fluidmechanics concepts. Participants were provided with a worksheet to guide them during theexperiment. The worksheet contained steps for the participants to perform during the experiment.The worksheet allowed the participants to think and reflect on the concepts being taught.Afterward, each participant was given a post-test to examine how much they had learned duringthe instruction. They were then required to respond to the motivational/engagement survey.Participants received links to the online motivational survey administered via Qualtrics© at theend of the LCDLMs sessions. The survey prompts asked participants to reflect on their LCDLM-facilitated instructions and report how well they believed experiencing LCDLMs instructionhelped them to engage in
abilities are affected byfactors such as lack of access to training facilities, increased stress levels and burnout, andreduction of urban navigation.Limitations There are some potential limitations to the work. One involves the potential of seasonaleffects as the tests which were administered during spring for both groups. Additionally theparticipants reflect a convenience sample that was drawn from the BLV population. Theparticipant population spans a large range of ages and due to the population size in thepre-COVID and post-COVID groups the research was unable to be segregated into smaller ageranges. Finally, there are different levels of vision within low vision participants and even thoughparticipants wore blindfolds this does bring a
Jared Markunas who assisted in the development of the survey that will inform the engagementguide prototype.References[1] D. R. Fisher, A. Bagiati, and S. Sarma, “Developing Professional Skills in Undergraduate Engineering Students Through Cocurricular Involvement,” J. Stud. Aff. Res. Pract., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 286–302, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1080/19496591.2017.1289097.[2] G. Young, D. B. Knight, and D. R. Simmons, “Co-curricular experiences link to nontechnical skill development for African-American engineers: Communication, teamwork, professionalism, lifelong learning, and reflective behavior skills,” in 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings, Madrid, Spain, Oct. 2014, pp. 1–7. doi: 10.1109/FIE
and thinking styles, whereas higher analytical thinking scoresindicate more logical, rigid writing and thinking styles [9]. Lower clout scores indicate more of aself-focus, a “follower” not caring as much about relative social status, whereas higher cloutscores indicate a “leader” with more focus on dominating the others in a group [10]. While lowerauthenticity scores can reflect a measure of deception, they also indicate a prepared or sociallycautious response, whereas higher authenticity scores indicate more spontaneous, complex,honest, and unfiltered conversations [11], [12]. Lower emotional tone scores indicate a morenegative attitude, whereas higher emotional tone scores indicate a more positive outlook in thetext [13]. LIWC provides
-identified as part of a racial or ethnic minority; the remainder identified as White.Each of these seven students participated in one 60–90-minute semi-structured interview [54-55].Interviews were designed to create a space for the participants to reflect on their K-12experiences and how those K-12 experiences influenced their decision to major in engineering.The first three student participants were interviewed in-person in a private office on theuniversity campus. The remaining four students were interviewed via Zoom. As a first step to theinterview, all participants were asked to develop a timeline of their formative experiencesleading to becoming an engineering major. Timelines were developed initially by students at thebeginning of the
consensus existing around certain categories. Negative identities tend to reflect elements that do not comply with societal expectations. Because of the multiple spaces where we develop identities, we have multiple social identities and they differ in their nature and strength [70]. An engineering
design and implementation of learning objective-based grading for transparent and fair assessment; and the integration of reflection to develop self-directed learners. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Response Process Validity of the CBE Adaptability Instrument When Used With Engineering InstructorsI. IntroductionThere have been several calls of action to change undergraduate engineering education with onefocus being on the adoption of research-based instructional practices [1]. Adoption of research-based instructional practices have been shown to contribute to attracting and retainingundergraduate STEM students [2]. This is particularly important given that more than
). These experiences embedded inthe curriculum and engineering design courses allows engineering students to develop anempathic formation compass required to flourish in co-design processes (Smeenk et al., 2019).In engineering education, especially in programs tending towards engineering science, teachingempathy needs careful pedagogical consideration. As such the need for empathy in engineeringneeds to be more visible to students to make meaningful and purposeful connections with priorassumptions and foster epistemic attitudes toward the construct (Walther et al., 2020). Thisembodiment of empathy in professional education allows students to recognize and reflect on theservice nature of the engineering profession and its potential connections to
theuniversity is to serve the local population of the region in which it is located. 95% of students arecommuters [2], and over a third of the student body are transfer students, predominantly from thelarge network of community colleges serving the East side of Los Angeles. A very highHispanic-enrolling Minority Serving Institution (MSI), 70% of students identify atHispanic/Latinx [1], which is also consistent with the regional population.Student demographic characteristics at Cal State LA are also reflective of the systemicoppression broadly experienced by Communities of Color on the East side of Los Angeles. Themedian family income of students at Cal State LA is $40,300 per year [3], and 60% qualify forfederal Pell Grants [4]. While exact data is not
et al., “Positionality practices and dimensions of impact on equity research: A collaborative inquiry and call to the community,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 19–43, Jan. 2021.[41] B. Bourke, “Positionality: Reflecting on the research process,” The Qualitative Report, Oct. 2014.[42] T. Armstrong, “The Myth of the Normal Brain: Embracing Neurodiversity,” AMA Journal f Ethics, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 348–352, 2015.[43] L. Clouder, M. Karakus, A. Cinotti, M. V. Ferreyra, G. A. Fierros, and P. Rojo, “Neurodiversity in higher education: a narrative synthesis,” Higher Education, vol. 80, no. 4, pp. 757–778, Oct. 2020.[44] C. Nicolaidis, “What can physicians learn from the neurodiversity movement?,” Virtual Mentor
multiple styles or languages.Resistant capital reflects the abilities that are created through opposing behaviors, with the goalof challenging the current inequities. Navigational capital is the ability to maneuver throughsocial systems that were not created for People of Color. Social capital refers to the groups,connections, and networks of people that a person can access for assistance. Finally, aspirationalcapital, the focus of this paper, is the individual’s abilities to keep their goals intact despiteobstacles [5].The EST framework contains five layers: the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem,macrosystem, and chronosystem. The microsystem is “a pattern of activities, roles, andinterpersonal relations experienced by the developing person” [5
white and Asian, and 80% identify as men [3]. Usinga sample representative of the discipline would result in an instrument that not only did notaccurately reflect participants who are neither white, Asian, or men, but also would notaccurately reflect the nuance within minoritized groups. For example, Black computingundergraduates attending an HBCU may have differing academic experiences (as part of thedominant racial group on campus) from those attending PWIs (who are part of a non-dominantgroup both in computing and on campus). Students may also be part of a non-dominant group(e.g., race) and dominant group (e.g., gender or ability) based on different parts of their identity.In addition, Cross et al. [1] note that because people from non
acknowledges the unique experiences and identity development of male andfemale students who identify as Black. How they have achieved different stages of their racial identitydevelopment affects their STEM reflective identity, competence/ability, value/interest, and assimilationinto STEM culture [10]. Black males and females construct their STEM identities as they develop theirgender identities. Collins [10] notes how racial identity development and gender identity begin to formbefore the development of any STEM interest. The relationship between Black students' gender-basedracial identity and their interest and persistence in STEM is complex. Collins [10] places the gender-basedracial identity of a student in the center of the visualization to mirror
materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] Council of Graduate Schools, “Ph.D. completion and attrition: Analysis of baseline data from the Ph.D. completion project,” Council of Graduate Schools, Washington, DC, USA, 2008.[2] C. Wendler et al., “The path forward: The future of graduate education in the United States,” Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2010.[3] J. M. Jones, “The dual pandemics of COVID-19 and systemic racism: Navigating our path forward,” School Psychol., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 427-431, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1037/spq0000472.[4] C. Davies, C. A. Arbeit, and M. Yamaner
.,instructors and teaching assistants) were guided to take training and were provided withguidelines to effectively administer the oral exams. In terms of training, online modules weredeveloped and were followed up with reflection activities on relevant topics (e.g., reducingstudents’ anxiety; effective communication and making the student comfortable whenadministering the oral exams). Assessors were encouraged to implement grading rubrics and 5scripts that incorporated those practices (e.g., anxiety-reducing gestures, scaffolding studentswith expectations, minimizing time pressure) to standardize the procedures and fully capture thestudents
by one researcher, reflecting the exploratory nature of thiswork: this methodological choice is discussed further at the end of this paper.Table 1 - Descriptions and examples of interactional positioning codes, taken from [10].Positional move (code) Description Example from data Firm statements of fact or firm or strong “The least amount of time is gonna be the kidExpert (C1) disagreement [shoveling]”. Softened statements or softened disagreement,Intermediate expert (C2) “Safety should probably be first
(2021) introduced the concept of person-centered approaches to the engineeringeducation community, which originated in the context of longitudinal analyses. A person-centered approach recognizes heterogeneity and attempts to identify latent groupings amongindividuals in the sample based on the relationships among variables which reflect thecharacteristics of individuals and their environment. In contrast, a variable-centered approach isfocused on prediction and relationships between variables (Laursen & Hoff, 2006). Althoughperson-centered approaches may use data-driven methods to fulfill these tasks, not all data-driven methods can be used in a person-centered fashion without more critical thought (Godwinet al., 2021). For example
internationally trained minoritized women.Our study will expand the ongoing conversation into the Canadian landscape.Theoretical PerspectivesOur study adapted Carlson and team’s [1] conceptual model of professional identity developmentwhich include: 1) Program Expectations; 2) Teaching and Supervision; 3) Research; 4)Publication; 5) Grants and Funding; 6) Service; and 7) Conferences, Networking, and ProfessionalDevelopment. We chose this model because it was suited for examining the professional identitydevelopment of doctoral programs, was extendable to include ECR and allowed specific elementsof the model to be woven into our interview questions and narratives. We choose duoethnography[18] because of its collaborative, reflective, dialogic, and
-structured interview protocol with four sections:introduction and warm-up, engineering identity, teamwork, and conclusion. When timepermitted, we asked the interviewees to reflect on the stories of the practicing engineers. Thesestories were developed from publicly-available accounts of the day-to-day experiences ofpracticing engineers. The interview protocol and other applicable parts of our study design wereapproved by our institution’s human subjects review process.Two mock interviews were performed to evaluate the clarity (or ambiguity) of the questions andthe total time required to perform the interview. It also served as an opportunity for our team tofamiliarize ourselves with the interview process. Two students volunteered for the
assess the perceivedimpact of participating in such centers. The in-progress validation process has providedinsightful reflections on multiple items regarding the way the items were written, theirappropriateness, and their alignment with participants' experiences. This work improvesconsistency in how ERCs evaluate the effectiveness of their education and diversityprogramming.Next steps will involve further distribution of the instrument and increasing its use amonginterested centers to further the validity evaluation of the instrument. It is expected that thisinstrument will facilitate greater cooperation between ERCs and other large, STEM researchcenters. Our future work will continue to gather validity evidence for the use of this instrumentin
analyzing student written responses to conceptually challenging problems. • Gather more text samples that center written responses to conceptually challenging problems from underrepresented groups to adequately train algorithms.AcknowledgmentsWe acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) through the NRT DGE2021874 and DUE 2135190. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendationsexpressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.References[1] H. Auby, N. Shivagunde, A. Rumshisky, and M. D. Koretsky, “WIP: Using machine learning to automate coding of student explanations to challenging mechanics concept questions,” presented at the American Society for
., code of cooperation) to hold each member accountable.At any particular time, I knew each team member's role, so I knew what to expect from them.An outside observer would have concluded our team had an effective process to complete ourassignments.Team members arrived on time to team meetings.Team members were prepared for team meetings.My teammates displayed appropriate interpersonal skills when conflict arose.GOAL SETTINGMy team used clear, long term goals to complete tasks.My team reflected upon its goals in order to plan for future work.My team made use of incremental goals (i.e., we set short term goals) in order to completecourse assignments on time.My input was used to set our team goals.This team helped me accomplish my individual goals
: Reflecting on the research process,” The Qualitative Report, Oct. 2014.[48] J. Feldkamp, “The Rise of TikTok: The Evolution of a Social Media Platform During COVID-19,” in Digital Responses to Covid-19: Digital Innovation, Transformation, and Entrepreneurship During Pandemic Outbreaks, C. Hovestadt, J. Recker, J. Richter, and K. Werder, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021, pp. 73–85.[49] A. Bhandari and S. Bimo, “Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmized self and the future of self-making on social media,” Soc. Media Soc., vol. 8, no. 1, p. 205630512210862, Jan. 2022.[50] E. Simpson, A. Hamann, and B. Semaan, “How to Tame ‘Your’ Algorithm: LGBTQ+ Users’ Domestication of TikTok,” Proc. ACM Hum. Comput
teaching in his life. This was when his views of issues of equity started to surface.Each participant’s experiences contribute to a fuller sense of the challenges facing gendered and/orracially-minoritized students in introductory engineering programming courses. Interestingly, theauthority and social infrastructures proved to be the most important for the three student participants,reflecting existing scholarship about the importance of community, mentorship, and student dispositionsof confidence in programming education. The physical and operational infrastructures also discouragedactive participation by all students, while challenges with the economic infrastructure didn’t surface inthese interviews. 7. Future workOur ongoing research and
, contextual, and perception-based phenomena of interest, asemi-structured approach was used when collecting data [51]. Focus groups consisted of four tofive participants, lasted about one hour, and were conducted at the end of each semester. Thefirst author led all focus groups, with the second or last author as a secondary interviewer andnotetaker. At the end of each focus group, the first author compiled these notes, information onhow the focus group went, and initial impressions of the data into summarized memos.Guiding questions prompted participants to reflect on their interest in their current majors andminors (if applicable) as well as how this interest has changed since the previous focus group.The guiding questions targeting interest were
studyattitudes for face-to-face classes, but it appears that our model is at least somewhat effective atengaging groups of minority students who, according to literature, may not prefer peer activities.VI. AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.(2122442). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.VII. References[1] A. P. Carnevale and N. Smith, ‘Working Learners-The New Normal’, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?did=842878281&Fmt=7&clientId=10461&RQT=309& VName=PQD[2] D. A. Santiago
– including programs for the future engineering professoriate, and leveraging institutional data to support reflective teaching practices. She has degrees in Electrical Engineering (B.S., M.Eng.) from the Ateneo de Davao University in Davao City, Philippines, where she previously held appointments as Assistant Professor and Department Chair for Electrical Engineering. She also previously served as Director for Communications and International Engagement at the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, Lecturer at the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University, and Assistant Professor at the Department of Inte- grated Engineering at Minnesota State University, Mankato. She holds a Ph.D. in
by the National Science Foundation (NSF) underGrant No 1564768. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.References[1] National Science Foundation, "Sophomore fast-forward: A summer bridge program to support retention in engineering," [Online]. Available: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWDID = 1564768HistoricalAwards = false. [Accessed 10 5 2021].[2] K. Evans, M. K. Orr, D. E. Hall and M. Desselles, "S-STEM summer scholarship for a sophomore bridge: Year 1 in review," ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2018.[3] K. Evans, M. Desselles and M. K. Orr, "Year 2 of an S-STEM Summer Scholarship for a
reflect students’ lived experiences?RQ2: How can serious games like Next Stop provide an opportunity for students to experiencecomplex transportation engineering and urban design collaborative problem solving?RQ3: What is the role of playful experiences in engaging students into difficult conversationsabout complex engineering problems that affect their communities?We intend to conduct interviews with bilingual students about their experiences with the gameand how they identify as an engineer through self-efficacy STEM student measures [28]. Thesedata sources will help us explore the ways that games can shift students into the mindset of anengineer and how best to meet the educational materials needs of multilingual students. We willalso video
participants to confirm that ourinterpretations of the data were consistent with their lived experiences and perceptions. Our aimwas to enhance the credibility and trustworthiness of the research findings by ensuring that theyaccurately reflect the participants’ perspectives. Five of the seven participants responded to ourrequest and informed us that the experiences and perceptions we reported were accuratelycaptured and documented. Two participants did not respond to us.ParticipantsThe study participants were seven international graduate students majoring in Sciences andEngineering. All seven participants were older than 18 years of age. They were pursuinggraduate studies at public research universities in the US at the time of data collection. Six