, and (2)building community and networks. Each of these concepts is where participants have detailedhow community cultural wealth and cultural capital have been influential in their pathways. Wepresent the words from our research participants verbatim.The Dynamic Nature of Community Cultural Wealth in Graduate Education Our research participants often spoke of tenacity or stubbornness that helped them intheir educational journeys, specifically in overcoming rough or seemingly insurmountableconditions. I learned the hard way that I was not taking care of myself. Yeah because all of undergrad and early grad school I was just so committed to not failing. Yeah, that I never know, I never took a step back to assess like, how
, organizations, and resources may differ at other campuses, we imagine theexplanations will allow for similar decision making beyond our institutional environment. In2024-2025, we will follow up with additional interviews—with students, student makerspacestaff, administrators, and full-time makerspace staff—to assess the impacts of theserecommendations. The full paper including those details will be shared at a future ASEE nationalconference.Among our interviewees, the single most often cited challenge to engaging with makerspaceswas unresponsive or hostile/dismissive interactions with student workers at the makerspace.While it’s worth noting that among the regular users of campus makerspaces the staff wereperceived as friendly and helpful, if often
thinking. Anzaldúa [16] argue that challenging traditional and normative notionsof reality becomes a way to challenge traditional methodologies – a process ofdecolonization. For engineering education research, this process of decolonization isparticularly important because counternarratives are necessary to more critically assess thecultures of engineering [6, 19, 20]. Nepantla offers a framework for examining howsociopolitical forces—intersections of ideologies, behaviors, beliefs, values, and dominantpolicies—have shaped the educational journey of Latino/a/x engineering students,challenging established notions of what constitutes reality and for whom [21]. It provides aparticular framework that breaks from the traditional white methods [22] used
determiningguidelines in assessment of patient risk factors and determining appropriate preventativemeasures. These products can also be used for the effective design of medical devices and otherproducts.In addition to the physical products of this project, working on the project has allowed thestudents involved to grow beyond merely understanding concepts taught in the mechanicalengineering curriculum. Through applying concepts and tools from previous courses, analyzingdata and other results, evaluating alternative problem-solving methods and ultimately creating atest system that can be used for meaningful research, students have prepared themselves to beeffective engineers and have become more engaged in their own learning than they ever could bein
education inmiddle school. The research was implemented in two phases: (1) literature exploration (this wasa pre-phase approach adapted from [4]; and (2) analysis guided by synthesis approaches used by[23]. The first pre-phase consisted of searching broadly if CRP was used in the STEM Educationresearch literature. To accomplish this, I searched Google Scholar using relevant keywords (i.e.,"culturally relevant pedagogies" + "STEM Education" + pre-college). Following, I assessed theextent to which articles addressed ideas related to my research inquiry (e.g., were the papersengaging with pre-college groups, were the papers using CRP as a guiding framework, etc.).Lastly, I limited my search to papers that were published within the last ten years
basic methodology consists of seven steps, analyze, integrate, iterate, converge,screen, visualize, and assess risk1. Some examples of methodologies used by aircraft designers inthe past, which were used as an initial starting point for this project, were design texts byRoskam8, Raymer16, Nicolai7 and Torenbeek15. The methodology produced by each designerrepresents a final refined methodology that took years of experience before a true aircraft designmethodology was fashioned. After comparing all methodologies, a combination of Raymer’s16and Torenbeek’s15 methodology is used to develop Skybrid Aeronautics methodology.Figure 6 Overall MethodologyThe flow of information is also visualized from the methodology in Figure 6. When compared tothe
and Retention, Session 3553, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Washington, DC, June 23 – 26, 1996.20. Besterfield-Sacre, M., Atman, C.J., and Shuman, L.J., Engineering Student Attitudes Assessment, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 87, No. 2, pp. 113-141, April 1998.21. Besterfield-Sacre, M., Atman, C.J., and Shuman, L.J., Characteristics of Freshman Engineering Students: Models for Determining Student Attrition in
Assessment. Green Products in Design Choices for Cleaner Environment. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992. Indira Nair, Panel Chair. 8. Meadows Beyond the Limits 9. Leopold, Aldo. The Sand County Alamanac 10. Carson, Rachel. Silent Spring. 11. Merkhofer, Miley. Decision Science and Social Risk Management, Springer, 1986. 12. Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Environmental_Policy_Act viewed 9/30/2011 13. Op cit, #4 above. 14. Lau, Andrew S. “Green Design in First-Year Engineering.” International Journal of. Engineering Education. Vol. 23, No. 1, 2007. See also, 15. Papanek, Victor, The Green Imperative: Natural Design for the Real World, Thames and Hudson, 1995; Graedel, T. E
the institution, allowing for athorough understanding of their existing academic offerings. Our Graduate Research Assistantcollaborates with the various academic representatives to design a program that integrates theirinstitution’s offerings into the statewide ecosystem.As part of this collaborative effort, a preliminary course equivalency assessment is conducted.This involves an examination and comparison of the courses already established at theinstitutions. This initial evaluation allows us to identify potential areas of alignment and establishthe groundwork for the integration of those courses into the program.Through these engagements, we not only provide valuable insights into the benefits of optinginto the program but also actively
San Diego. She is interested in scholarly teaching and employs active learning techniques to empower students to attain an expert level of critical thinking. Her expertise facilitates students’ journey towards connecting facts with practical knowledge to tackle intricate engineering challenges. She excels in crafting innovative assessments and explores their impact on enhancing students’ learning outcomes and fostering an inclusive educational environment.Prof. Bill Lin, University of California, San Diego Bill Lin received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences from the University of California at Berkeley in 1985, 1988, and 1991, respectively. He is currently a
few notes of explanation (Figure 2). Thetemplate had space for this activity to be done three times, but the students were to only fill outthe first instance. During class, students folded their page to cover their own answer whilekeeping the other spots on the template open, and then passed the template and a copy of theirpaper to another student who then took around 10 minutes to purposefully scan the paper, makean assessment of the underlying epistemology, position the paper on the triangle based on theepistemological assessment. The sheet was folded so that the answers of the second student werehidden and then the sheet and the paper were passed to a third student, who did the same thing.After this round, all worksheets were passed back
Foundation Coalition has experiencedseveral changes in its institutional membership, there has been a real continuity andpartnership among the members. Today there are six Foundation Coalition partners: theUniversity of Alabama, Arizona State University, the University of Massachusetts atDartmouth, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Texas A&M University, and theUniversity of Wisconsin at Madison. Four thrusts define the Foundation Coalitioncurricular reform: integration of course work across disciplines; active and cooperativelearning; the use of technology in the classroom; and on-going assessment andevaluation. Their primary focus is on the freshman and sophomore curricula. While theparticipating programs shared these four thrusts, each used
final designs, as idea fixation, which represents a significant barrier topersisting and learning from design failures.Using a protocol for assessing the actions of observing, diagnosing, explaining, and fixingassociated with troubleshooting design failures, Crimsond [7] had high school students analyzedifferent designs, make observations, identify flaws, and suggest remedies. The studentsfrequently neglected to make observations and identify flaws and Crismond hypothesized thatidea fixation is simply due to novices not noticing weaknesses in their current prototype.In a subsequent paper, Crimson and Adams [8] stated that beginning designers use “anunfocused, non-analytical way to view prototypes during testing and troubleshooting of ideas
emergent codes(e.g., when PSTs asked students to defend their design decisions) and to parsing structural codes(e.g., separating the idea of “teacher telling” into when PSTs identified variables of concern forDesign 2 and when PSTs suggested specific design decisions for Design 2 in SETE 2).Analysis of the early SETE helpfulness question began with the first author reviewing eachparagraph to assess if each PST expressed that the early SETE experiences were helpful,somewhat helpful, or not helpful (three main codes). In addition to these structural codes,emergent codes were identified to capture reasoning to support their response of helpful orsomewhat helpful; there were no “not helpful” codes.FindingsFirst, we present codes that we identified—as
(age, gender, citizenship, academic discipline, and stage of persistence) and theirpreferences for three styles of mentoring as assessed by the Ideal Mentor Scale (IMS): Integrity,Guidance, and Relationship. The study concluded that “graduate students’ perceptions of theideal mentor are influenced somewhat by major socio-cultural factors, but also suggest thatindividual differences may play a larger role” [25]. Mutual respect fosters an environment ofstrong relationship for effective engagement and attracts students who commit and want tofollow the mentor because, relationally, the students are motivated by the sense that the mentorcares for them more than his or her positional rights, and so are willing to follow in theirmentor’s directives
Stanford University in 2008 and 2012, respectively. Her current engineering education research interests include engineering students’ understanding of ethics and social responsibility, sociotechnical education, and assessment of engineering pedagogies.Dr. Janet Y Tsai, University of Colorado Boulder Janet Y. Tsai is a researcher and instructor in the College of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Colorado Boulder. Her research focuses on ways to encourage more students, especially women and those from nontraditional demographic groups, to pursue interests in the eld of engineering. Janet assists in recruitment and retention efforts locally, nationally, and internationally, hoping to broaden the image
something within a theme.”). Those who reported that thematerials were effective in meeting their course learning objectives explained that this wasdetermined based on course evaluations and feedback surveys, anecdotal evidence from students’comments, and the fact that students were performing satisfactorily and successfully meeting keydeliverable deadlines.Discussion and ConclusionThis work aimed to assess the effectiveness of open access Online Course Modules shared via anonline platform for use by faculty and others interested in curriculum related to globalchallenges. The platform, built in the Canvas LMS, was developed to share the course materials,focused on exploring the NAE Grand Challenges for Engineering and other global challengesfrom an
Paper ID #33789Civil Engineering Master’s Programs: Requirements and OutcomesDr. Angela R. Bielefeldt, University of Colorado Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and Director for the Engineering Plus program. She has served as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education in the CEAE Department, as well as the ABET assessment coordinator. Professor Bielefeldt was also the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where students learned
byCongress on October 14, 1998. It created recommendations on how to improve the incorporationof women, minorities, and people with disabilities into the workforce and to keep minorities,disabled students, and women in the "pipeline." Another large study was the Women inEngineering Programs & Advocates Network (WEPAN) Pilot Climate Survey9 that assessed theperceptions of 8000 male and female undergraduate engineering students from 29 institutionsabout the educational climate in the United States. Factors of persistence in this study wererelated to student self-confidence and self-esteem. The fourth large study was completed for theDepartment of Education using National Center for Education Statistics data10 and identifiedparental education and