International Programmes for Overseas Teacher sponsored by ITEC. Offered three SWAYAM MOOC courses – E-content Development, OER for Empowering Teachers and AICTE NITTT Module 1 Orientation towards Technical Education and Curriculum Aspects. Her areas of interest encompass Data and Text Mining, Cloud Computing, Technology-Enabled Teaching and Learning, Instructional Design, E-Learning, and Open Educational Resources (OER), as well as Immersive Technologies.Dr. Dinesh Kumar KSA Dr. K S A Dineshkumar, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technical Teachers Training and Research, Chennai. He has been working in the domain of Student Assessment and Evaluation, Learned - Centered approach, Outcome
Safety, Human-robot Interaction, and Engineering Education. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Enhancing Teamwork Skills in STEM Education: A Behavioral Theory-Based Approach AbstractThe ability to work in a team is one of the most important skills a college graduate can acquirefrom an educational institute. However, some students do not appropriately participate in courseprojects, making teamwork more challenging than it needs to be for others. As a result, manystudents fail to develop teamwork skills, and some become frustrated with course projects. Thisstudy adopted the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to develop tools
, doi: 10.1007/s10798-022-09802-w.[4] M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen, Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach, 1st ed. New York: Psychology Press, 2010. doi: 10.4324/9780203838020.[5] P. R. Brown, R. E. McCord, H. M. Matusovich, and R. L. Kajfez, “The use of motivation theory in engineering education research: a systematic review of literature,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 186–205, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2014.941339.[6] J. R. Morelock, “A systematic literature review of engineering identity: definitions, factors, and interventions affecting development, and means of measurement,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 1240–1262, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2017.1287664.[7] L
for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education and Practice (ISTEP), Director of the Collaborative Specialization in Engineering Education, a 3M national Teaching Fellow, and a mOliver Pan, University of Toronto Oliver Pan is an undergraduate student at the University of Toronto, studying finance with a double minor in statistics and economics. He exhibits a deep enthusiasm for data analytics, driven by a curiosity to unveil analytical insights spanning multiple sectors such as financial technology. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Engineering Students’ Engagement and Learning Outcomes: A Typological Approach Qin Liu, Greg Evans, and Oliver
Paper ID #38926Work in Progress: Using Participatory Design and Qualitative ResearchStrategies in the Development of a New Faculty Mentoring Program forUndergraduate Engineering StudentsDr. Constanza Miranda, Johns Hopkins UniversityMrs. Rachel McClam, Johns Hopkins University Rachel McClam is a doctoral student at Johns Hopkins School of Education. Her primary research inter- ests involve questions about how to support educators to make and sustain growth in their practice across the span of their career. In particular, she is interested in ways to better support educator development toward equitable outcomes for historically
education systems urgently needed new measures for assessing students' learning byfocusing on learning outcomes rather than the courses students have taken—these demands fornew assessment methods aligned with ABET accreditation's shift towards using outcomes-basedcriteria that allowed more diverse approaches to pedagogies and curricula in differentengineering programs. As a result, ABET established a new set of outcomes-based standardsinstead of input-based measures: Engineering Criteria 2000 (EC2000). Unlike the input-basedcriteria, which focus on what should be taught, EC2000 emphasizes what students learn and areexpected to do and focuses on students' competency and performance assessment [6].The transition from input-based to outcomes-based
University of Leeds, UK, evaluating an institution-wide curriculum transformation initiative. He holds a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the University of Not- tingham, UK, prior to the undertaking of which he spent a decade teaching English as a foreign language.Dr. Robin Fowler, University of Michigan Robin Fowler is a Technical Communication lecturer and a Engineering Education researcher at the Uni- versity of Michigan. Her teaching is primarily in team-based engineering courses, and her research fo- cuses on equity in communication and collaboration as well as in group design decision making (judg- ment) under uncertainty. She is especially interested in how power relationships and rhetorical strate- gies affect
0.07502 13.911 0.007583* motiv-external(-) 1.6258 0.8042 1.4013 0.844 1.9662 0.742 approach 1.8778 0.7582 3.5761 0.4664 3.909 0.4185Factors that appear to have a significant effect on changes in one or more lifelong learningdimension include one’s home department or engineering major, level of satisfaction with theprogram relative to expectations, curriculum breadth, theoretical content, and practical content.Respondents that considered curricular breadth and/or theory to be less beneficial or impactfultended to demonstrate an increase in interest-driven motivation from the undergraduate contextto the workplace. These are preliminary results
Paper ID #36856From Engineering Students to Student Engineers: Reflections, Identity,and Positioning in Co-curricular ActivitiesDr. Zhiyi Liu, University at Buffalo Zhiyi Liu is a researcher and educator with research interests in learning and instruction. Dr. Liu was a postdoctoral associate in the Department of Engineering Education at the State University of New York at Buffalo.Dr. Andrew Olewnik, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Andrew Olewnik is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the Univer- sity at Buffalo. His research includes undergraduate engineering
Paper ID #39138A Systematic Implementation of Four Versions of a Course-BasedIntervention to Reduce Attrition Among Civil Engineering Students:Overall Study Design and Implementation of First VersionDr. Beth (Ann Elizabeth) Wittig, City University of New York, City College of New York, Department ofCivil Engineering Beth Wittig is a licensed professional environmental engineer and LEED AP, who holds a PhD in chemical engineering. After years as a consultant and field engineer designing and overseeing air quality measure- ment field campaigns, she is now an Associate Professor at The City College of New York and chairperson
understand their individual skills andmotivations as they have various perspectives and backgrounds. By including asset language,which covers both the strengths and gaps in their abilities, we can gain a better understanding ofthe students and tailor the program to their unique needs [2]. This approach can lead to moreeffective and engaging learning experiences for the students. In the LED program, we use RPK(Recognition of Prior Knowledge) assessments which allow us to see the students' knowledgeand thought process in terms of engineering before and after the course. With the help of theRPK assessment, the curriculum considers students' prior knowledge, skills, and attitudestowards STEM to contextualize the material. In this paper, we specifically
courses in psychology and learning techniques, including but not limited to ”Introduction to Psychology”, ”Social Psychology” and ”How to Learn”. Demonstrating practical application, Chenhui teaches English to K-6 learners, leveraging skills gained in legal career such as knowing your clients, analysis and cross-cultural communication. Presently pursuing a Master of Teaching degree to become a K-6 teacher, Chenhui is committed to blending law, education, and psychology in her educational approach. Fluent in English and Mandarin, Chenhui aims to make a significant impact in educational research and practice. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Enhancing Chemistry Education Through
and apply new knowledge as needed, using appropriate learningstrategies”[10]. At the same time, alumni tracking and scholarly research shows that manyengineering program graduates go on to non-engineering careers and may have different lifelonglearning needs [11], [12]. Uncertainties persist regarding the most effective approaches towardsachieving lifelong learning outcomes. In this literature review, we summarize existing findingsregarding lifelong learning’s role in graduates’ careers and development.2.1 Conceptions of Lifelong LearningLifelong learning orientations are the patterns of behaviour towards learning that are driven byunderlying values, beliefs, attitudes, and goals [13]. However, lifelong learning’s numerous othermeanings can
sustainable and developmental goals of our planet. Inthe past, elective courses in the humanities have been offered as part of the engineeringcurriculum, however, even these attempts do not solve the problem as the humanities andengineering courses continue to be siloed and there is no conversation between theengineering and the humanities faculty. To have a synergy between the humanities andengineering, there is a need for joint curriculum design and adopting collective pedagogicalapproaches.This work-in-progress paper showcases a pedagogical innovation that was employed in acourse for engineering students. It introduces a new transdisciplinary course which has beenco-designed by faculty belonging to the humanities and technology domains
to PBL Recognizing that a progression of familiarity, comfort, and expanding knowledge exists andallowing students time to ramp into PBL work and increase their familiarity with the processover time has been recommended by existing studies as a way to counteract the uneasiness somestudents feel with this often-new style of learning [10], [5]. Additionally, a mixed-methodsapproach that balances traditional lecture-based coursework with PBL projects has been shownto be a successful way to approach PBL in an engineering curriculum [10], [11] as it addressesthis uneasiness on both the part of the student and teacher [5]. Perrenet et al. [11] noted the valueof this gradual phase-in for PBL in engineering specifically, noting “In engineering some
Paper ID #38355Fostering Educational Equity in EngineeringMiss Katrina Marie RobertsonHadi Ali, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Hadi Ali is an Assistant Professor of Aerospace Engineering at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. He studies the influence of the future of work on curricular innovation, with a focus on exploring the relationships between and among adaptability, risk taking and value making. In an effort to characterize engineering education as an (eco)system, his approach integrates analytical methods of data science to address changes in systems and society. More broadly, he is interested in
Paper ID #42409Exploring Variance in Undergraduate Research Participation: A Quantitativeand Qualitative Investigation among Students with Differing Levels of InvolvementDr. Andrew Olewnik, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Andrew Olewnik is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the University at Buffalo. His research includes undergraduate engineering education with focus on engineering design, problem-based learning, co-curricular involvement and its impact on professional formation, and the role of reflection practices in supporting engineering undergraduates as they
Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI).Dr. Justin Charles Major, Rowan University Dr. Justin C. Major (he/him) is an Assistant Professor of Experiential Engineering Education at Rowan University in Glassboro, New Jersey where he leads ASPIRE Lab (Advancing Student Pathways through Inequality Research in Engineering). Justin’s research focuses on socioeconomically disadvantaged stu- dents (SDS; low-income) in engineering, student experiences of trauma, and feminist approaches to en- gineering education research, and connects these topics to broader understandings of student success in engineering. Justin completed his Ph.D. in Engineering Education (’22) and M.S. in Aeronautics and Astronautics (’21) at Purdue University, and two B.S
. Ross, ‘“Be real black for me” imagining BlackCrit in education’, UrbanEducation, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 415–442, 2016.[26] S. Hartman, Lose your mother: A journey along the Atlantic slave route. Macmillan, 2008.[27] D. Roberts, Fatal invention: How science, politics, and big business re-create race in the twenty-firstcentury. New Press/ORIM, 2011.[28] S. Cedillo, ‘Beyond inquiry: Towards the specificity of anti-blackness studies in STEM education’,Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, vol. 18, pp. 242–256, 2018.[29] C. C. Samuelson, and E. Litzler, “Community cultural wealth: An assets‐based approach to thepersistence of engineering students of color.” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 05, no. 1, pp.93-117, 2016
Paper ID #37266Confirmatory factor analysis of the framing agency surveyMadalyn Wilson-Fetrow, University of New MexicoDr. Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico Dr. Vanessa Svihla is a learning scientist and associate professor at the University of New Mexico in the Organization, Information and Learning Sciences program and in the Chemical and Biological Engineer- ing Department.Dr. Andrew Olewnik, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Andrew Olewnik is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at the Univer- sity at Buffalo. His research includes undergraduate engineering
Example,” Journal of College Science Teaching, vol. 49, pp. 50–59. 2020.[36] T. Jen, C. Morales, E. Greenwald, R. Montgomery, S. Loper, and J. Barber, “Enacting ambitious engineering curriculum in science classrooms: Examining teachers’ implementation of virtual engineering internships,” International Journal of Science Education, vol. 42, no. 12, pp. 2055–2074, 2020.[37] K. Keratithamkul, J. N. Kim, and G. H. Roehrig, “Cultural competence or deficit-based view? A qualitative approach to understanding middle school students’ experience with culturally framed engineering,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 7, no. 1, 2020.[38] A. L. Gillen, J. R. Grohs, H. M. Matusovich, and G. R. Kirk, “A
Macroethics Issues and Education,” in 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Uppsala, Sweden: IEEE, Oct. 2022, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962654.[15] E. A. Strehl and M. Ennis, “Work in Progress: Undergraduate Student Perceptions of Macroethical Issues in Aerospace Engineering,” 2023.[16] C. Bowen et al., ASEE 2024 Paper (Blind for Review in Draft)[17] G. Ellis, S. Howe, and D. Riley, “‘To Move People From Apathy’: A Multiperspective Approach To Ethics Across The Engineering Curriculum,” in 2004 Annual Conference Proceedings, Salt Lake City, Utah: ASEE Conferences, Jun. 2004, p. 9.3.1-9.3.15. doi: 10.18260/1-2--13836.[18] D. Kim, B. K. Jesiek, and S. J. Howland, “Longitudinal
number of articles included Definition Codes N AI Integration in This theme examines the transformative role of AI in AI in course 7 the field of engineering, highlighting how AI tools like intelligent Course content Engineering tutoring systems and language models are incorporated AI teaching into teaching and learning processes, and the impact of AI on curriculum design and pedagogical approaches. Ethical and This theme explores the ethical challenges and Ethics 7 Academic academic integrity issues arising from the use of AI in Academic
the fact that so much of the aerospace industry is involved in national defense?We use constructivist grounded theory as a methodological framework to guide our comprehension ofstudent response data in this and future related works. Constructivist grounded theory is a process thatallows researchers to generate theory through inductive analysis of qualitative data rather than utilizeexisting theoretical frameworks (Charmaz, 2006; Chun Tie et al., 2019). We use this approach in order tounderstand how undergraduate aerospace engineers construct meaning around the concept of macroethicsand are working to develop a comprehensive theory that addresses our research questions. The dataanalysis for this work-in-progress represents the initial
). However,according to a recent systematic review, the existing entrepreneurship education programs inengineering have not been well-defined, measured, and evaluated (Zappe et al., 2023). Given thatESE is a critical construct that can affect engineering students’ learning in entrepreneurship, anESE instrument for college engineering students is timely needed. In addition, with a well-established assessment tool for students’ ESE, engineering researchers and practitioners canmeasure students’ self-efficacy for entrepreneurial-related activities and skills through a data-driven approach and improve future entrepreneurship education programs. In the present study,we developed and examined an Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy for Engineering Students (ESE
encourage industry-academia collaborations through offeringworkshops and highlighting divisions such as the College Industry Partnerships Division.However, these collaborations rely heavily on the resources of the academic partner. Thisprompts the question: To what extent is it possible for industry professionals to conductengineering education research without an academic partner? What barriers exist for thoseconducting engineering education research while working in education-adjacent industries? Thiswork in process paper outlines our approach to addressing these research questions by collectingdata from colleagues at two education-adjacent companies. From this research, we hope to gain abetter understanding of how industry members can overcome
assignments, such as group homeworkassignments, may be considered in the teaching curriculum to help students with low self-regulatory of motivation keep up with their learning. Task Interpretation and Evaluation iscritical for teachers to understand for 2nd year students. First year students, who have had mostlymath and science courses, may not have engaged as much in these SRC activities. When theyreach 2nd year engineering courses, they encounter difficulty because the need to engage in SRCactivities is new and perhaps, not taught explicitly. Learning how to understand problems is asessential as getting the solutions. Allowing practice self-regulation through learning how tointerpret problem, building a workable plan to solve the problem
of Michigan where her research interests pivoted to engineering education. Her current research interests focus on examining the messaging undergraduate engineering students receive with respect to the type of work that is valued in engineering. Her research is centered around the goal of making engineering curriculum more socioculturally relevant and the field more inclusive of women and students of color.Shannon M. Clancy, University of Michigan Shannon M. Clancy (she/they) is a Ph.D. candidate in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Michigan. She earned a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) and an M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of
gradedassessments. This requires approval by curriculum and department leadership as it affects gradedassessments. The intent is to reduce student workload by incorporating PLTL with existingassessments vice requiring additional assignments. The authors plan to scale this work beyondthe three previously identified courses.ConclusionThe results so far have been encouraging and show the peer support intervention has positiveeffects on student grades. The course averages indicate that students involved with PLTLactivities have higher course averages an indicator of academic success that has potential to leadto persistence in engineering pathways compared to those students not involved with PLTLactivities. This preliminary data appears to support the overall
participating in a researchexperience for undergraduates (REU) program, where we will be collecting data using anarrative inquiry approach. Therefore, analysis of current literature using narrative inquiry actsas the baseline for developing our own methodological approach to understanding the studentexperience, including their identities and EM. [4, 13-14]. EM research in engineering educationhas flourished due to the growing need for engineers with entrepreneurial skills to populateindustry positions that require innovation, communication with different disciplines, and technicalproblem solving [15-16]. However, similar to narrative research concerning the broaderengineering discipline, narrative research specific to EM in engineering education is