engineering coursework and the design process of undergraduate students in project-based courses.Dr. Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of the U.S. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). http
Report NSF 15- 311. Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.3. Mann, Allison and Thomas A. DiPrete (2013). Trends in Gender Segregation in the Choice of Science and Engineering Majors. Social Science Research 42(6), 1519–1541.4. Settles, I. , Cortina L. , Malley, J. , Stewart, A. (2006). The Climate for Women in Academic Science: The Good, the Bad, and the Changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), 47-585. Seron, C., Silbey, S. S., Cech, E., & Rubineau, B. (2016). Persistence Is Cultural: Professional Socialization and the Reproduction of Sex Segregation. Work and Occupations, 43(2), 178-214.6. Leskin E. , Cortina L. , Kabat D. (2011) “Gender Harassment: Broadening our Understanding of Sex
Paper ID #19892Making Connections: Challenging the Perceived Homogeneity of MakingDr. Gina Navoa Svarovsky, University of Notre Dame Gina Navoa Svarovsky is an Assistant Professor of Practice at the University of Notre Dame’s Center for STEM Education and the College of Engineering. She has studied how young people learn engineering for over a decade.Dr. Marjorie B. Bequette, Science Museum of Minnesota Marjorie Bequette is Director of Lifelong Learning at Science Museum of Minnesota.Lauren Causey, Science Museum of Minnesota c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Making Connections
Education as a Rigorous Discipline: A Study of the Publication Patterns of Four Coalitions,” Journal of Engineering Education, 96, pp. 5–18, 2007.3 Spalter-Roth, R., N. Fortenberry, and B. Lovitts, What Sociologists Know About the Acceptance and Diffusion of Innovation: The Case of Engineering Education, Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 2007.4 Henderson, C., A. Beach, and N. Finkelstein, “Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, pp. 952–984, 2011. doi:10.1002/tea.20439.5 Jamieson, L.H. and J. R. Lohmann, Innovation with Impact: Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering
higher levels of project performance through improved teamwork (Van Knippenberg,van Ginkel, & Homan, 2013). Two layers of diversity attributes were identified by researchers:(a) the surface level (e.g., age, gender, race, and physical disabilities; Mannix & Neale, 2005);and (b) the deep level (e.g., cognitive ability, personality traits, values, beliefs, and attitudes;Harrison, Price, Gavin, & Florey, 2002). However, the majority of studies on team diversity havefocused solely on surface-level attributes because deep-level diversity tends to be difficult tomeasure. The present study aims to explore micro-level patterns of behavior where effects ofdeep level diversity are manifested to create a collaborative environment and attenuate
., Hinkin, 1998). Inaddition to authentic engineering practices, we used ABET’s EC2000 Criterion 3a-k as atheoretical basis for defining elements of engineering practice: a. an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering b. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data c. an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability d. an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams e. an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f. an understanding of professional and ethical
Foundation.ReferencesAlexander, C. (2011). Learning to be lawyers: Professional identity and the law school curriculum. Maryland Law Review, 70(2), 465-483.Ampaw, F. D., & Jaeger, A. J. (2012). Completing the three stages of doctoral education: An event history analysis. Research in Higher Education, 53(6), 640-660.Auxier, C., Hughes, F. R., & Kline, W. B. (2003). Identity development in counselors-in- training. Counselor Education and Supervision, 43(1), 25-39.Bieschke, K. J., Bishop, R. M., & Garcia, V. L. (1996). The utility of the research self-efficacy scale. Journal of Career Assessment, 4(1), 59-75.Bowen, W. G., & Rudenstine, N. L. (1992). In pursuit of the Ph. D. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Brace, N
, enabling students to be instructors is a viableapproach for improving student motivation in introductory engineering courses.References[1] French, B. F., Immekus, J. C., & Oakes, W. C. (2005). An examination of indicators of engineering students' success and persistence. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 419-425.[2] Montoya, Y., Pacheco, A., Delgado, E., Webb, I. & Vaughan, M. R. (2015) Developing Leaders by Putting Students in the Curriculum Development Driver Seat. 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, WA, June 2015.[3] Barkley, E. F., Cross, K. P., & Major, C. H. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. John Wiley & Sons.[4] Fagen, A. P
students? on the use of the Engineering Student Identity Survey. In: Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2016 IEEE.; 2016:1-6.18. Curran PJ, West SG, Finch JF. The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychol methods1. 1996;1(1):16-29.19. Muthen B, Kaplan D. A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables: A note on the size of the model. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1992;45(1):19-30.20. Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol Methods. 1999;4(3):272.21. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 2001.22
, Constantz, & Anderson,2009). Continuing this research line, we wish to (a) contribute to the understanding ofengineering student identity; (b) understand the factors (experiences, situations, and settings) thatfoster the formation and transformation of identity during the undergraduate experience; and (c)gain insight into improving recruitment and retention of engineering students, particularlyunderrepresented students. However, in order to empirically explore the role of identity forengineering students, we must first have a psychometrically sound measure of engineeringstudent identity.Why Care About Identity? A plethora of previous studies have focused intently on retention issues in engineering;however, this research only describes the
EducationMotivation and BackgroundThere are two purposes for this paper. The first purpose is to describe our unique application oftwo different qualitative research methods to evaluate the implementation and outcomes for thefirst year of an NSF funded grant on STEM faculty development. We used two different researchmethods in order to be able to describe and examine adequately the underlying change processesand outcomes that faculty experienced during participation in Year One of the grant. The secondpurpose is to report out the implementation results and outcomes from this evaluation.The two different research methods were: (a) conjecture mapping1 and (b) self-study2,3,4. Thegrant evaluator used conjecture mapping, which is a method from design-based
like to express our gratitude to the McNair Scholars Program at Harding University.This work was made possible by their support. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in the material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflectthe views of the McNair Scholars Program.Additionally, we would like to thank the insightful comments of the anonymous reviewers of thispaper. These points of feedback helped us sharpen the quality of the paper.References 1. Graesser, A. C., D'Mello, S. K., Craig, S. D., Witherspoon, A., Sullins, J., McDaniel, B., & Gholson, B. (2008). The relationship between affective states and dialog patterns during interactions with AutoTutor. Journal of Interactive
Challenge Scholars Program," 2017. Retrieved from http://www.grandchallengescholars.org[2] "Grand Challenge Scholars Program-Arizona State University", 2017. Retrieved from https://gcsp.engineering.asu.edu/[3] C.L.A. Dancz, J.M. Plumbee, D. Bargar, P. Walters Brunner, K. High, L. Klotz and A.E.Landis, "A Rubric to Assess Civil Engineering Students' Grand Challenge SustainableEntrepreneurship Projects," in American Society for Engineering Education 123rd AnnualConference & Exposition, 2016.[4] R. Stevens, K. O'Connor, L. Garrison, A. Jocuns and D.M. Amos, "Becoming an engineer:Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning," J Eng Educ, vol. 97, pp. 355, 2008.[5] J. Turns, B. Sattler and D. Kilgore, "Disciplinary knowledge
collection and analysis processes for this phase and the final framework, which was thenintegrated in the information sheets presented at the end of the paper.Data collection. To ensure that a large enough sample of methods was gathered, we used asystematized literature review process. As suggested by Borrego and colleagues20, wefollowed the PRISMA selection process to search for and select potentially relevant papers.First, we defined three inclusion criteria:1. The papers needed to focus on the social or procedural aspects of small scale HE projects, such as: a. Frameworks, methodologies, processes, approaches, principles, or collections thereof, b. Methods, tools, techniques, dimensions, mindsets, c. Lessons learned, and/or d. Case
). Retrieved from Proquest dissertations and theses - full text. (UMI No. 3408757).7. Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. In Wealth of Networks (pp. 356–487). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.8. Kvavik, R. B., & Caruso, J. B. (2005). Students and information technology, 2005 : Convenience, connection, control, and learning. Boulder, CO: Educause. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ers0506/rs/ERS0506w.pdf9. Schmidt, H. (2013). Media literacy education from kindergarten to college : A comparison of how media literacy is addressed across the educational system. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 5(1), 295–309.10. O’Neal, J. (1990). The humanities
manageable scale. The smaller nature of the Tiny House projectallowed for greater collaboration between disciplines and required a fraction of the fundraisingand travel logistics presented by the Solar Decathlon – a much easier undertaking for aninstitution with limited resources to devote to such a project. (Schematics of the Tiny House canbe seen in Appendix B)After reviewing the successes, failures, and lessons learned from both the Solar Decathlon andTiny House competitions, the researchers have decided to continue to integrate student teamsfrom multiple disciplines in project-based-learning opportunities. Both the Tiny House, and theSolar Decathlon house are now back on the subject university campus. In deciding what to dowith the buildings
in order to helpMichael catch up to them. Finally, Michael exclaims, “God, that took forever. That was stupid.”He has finally reached the correct solution on part B. His exclamation reveals a negativeappraisal regarding the length of time it took to complete that portion of the problem wasunacceptable. This frustration leads Michael to move on to the next part of the problem withoutchecking to see if his partner, Gary, is caught up. He moves on to part C, while there is noindication that Gary is caught up to the rest of the group. By the time Michael moves on to partC of the first homework problem, Becca and Benjamin have already moved on to the secondproblem. The group continues working in a similar manner throughout the evening
differences in returning and direct-pathway students’ decisions to enroll and persist in engineering PhD programs. Consistent withthis literature and recent calls for a more in-depth theoretical focus on the dimensions cost withinthe EVT model and how cost relates to a number of student outcomes, in this paper we focusexclusively on the cost component of expectancy value theory. Specifically we ask: a) howreturning students differently perceive the costs associated with an engineering PhD and b) how,if at all, these costs shape their PhD work. We explore these questions using a mixed methodsapproach that draws on quantitative findings from a survey of returning and direct pathwaystudents in conversation with qualitative findings from interviews with
methodological perspectives. Journal of Engineering Education. 6. Huff, J. L., Smith, J. A., Jesiek, B. K., Zoltowski, C. B., Graziano, W. G., & Oakes, W. C. (2014, October). From methods to methodology: Reflection on keeping the philosophical commitments of interpretative phenomenological analysis. In 2014 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings (pp. 1-9). IEEE. 7. Kirn, A., & Benson, L. (In Review). Engineering Students' Perceptions of Problem Solving and their Future. Journal of Engineering Education. 8. Ross, M., & Godwin, A. (2015, October). Stories of Black women in engineering industry—Why they leave. In 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Proceedings (pp. 1-5
Educ Psychol. 1983;75(2):215-226. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.75.2.215.2. Tinto V. Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Rev Educ Res. 1975;45(1):89-125.3. Ohland MW, Brawner CE, Camacho MM, et al. Race, Gender, and Measures of Success in Engineering Education. J Eng Educ. 2011;100(2):225-252.4. Cabrera AF, Nora A, Castaneda MB. The Role of Finances in the Persistence Process: A Structural Model. Res High Educ. 1992;33(5).5. Wohlgemuth D, Whalen D, Sullivan J, Nading C, Mack S, Yongyi W. Financial, academic, and environmental influences on the retention and graduation of students. J Coll Student Retent. 2006;8(4):457-475. doi:10.2190/86X6-5VH8-3007-6918.6. Rhoads B
.20054Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictivevalidity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (mslq). Educational andPsychological Measurement, 53(3), 801-813. doi:10.1177/0013164493053003024Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave thescience. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.The National Center for Academic Transformation. (2017). Who we are. In The national centerfor academic transformation. Retrieved March 7, 2017, fromhttp://www.thencat.org/whoweare.htmlZhang, G., Anderson, T. J., Ohland, M. W., & Thorndyke, B. R. (2004). Identifying factorsinfluencing engineering student graduation: A longitudinal and cross-institutional
sociology, 26(1), 611-639.Benneworth, P., & Jongbloed, B. W. (2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education, 59(5), 567-588.Coser, L. A. (1957). Social conflict and the theory of social change. The British Journal of Sociology, 8(3), 197-207.Foote, K., Knaub, A., Henderson, C., Dancy, M., & Beichner, R. J. (2016). Enabling and challenging factors in institutional reform: The case of SCALE-UP. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010103.Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University Press.Fry, C. L. (Ed.). (2014). Achieving Systemic Change: A Sourcebook for Advancing
published by the National Science Foundation, How People Learn [1]effectively communicates the characteristics of an ideal learning environment as (a) knowledge-centered, (b) learner-centered, (c) assessment-centered, and (d) community-centered. “Briefly, alearner-centered approach attempts to expose students' prior conceptions and connect newlearning to them; a knowledge-centered approach promotes conceptual understanding andorganization of the knowledge; an assessment-centered approach gives frequent opportunities forformative feedback; and a community centered approach uses students' peers in the learning andalso attempts to connect students to the way professionals might work” [11]. Active learning,cooperative learning, peer-led team learning
Algebra.Seeking an engineering-focused option, GS Program and the Department of Applied Math(APPM) leaders agreed to develop a Pre-Calculus for Engineers (Pre-Calc) course specificallytargeting preparation for the subsequent engineering calculus sequence. An experienced calculusinstructor, Sara, was recruited from a community college because of her success in preparingstudents, many from backgrounds similar to those of the GS students, for calculus. The GSProgram’s initial Pre-Calc offering was successful. The overwhelming majority of students metstringent requirements (grade of B- or better) for moving into the calculus sequence after onesemester; most of those who did not initially achieve a B- or better grade did so the followingsemester after taking
sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.[2] Marra, R. M., Rodgers, K. A., Shen, D., & Bogue, B. (2012). Leaving engineering: A multi- year single institution study. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 6–27.[3] Eris, O., Chachra, D., Chen, H. L., Sheppard, S., Ludlow, L., Rosca, C., Bailey, T., & Toye, G. (2010). Outcomes of a longitudinal administration of the persistence in engineering survey. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(4), 371–395.[4] Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.[5] Sandoval, W. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Design-based research methods for studying learning in context: Introduction. Educational Psychologist
bythese topics, which is an important element in the guiding principles.The topics that emerged from the retreat were a starting point for creating sustained activityaround areas of affinity. After the retreat, faculty were invited to join one of these existinggroups for sustained engagement, switch to a different group, or propose a new group. From thisexercise, four affinity groups evolved: a. Project Spine Courses: How to align student outcomes b. Revolutionizing Math Intensive Courses c. Revolutionizing Content Heavy Courses Through Flipping – How to make it work d. Rethinking How We Teach Our Students To Communicate In WritingTo formalize the groups, each affinity group completed an online intake form documenting theirgoals, the
Piazza in one of four ways: a) posing a question or problem directlyrelated to topics covered in lectures; b) asking a follow-up question to another question; c)answering a question; or d) improving upon another response. To ensure high quality ofquestions are being asked, the teaching team (composed of the instructor and four teachingassistants) actively monitors the questions as they are being posted, and flag anything that isincorrect, repeated, or too simple. Students are encouraged to work in groups and discuss theirideas while creating the questions and/or answers. The questions that students create areprimarily concept or problem-based questions related to the course content being covered inclass (i.e., some topics are better suited for
). Sampling Designs in Qualitative Research: Making the Sampling Process More Public. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 238–254.13. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. SAGE.14. Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using Mixed-Methods Sequential Explanatory Design: From Theory to Practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X0528226015. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4 edition). Boston: Pearson.16. Marra, R. M., Rodgers, K. A., Shen, D., & Bogue, B. (2009). Women Engineering Students and Self-Efficacy: A Multi
Paper ID #18442A Systems Approach to Analyzing Design-Based Research in Robotics-FocusedMiddle School STEM Lessons through Cognitive ApprenticeshipDr. S. M. Mizanoor Rahman, New York University Mizanoor Rahman received his Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Mie University at Tsu, Japan in 2011. He then worked as a research fellow at the National University of Singapore (NUS), a researcher at Vrije University of Brussels (Belgium) and a postdoctoral associate at Clemson University, USA. He is currently working as a postdoctoral associate at the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, NYU Tandon School of
. (2011). Engineering Education Discourses on Underrepresentation: Why Problematization Matters. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(5), 1117. 4. Lewis, B. F. (2003). A critique of literature on the underrepresentation of African Americans in science: Directions for future research. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9(3&4). 5. Moore, J. L. (2006). A qualitative investigation of African American males' career trajectory in engineering: Implications for teachers, school counselors, and parents. Teachers College Record, 108(2), 246. 6. May, G. S., & Chubin, D. E. (2003). A retrospective on undergraduate engineering success for underrepresented minority