Paper ID #31581Determinants of initial training for engineering educatorsDr. Elizabeth Pluskwik, Minnesota State University, Mankato Elizabeth leads the Engineering Management and Statistics competencies at Iron Range Engineering, an ABET-accredited project-based engineering education program of Minnesota State University, Mankato. She enjoys helping student engineers develop entrepreneurial mindsets through project-based and expe- riential learning. Her research interests include improving engineering education through faculty devel- opment, game-based learning, and reflection. Elizabeth was a Certified Public
Paper ID #32614Initial Faculty Perceptions of Scrum for Departmental ChangeDr. James J. Pembridge, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona BeachDr. Timothy A. Wilson, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach Tim Wilson is chair of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Florida.Olivia Elizabeth Roa, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Initial Faculty Perceptions of Scrum
Central New Mexico Community College where she manages the college-wide accreditation and strategic plan. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020From Q&A to Norm & Adapt: The Roles of Peers in Changing Faculty Beliefs and PracticeAbstractThis research paper reports on the impact of professional development across four years of amajor change initiative. Research suggests students from groups underrepresented in engineeringare particularly vulnerable to poor teaching, drawing inaccurate conclusions about their fit andpotential. However, supporting faculty to make their teaching more inclusive and learner-centered can be challenging. Faculty may not have experienced such
initial contact. In addition, changes in teaching practice are frequently not evidentimmediately after participating in professional development; often instructors need time toimplement and incorporate what they have learned into their teaching practice.The purpose of our study is to explore the lasting impact of the SICR on faculty participants. Inparticular, this study focused on three research questions: 1) What elements from the SICR dofaculty describe as practices that they continue to use in the design and implementation of theircourses more than two years after participation?, 2) What do faculty describe as challenges inimplementing their redesigned courses since participating in the SICR?, and 3) What do facultydescribe as positive
Paper ID #29209Validation of the Climate Scale in the Persistence of Engineers in theAcademy Survey (PEAS)Dr. Julie Aldridge, The Ohio State University Julie Aldridge is a postdoctoral scholar in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. She received her Ph.D in Agricultural Communication, Education, and Leadership and M.S. in Natural Resources both from The Ohio State University.Dr. So Yoon Yoon, University of Cincinnati SSo Yoon Yoon, Ph.D., is a research scientist at the Department of Engineering Education in the College of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS) at the University of
one data set for initial coding, assigning descriptive words and phrases tothe 2019 mentor’s responses. Smith and Osborn [14, pp. 68] detail this process, noting “the skillat this stage is finding expressions which are high level enough to allow theoretical connectionswithin and across cases but which are still grounded in the particularity of the specific thingsaid”. After coding the interview, the research team grouped similar and redundant codes intolarger themes. The coding and grouping process was then repeated for the 2018 and 2017 datasets, adding codes to the existing themes when appropriate and creating new themes whennecessary. This process led to a master document of compiled themes and some outliers. Theresearch team continued
Paper ID #34316Faculty Motivations and Barriers for Engineering Education ResearchMs. Mia Ko, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Mia is a 4th year undergraduate student studying Bioengineering with a minor in Material Science and Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. On campus, she actively participates as an Engineering Ambassador: encouraging younger students’ interest in STEM related fields while changing the definition and conversation of what it means to be an engineer. Her research interests include motivation and STEM curriculum development and evaluation. She is very excited to
-selected groups mayalso lead to isolation and lack of participation from students who do not have close friends in the class. Instructor selected groups are clearly a better method for producing positive group outcomes. However, ∗ Funding for initial development of the Group Assignment Tool from September 2017 through March 2018 was providedby the Kaminsky Undergraduate Research Award.manual group formation can be difficult and time consuming. Group formation is a high dimensionalityconstrained optimization problem. Instructors typically aim to maximize heterogeneity of groups withrespect to certain attributes while minimizing heterogeneity with respect to others and fulfilling variousconstraints—for example, avoiding pairing certain
anengineering college in a large, research-based Southwestern university. The program, funded throughthe National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Improving Science Education (IUSE) initiative, is currentlyin its final year and has focused on infusing active learning into engineering undergraduate classroomsand providing faculty with evidence-based instructional strategies that would foster a morestudent-centered classroom. Seven engineering disciplines were represented by the faculty participants:aerospace, biomedical, chemical, civil, construction, materials, and mechanical. This paper exploresthe ability of continuing Communities of Practice to sustain content disseminated in a facultydevelopment program. We use this paper to document and highlight
Classrooms: Dimensioning the Behaviors That MatterThis research paper describes the findings from an exploratory study. Student retention inengineering disciplines, from program initiation through commencement, is recognized as achallenge by higher learning institutions across the US. Numerous studies have identified thatprofessors who can establish strong and positive rapport with their students have an immediateand positive impact on students’ learning, engagement, motivation and academic success,resulting in a positive long-term influence on retention. Previous work has defined fifteenspecific faculty behaviors that establish positive rapport between students and professors in otherdisciplines. However, these past studies may not be generalizable
assist in generating an organic, conversation-orientedenvironment that encourages participant autonomy such that individual and collective experiencesare respected.Once the survey and focus group interviews have concluded, the authors will initiate, in Phase 3of the project, a series of meaningful conversations aimed at engaging engineering facultymembers who have undergraduate research students in exploring collaborative efforts toimplement the proposed model. This effort will draw on data collected from the study to informthe material required to develop and facilitate in-depth, dynamic training sessions in which themodel is explained in detail.REFERENCES[1] Gordon, V.N. (1995). The undecided college student: An academic and career
Kamal, Independent Researcher American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Work in progress: The challenges of evaluating ADVANCE initiatives effectiveness in the progress of women faculty in engineeringAbstractThe retention and promotion of a diverse engineering faculty body play a primary role in theadvancement of the field. Failure to retain engineering faculty has significant economicimplications for institutions. Additionally, the availability of role models and potential mentorsfor women and other minorities is paramount for the continuing diversification of the field. Priorresearch has documented additional challenges faced by women faculty in
as unidimensional [12]. Our researchhighlights ways the five OCBs can be behavioral indicators of collegiality, which are alignedwith assertions in the previous studies [9, 23].Furthermore, our research shows that OCB as collegiality influences faculty mindset forcurricular and instructional changes in engineering education. We found that faculty with highOCB committed more to the change initiatives and actively engaged in efforts to develop andimplement student-centered teaching strategies. Our study therefore expands Su and Baird’sresearch [12]. They found that collegiality increases faculty commitment and that increasedcommitment can improve faculty teaching. In our research, faculty mindset towards students(growth vs. fixed mindset
with the STEM education community. Before theworkshop, participants were encouraged to speak with prior S-STEM PIs at their institutions,even if in other disciplines, to glean from their lessons learned (whether positive or negative) andutilize that information in developing their projects. During the workshop, they were introducedto tools such as logic models to help with project planning and to initiate conversations as theymet with prospective project evaluators. One of the novel elements of our project was that it not only provided training, but alsoincluded a research component designed to generate knowledge about the participants’experiences in developing and submitting S-STEM proposals in order to illuminate challengesthey
research the integration of innovative instructional strategies and technologies in their classrooms and designs and delivers teaching- focused professional development programs for faculty in the college.Dr. Markeya S. Peteranetz, University of Nebraska-Lincoln Dr. Peteranetz is the Learning Assessment Coordinator for the University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Engineering. Her research interests include the impact of instructional practices on student learning and motivation, and sources of within-person variation in motivation and self-regulated learning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Bridging the Gap: Preparing Future Engineering Faculty for
completion of their appointment despite their desire for a tenure-track faculty position.Half of all students entering graduate school in STEM fields consider a career in theprofessoriate desirable (McGee et al., 2019). This initial interest originating in the earlyexperiences and family influences present in an individual’s life (Burt, 2019), an attraction toacademic work (Lindholm, 2004), the perception of research autonomy, independence andindividual expression (Gibbs & Griffin, 2013; Lindholm, 2004), the allure of the university workenvironment (Lindholm, 2004), and as a platform to help others (Gibbs & Griffin, 2013). McGeeet al. (2019) recently found 51% of students entering graduate school initially indicated aninterest in a career in
alternative energy systems curricula for public and college courses and experimental laboratories. Additionally, he is the co-developer of the outreach initiative, Educators Lead- ing Energy Conservation and Training Researchers of Diverse Ethnicities (ELECTRoDE). He received his Bachelor of Science degree from Florida A&M University and his graduate degrees (culminating in a Ph.D.) from Georgia Tech; and all of the degrees are in the discipline of Mechanical Engineering.Dr. Rosario A. Gerhardt, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Rosario A. Gerhardt is Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology. In addition to her engineering research interests, she is also interested in
satisfaction for professional-track faculty. Becausecareer satisfaction is linked with faculty retention and advancement [12], these actions are aninvestment into the future for institutions wishing to hire, develop, and retain strong faculty.Recent publications have described initiatives and programming intended to improve careersatisfaction for professional-track faculty [2], [4], [5], [9]. With this paper, we aim to contributeto the dialog through a research project on faculty satisfaction that identifies factors related toprofessional-track faculty career satisfaction. Understanding these factors will help institutionstarget initiatives designed to foster professional-track faculty retention and success.Continuing-Track Faculty at the University
]. Research suggests that HSIs are better equipped to enhance Latinx students' outcomes thannon-HSI settings through target initiatives, such as student-centered support programs andinclusive curricula that connect to their cultural identity [16]. HSIs are exemplars of inclusivecurricula through intentional incorporation of diverse instructional activities and assessments[17] as well as through alignment of identities with learning objectives in their course [18][19][20]. Despite the contemporary research insights on the value that HSIs provide to Latinxstudents, there is still a need for inclusive and learner-centered practices within engineeringdepartments [21].Therefore, this paper explores how engineering faculty at HSIs perceive and approach
and learning, gamified classrooms, and engineering faculty collaborations around the scholarship of teach- ing and learning. He is currently the Associate Director for Educational Innovation and Impact at the University of Georgia’s Engineering Education Transformations Institute.Dr. Nicola W. Sochacka, University of Georgia Dr. Nicola Sochacka is the Associate Director for Research Initiation and Enablement in the Engineering Education Transformations Institute (EETI) in the College of Engineering at UGA. Supported by over 1.5M in funding, Dr. Sochacka’s research interests include systems thinking, diversity, STEAM (STEM + Art) education, and the role of empathy in engineering education and practice. Her work has
for several years. She holds B.S. in Computer Engineering and M.S. in Industrial Engineering. She received her Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Binghamton University (SUNY). Her background and research interests are in quality and productivity improvement using statistical tools, lean methods and use of information technology in operations management. Her work is primarily in manufacturing and healthcare delivery operations.Dr. Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven Ron Harichandran is Dean of the Tagliatela College of Engineering and is the PI of the grant entitled Developing Entrepreneurial Thinking in Engineering Students by Utilizing Integrated Online Modules and Experiential
Paper ID #32676Supporting Students’ Skillful Learning: Lessons Learned from a FacultyDevelopment WorkshopDr. Patrick Cunningham, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Patrick Cunningham is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technol- ogy. His professional development is focused on researching and promoting metacognition, self-regulated learning, and reflection among students and faculty in Engineering Education. Dr. Cunningham has been a PI/Co-PI on two NSF-funded grants and led Rose-Hulman’s participation in the Consortium to Pro- mote Reflection in Engineering Education (CPREE). He is also a
Teaching and Learning, The Ohio State University, where she supports the future growth, stability and productivity of the institute. Her responsibilities range from instructional/policy creation support and initiative management. She is charged with contributing to and promoting the inquiry and scholarship mission of the institute. She holds a Ph.D. from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in Higher Education Curriculum and Instruction and has served as a director of teaching and learning at Ohio State’s College of Veterinary Medicine and the University of Cincinnati’s Center for the Enhancement of Teach- ing and Learning, as well as a faculty member at various private liberal arts, community college, and research
in 1985 and her M.S. in 1988 and Ph.D. in 1991 in chemical engineering both from Pennsylvania State University. Dr. Karen’s educational research emphasis includes faculty development and mentoring, graduate student development, critical thinking and communication skills, enhancing mathematical student success in Calculus (including Impact of COVID-19), and promoting women in STEM. Her technical research focuses on sustainable chemical process design, computer aided design, and multicriteria decision making. She also has extensive experience in K-12 STEM education and program evaluation and assessment. She has held a variety of administrative positions: 1) Director of STEM Faculty Development Initiatives-Clemson, 2
STEMeducation enterprise and broaden the pool of researchers that can conduct fundamental researchinto STEM learning and learning environments. This is motivated in part by the recognition thatimproved STEM education will benefit from qualitative and quantitative research [1], and for theneed to evaluate the effectiveness of various initiatives that are being explored [2]. Recent NSFawards have focused mostly on graduate students seeking to become STEM researchersincluding studies that established: 1) an Institute in Critical Quantitative, Computational, andMixed Methods Training for Underrepresented Scholars [3], 2) a Meta-Analysis ResearchInstitute (MMARI) to improve the quality of meta-analyses conducted in STEM education byproviding training to
impact assessment tool,” Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol. 13, pp. 12, 2015.13. L. Bornmann, “Measuring the societal impact of research,” EMBO Reports, 13(8), pp. 673–676, 2012.14. King’s College London and Digital Science, “The nature, scale and beneficiaries of research impact: An initial analysis of Research Excellence Framework (REF),” 2014 impact case studies, London: King’s College London, 2015.15. H. F. Moed, Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005.16. P. Campbell, and M. Grayson, “Assessing science.” Nature, 511(7510), pp. S49, 2014.17. J. Karlin, C. Allendoerfer, R. Bates, D. Ewert, and R. Ulseth. "Building Your Change- agent Toolkit: The Power of Story." In ASEE Annual Conference &
Paper ID #34546A Grounded Theory Analysis of COVID-19 Information and ResourcesRelayed Through University Webpages: Implications for a More InclusiveCommunityDr. Sreyoshi Bhaduri, McGraw Hill Dr. Sreyoshi Bhaduri is an Engineering Educator and People Researcher. She currently heads Global People Research and Analytics at McGraw Hill, where she leads research leveraging employee data to generate data-driven insights for decisions impacting organizational Culture and Talent. Her research interests include assessing the impact and effectiveness of inclusion initiatives as well as employing in- novative, ethical and inclusive
into engineering courses, connect professional values and skills to technical content, andempower faculty to use innovative pedagogical practices.This paper will describe the five lessons learned on how faculty successfully mobilize curricularchange as well as barriers to these efforts. These lessons learned will be presented throughfaculty perceptions, which were solicited through 29 semi-structured qualitative interviews and 1focus group conducted by a postdoctoral research associate and a social scientist at two to threeyears in of a five year grant intended to foster institutional change. These interviews encompassboth the leadership team of the change initiative and the general faculty who responded to thosechange efforts within all five
Paper ID #30778WIP: Supporting Faculty Developers’ Engagement with DisciplinaryPerspectivesMr. Richard J. Aleong, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Richard J. Aleong is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He received his M.A.Sc. and B.Sc.E in Mechanical and Materials Engineering from Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada. His research interests are focused on integrative thinking and design, interdisciplinary collaboration, and educational development to support students’ personal and professional learning and growth
or pedagogy that you were afraid to explore before that you can explore now? • What leadership positions are you interested in pursuing? Post Major revisions to career strategic plan: ELATE Promotion • How can you connect with younger faculty? HERS Leadership • How can you continue to create value for your institution and your Institute students? KEEN Leadership • What avenues of research and pedagogy are you curious about? WorkshopFuture Steps and ConclusionsThe next steps in this initiative