Paper ID #29680Exploring Literature on how Instructor Feedback Impacts STEM StudentMotivationCassie Wallwey, The Ohio State University Cassie Wallwey is currently a Ph.D. student in Ohio State University’s Department of Engineering Educa- tion. She is a Graduate Teaching Associate for the Fundamentals of Engineering Honors program, and a Graduate Research Associate working in the RIME collaborative (https://u.osu.edu/rimetime) run by Dr. Rachel Kajfez. Her research interests include engineering student motivation and feedback in engineering classrooms. Before enrolling at Ohio State University, Cassie earned her B.S. (2017
of theCAREER proposal needs to find a “sweet spot”: value, feasibility, and risk. Value is a measureof the potential impact of the proposed research and education activities. It goes beyond themonetary investment from the distribution of funds [11]. Value includes the ways in whichsociety may be improved as a result (directly and indirectly) from this work [12]; when the workis fundamental basic research, it is especially important for the investigator to describe this valuein both terms for other scientists / engineers and to politicians and society at large [13]. Thisemphasis means that applicants are encouraged to consider the value of their proposed workfrom the perspectives of science, the practice of engineering, the economy, the
forms of knowledge and information regardinginternship/employment resources, departmental and research opportunities, curriculumalternatives, exposure to graduate school, and professional experiences that may result favorablein future career aspirations. A fundamental component to facilitating successful student careerpaths is correlated to an authentic form of mentorship, which exposes students to a plethora ofcareer opportunities and prepares them to navigate postgraduate experiences. The proposed model,which was implemented over a span of four years with a total of sixteen engineering studentsconducting undergraduate research, identifies four key elements in the transformative process: 1)develop student-faculty relationship; 2) faculty
developed by stakeholders involved inthe system, the process also brings forth multiple perspectives to inform change [3, 5]. Anexample of the fundamental systems mapping process is illustrated in the following section.Example Application: Perspectives on Student Success and Retention in EngineeringThis section illustrates the application of systems mapping by a faculty developer by highlightingan example to gather perspectives and engage stakeholders on student success and retention.Student retention and success is a complex issue, with multiple factors and programs that canwork together or conflict. No one program, office, or individual holds singular influence toimpact student success; thus, systems thinking and systems mapping is an appropriate
useful at all". (see Table 4). Table 4. Perceived Usefulness of Pre-Travel Learning Activities.A key takeaway is that activities that garnered relatively lower marks were mostly passive;reviewing/reading and listening to the reports of others were not reported to be as impactful asthe active tasks of writing, presenting and even reading source materials.Participants were also queried about the amount of information, facts and knowledge providedprior to travel to determine if the resources were perceived as too little, too much, or appropriatefor their needs. Fifteen topical categories were utilized to collect and organize this feedback.The majority of respondents indicated that for twelve of the fifteen topic areas they had receivedthe right
that industryneeds and that this is not often taught in university programs. Trevelyan writes on thisextensively in his 2019 paper [20].The goal of establishing a basic teaching credential was again discussed and its importance wasagreed upon. John iterated that there is a body of knowledge about education, and that to be aprofessional educator, one must master it, as well as the technical area of expertise. Again, allthree workshop facilitators verbally offered to engage in ongoing communication withparticipants through email, Skype or phone calls, and that they welcomed participants to contactthem during the coming year.Reflection on the fourth workshop:Mani, acting as workshop participant/observer related that this workshop reemphasized
included face-to-face instruction, reading, and time to work alongside pedagogy andcurriculum experts to design or revise a targeted course. The SICR utilized an EngineeringLearning (EL) framework that guided faculty through an intentional course design process. TheEL framework shifts faculty from focusing on the delivery of content to the role of designer andfacilitator of learning. The SICR took place during the summers of 2016, 2017, and 2018. In thisstudy, we examined the elements from the SICR that faculty continue to use in their courses afterparticipating in the program. This is an important and fundamental study to consider as the long-term influences of educational development initiatives are rarely studied systematically yearsafter their
. Norman is a 2018-2019 Fulbright Scholar who actively volunteers as a NASA Solar System Am- bassador. She is also a US Army Veteran who has enjoyed contributing to and learning from a variety of organizations. Dr. Norman is active in helping faculty establish successful research portfolios. Her research interests include fundamental aeronautics; Hypersonics; Theoretical Physics; Planetary Entry, Descent and Landing (EDL) system design and analysis; Dewar and Cryostat design and cryogenic mate- rial testing; Advances in STEM Education and Curriculum development;Dr. Yuetong Lin, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Worldwide Yuetong Lin received the Ph.D. degree in Systems and Industrial Engineering from the University of
and Technology through Educational Research (CLUSTER), is a dynamic in- terdisciplinary team that brings together professors, graduate, and undergraduate students from engineer- ing, art, educational psychology, and social work in the context of fundamental educational research. Dr. Walther’s research program spans interpretive research methodologies in engineering education, the pro- fessional formation of engineers, the role of empathy and reflection in engineering learning, and student development in interdisciplinary and interprofessional spaces. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Building communities of engineering faculty, staff, and students engaged in educational
earned both her B.S. in agricultural engineering and M.S. in biomedical engineering at OLynn Hall, Ohio State University Lynn Hall is a Senior Lecturer and the Director of Engineering Technical Communications in the Depart- ment of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. She received her Ph.D. in English from Miami University (Ohio). Her research interests include writing in the disciplines, technical communica- tions, and diversity, equity, and inclusion.Dr. David A. Delaine, Ohio State University Dr. David A. Delaine is an Assistant Professor at The Ohio State University Department of Engineering Education. Within this newly formed department he strives to creatively impact engineering education and
Paper ID #33551A Rapid and Formative Response by the Engineering Education Faculty toSupport the Engineering Faculty and Students Throughout the ExtremeClassroom Changes Resulting from the COVID-19 PandemicMr. Lance Leon Allen White, Texas A&M University Lance White is a Ph.D. student at Texas A&M University in Interdisciplinary Engineering with a thrust in Engineering Education. He is working as a graduate research assistant at the Institute of Engineering Education and Innovation at the Texas Engineering Experiment Station at Texas A&M University under director Dr. Tracy Hammond. Dr. Karan Watson and Dr. Pavel
worth noting that theefforts at Lawrence Technological University grew into what became the KEEN IntegratingCurricula with Entrepreneurial-mindset (ICE) Workshops. A conference article by BaylorUniversity notes that their approach is “different [as] it concentrates on [their] efforts to changefaculty members” [6]. Their efforts included leveraging the ICE Workshops for facultydevelopment, faculty lunchtime seminars, end-of-term faculty workshops, and in-houseinnovators program. It is worth noting that Baylor joined the KEEN network in 2008 and a majorcomponent of their institutional grant was on faculty development. At the time of writing theirpaper, they reported that their faculty had produced approximately 32 papers over the 7-yearspan of
transition to online learning, which struggled both from an academic and non-academic perspective [11], [12].Both the surveys and the interviews of engineering students point to a large disconnect betweenthe faculty members and students’ experiences in remote learning in Spring 2020. Our facultyinterviews indicated that faculty members generally were unaware of best practices in teachingonline including best practices in terms of presentations, grading and assessment strategies. Thisaspect is fundamental in an online environment, in which visual clues are eliminated and thestudent-faculty contact time is diminished.As faculty members reflected about the challenges of the Spring 2020 semester, they alsodescribed their plans to improve their teaching
Paper ID #29715A Model for a Faculty Development Course Redesign Summer Working GroupDr. Michelle M Blum, Syracuse University Dr. Blum is interested in research in improving undergraduate engineering education; including develop- ment of inquiry based activities for first year engineering courses, improvement of student design projects, hands-on activities, professional skills development and inclusion and outreach activities. Dr. Blum also specializes in high performance materials development and characterization for tribological (friction and wear), structural, and biomedical applications.Dr. Katie D. Cadwell, Syracuse