undergraduate and experienced graduate students who have a demonstrated interest in issues of sustainable development. 2) Integrating the research experience into education initiatives that are focused on sustainable development. 3) Ensuring the research experience focuses on appropriate technology (defined here as the use of materials and technology that are culturally, economically, and socially suitable to the area in which they are implemented). 4) Using an operational model for sustainable development that is a global partnership, so students understand how to integrate and transfer the best and most appropriate knowledge, methodologies, techniques, and practices between the developed and developing
first-year students in undergraduate research opportunities which increases studentretention and graduation rate among STEM majors. A new initiative at the University ofMaryland, the First-Year Innovation & Research Experience Program (FIRE), provides authenticresearch experience to first-year students. This paper introduces a new program, the DesigningInnovations Research Stream, that engages first-year students in design research. The goal is thatstudents will learn about design by investigating how teams solve complex design problems andthen apply this knowledge to a real-world situation. The Designing Innovations Research Streamconsisted of two semesters and a 10-week summer research fellowship. In the first semester ofDesigning
physics. It was believed that the REU program would help to exposeour program to motivated students with a good idea about the research that they would beconducting as graduate students. In the first two years of the REU project, even though weobserved that the undergraduate research scholars were interested and motivated about theresearch projects, they had no idea about the applications of those technologies or if they wantedto take these ideas to the market. Further, very few of the REU scholars from the initial yearswere interested in applying to our graduate program. Therefore, it was decided to revamp andmodify our approach to the structure of the REU program during the third year of the project.REU project student statisticsStudents were
reform. Even the most optimistic estimates indicate that just7.5% of engineering students study abroad, while Shulman estimates that only 10-15% ofengineering schools are taking global education seriously.6 ,7In addition to the relatively modest number of schools that are working to thoroughlyinternationalize engineering education, many National Science Foundation (NSF) initiatives alsoprovide crucial support for global education and research, such as through the East Asia andPacific Summer Institutes (EAPSI) program. In this paper we focus on another such program,International Research and Education in Engineering (IREE). Initiated by NSF (ENG/EEC) in2006, IREE objectives include developing collaborations with engineering researchers abroadand
are discussedThe “Science of Team Science (SciTS)” is emerging as a research area to explore how large-scale research (initiated in the medical research context) endeavors can be best accomplishedacross multiple institutions and potentially hundreds of colleagues 1–3. The Science of TeamScience literature has high value in studying collaborations in engineering and particularly theways in which students learn to become collaborative members of their research teams. SciTSfindings have only recently been introduced in an engineering and graduate engineering studenteducational context 3. Most of these studies promote competency- or logistical- bases forsuccess: that by having the right conditions for success, all teams will be able to be
held in March 2009 at North CarolinaA&T State University under the sponsorship of the National Science Foundation (NSF).The workshop sought to address the building of meaningful bridges among minorityinstitutions and research-intensive universities in the United States, in emerging areas ofengineering research. This was the first such workshop that the NSF has sponsored underthe initiative of diversity in engineering research. The 205 attendees represented 56universities and 15 corporations; 62 faculty and administrators from minority institutionsand 66 faculty and administrators from majority universities attended and participated inthe workshop. The workshop included 3 plenary talks by two provosts of leadinguniversities and the head of
. Qualitative survey data was analyzed using ATLAS.ti, version 5.013, a qualitativemanagement program. Students’ responses to open-ended questions asking why they selectedthe rankings of confidence in summer research program success and degree of current successthat they did were reviewed. Responses that were similar in nature were given an enveloping“code-name.” All student comments were then coded individually by two independentresearchers. Upon completion of independent analysis the two researchers met to perform aninterrater reliability exercise. Initial researcher agreement on factors placed in each categoryranged from 85% to 90%, which is a reasonable level of agreement for this type of research11.Factors not initially agreed upon were discussed
decade and the shift to a requiredthesis for every graduate student completing the degree on campus created some challenges for aprogram that for most if its 40 plus years of existence was concentrated primarily onundergraduate education. Some of the MS growth challenge came from struggles that studentsoften have in formulating targeted questions and/or hypotheses about construction managementproblems, selecting appropriate methodologies to answer the research question or test thehypotheses, as well as difficulties experienced from the poor preparation of incoming studentsfor academic writing. Writing courses based on the Effective Army Writing program which wereadded to enhance student success and the initial indications of success in improving
tools, toolevaluation and web information seeking.2. Literature Review2. 1 Novice Researchers’ DifficultiesNovice researchers in a new field usually face various kinds of challenges. Hockey7 portrays thefirst year of PhD as the most crucial and difficult period because students “initially encounterand experience intellectual and social processes at their point of maximum novelty”(p1). Muchresearch has been done about the challenges and issues first-year PhD students or junior researchstudents face, including social isolation, productivity, financing, discrepancies with advisers, andunequal accesses to peer culture and academic culture7,9–13. An important area of doctoral studythat has received little attention is the development of
deficiency, U.S. universities and initiatives like theNational Science Foundation's International Research Experience for Students (IRES) program aredeveloping new approaches to foster global competencies in engineering students, aiming betterto prepare them for international collaborations and the global market [17], [18], [19], [20].This research takes a step towards addressing this gap. The motivation behind focusing onmicroelectronics research and the global competencies of engineering students stems from thecritical role that microelectronics plays in contemporary global technology. Many universities inthe US offer undergraduate research opportunities in microelectronics. These programs encourageinnovation and creativity, often in collaboration
students who participate in undergraduate research experiences (URE) aremore likely to attend graduate school [5] and that participation gives the student a deeperunderstanding of the topic, confidence in their research skills and confirmation of their chosenSTEM career [6]. These experiences also expand the participants academic credentials, establishrelationship with professionals as well as expand critical thinking and problem-solving skills [7,8]. Beyond UREs, it has been suggested by the Boyer Commission that every undergraduatestudent should be provided a mentor and research opportunity as early as their first year [9].SERVE was established to provide U.S. military veterans initially with an opportunity to receiveundergraduate research
students ontheir first visits to a collaborating laboratory. Their initial role is to help the students simplylearn how to operate in the new environment. This includes the details of travel and livingarrangements, establishing connections in the host organization, and finalizing the research workplan. In most cases, the faculty member also devotes a considerable amount of time tostrengthening existing collaborative activities and identifying new opportunities. Students areincluded in some of these activities so that as they become more experienced, they will be able todo this on their own. The overarching goal is to build sustainable partnerships, which requirescareful attention to issues such as institutional support, cultural sensitivity
studies, such asthat by Trenor and Pierrakos10, that examined students’ self-efficacy for future research andconsulted with REU administrators.Assessing Research Self-EfficacyThe Likert-type scale used in this study was a six-item scale to ensure students would not over-rely on a neutral response category and to provide enough options so that the participants couldrate their capabilities in sufficiently nuanced ways. Each response was then coded so that“strongly disagree” equaled “1” up to “strongly agree” having a value of “6”. Participantsresponded to these items both during the first week of the program (Time Point 1, TP1) and alsoat the end of the program (Time Point 2, TP2).We initially developed 12 items to assess participants’ perceived
talents thatexist throughout our population, including talents hidden in population segments that have nottraditionally enrolled at this University (or sometimes in any post-secondary institution).In the United States there is a tradition of strong Historically Black Colleges and Universities(HBCUs) that provide both a nurturing culture and strong academic preparation to students ofcolor in our society. But many of these institutions do not support a graduate research program,instead developing relationships with graduate research institutions for post-graduateopportunities for their students.As a research institution, the University of Arkansas has the need for strong graduate students tosupport its research initiatives. However, most graduate
research course employed a dualteaching approach, conducted through in person and Zoom instruction. While this strategyprovided the flexibility needed for some students and instructors to attend class, the integrationof technology introduced challenges. Occasionally, technology was uncooperative, interruptingcommunication and making it harder to use time efficiently. Student researcher Angelinahighlights that “While the out-of-class environment has provided me with flexibility means, it hasalso presented challenges regarding real-time coding and communication with other memberswithin the CI.” As the semester progressed, student researchers demonstrated great adaptabilityto the hybrid means of communication. While it was initially a distraction
indicators of relevance theparticipants were looking for as they scanned the results list and then skimmed the full text ofarticles that helped them determine a source’s utility.Participants used several approaches for determining source relevance when reviewing searchresults lists. The more experienced researchers, not only faculty participants but also graduatestudents who had spent several years in their program, did not initially focus on the article titles,but instead were looking for authors they knew and respected as well as journals they valued. Forexample, after seeing an author they recognized in the results list, one participant made thiscomment, “I know this person's name and so he is a very good person in the civil engineeringdomain
principles for conducting research responsibly within engineering domains • Gain experience in working in research teams and communicating with individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and research disciplines • Reflect on their initial research experience and develop goals for the remainder of their undergraduate research appointmentAll course materials were available via the university’s online learning platform on the first dayof the semester, and students had until the last day of final exam week to submit assignments andearn points for the course. Students were able to “build their own course” by selectingassignments and activities that best fit their academic, research and personal goals
AC 2007-1700: SHIP-TO-SHORE COLLABORATIONS: INTEGRATINGRESEARCH OF SHIPBOARD POWER SYSTEMS INTO TODAY’S POWERENGINEERING RESEARCH ACTIVITIESNoel Schulz, Mississippi State University Noel N. Schulz received her B.S.E.E. and M.S.E.E. degrees from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in 1988 and 1990, respectively. She received her Ph.D. in EE from the University of Minnesota in 1995. She has been an associate professor in the ECE department at Mississippi State University since July 2001 and holds the TVA Endowed Professorship in Power Systems Engineering. Prior to that she spent six years on the faculty of Michigan Tech. Her research interests are in computer applications in
AC 2009-1726: THE INFLUENCE OF A RESEARCH EXPERIENCES FORUNDERGRADUATES PROGRAM ON STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES TOWARDENGINEERING RESEARCHDavid Willis, Southern Methodist University David A. Willis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Southern Methodist University (SMU). He received his B.S. degree from North Carolina State University and his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Purdue University in 2001. His areas of research interests are heat transfer, phase change, and fluid mechanics problems associated with short pulse laser-material interactions. His research involves experimental studies of laser microfabrication, high power laser-ablation, and laser-induced forward
knowledge society’by increasing the level of research activity and output within the university. This isparticularly true in the sciences, engineering and technology. This increased pressureapplies equally to traditionally teaching-oriented colleges (TTOC), although not at thesame scale as research-intensive universities. For the TTOC, given the primacy ofteaching, this paper discusses the nexus between teaching and research and thequestion ‘why do research?’ is addressed within the overarching goal of embedding aresearch culture within the college. Initiatives to develop and grow sustainableresearch activity in traditionally teaching-oriented colleges are introduced anddiscussed. It seeks to answer the question as to how such initiatives can
Paper ID #36658Beyond Selecting a Methodology: Discussing ResearchQuality, Ethical, and Equity Considerations in QualitativeEngineering Education ResearchMalini Josiam (Student) Malini Josiam (she/her) is a first year doctoral student in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her advisor is Dr. Walter Lee. She graduated with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and minor in Educational Psychology from The University of Texas at Austin in May 2021. At UT Austin, she worked part time in the Women in Engineering Program office as a Strategic Evaluator and Program Assistant. She also conducted research in Engineering
”, aslessons learned for those choosing an REU. This first year of the REU may not provide enoughdata for the intended purpose (e.g., the detailed statistical analyses as suggested by Grimberg etal. [2]), but we initiated this study as the start of a longer-term study later by providingdescriptive statistics on the students, the program, and the mutual net effects. With the guidancefrom the previous work in REU assessment [3-6], this study conducted both quantitative andqualitative analyses for the purposes of formative and summative evaluation.A. Purpose of the StudyOne purpose of this study was to explore US and non-US students' research experiences duringsummer at a research university in the United States. Specifically, we tried to identify
analyze the 5-point Likert scaleitems of the pre- and post-surveys. A constant comparative method5 was used to analyze theopen-ended items of the survey, content test, and interview protocols. The first two authorsindependently coded data sets to create initial code dictionaries. Meetings were scheduled toshare, interpret, and consolidate codes. The development of codes was negotiated untilagreement in order to establish inter-rater reliability of the analysis method. The codes thatemerged were grouped into six main categories: experimental knowledge, research preparationand design knowledge, career focused preparation, engineering versus science, science contentknowledge, and the role of laboratory personnel
, it is not advisable toassign substantial interpretative weight to the survey outcomes as each party’s opinion makes uptoo large a portion of the result (~8.33%). Several students submitting low ratings for an elementthat their peers rated much higher, a circumstance that did occur, would depress the mean andincrease the standard deviation substantially. Thus, trends in the data can only be seen as tentativepatterns based on one small and initial sample. Even with that caveat, there are several notabletrends. - The three-week summer research program received consistently high ratings from participants with all informants willing to recommend participation to their peers. - Much of the information, up to as much as 100% for two
program. At the time ofthe program foundation in 2014, the College provided research experiences to students fromexternal universities, but opportunities for Penn State undergraduate students to become involvedin research were limited. The initial goals of the undergraduate research program were to 1)promote undergraduate students participating in research early in their academic career tobroaden their education; and 2) increase the likelihood of undergraduate participants to entergraduate school. At the direction of the Assistant Dean of Engineering Outreach and Inclusion,the undergraduate research program and its administrative staff were strategically placed inCEOI. As a result, the program goals expanded to include broadening research
Paper ID #29821Undergraduate Research: Deep Learning Based Plant Classifiers and TheirReal- Life Research ApplicationsDr. Deng Cao, Central State University Dr. Deng Cao received his Ph.D. in Computer Science from West Virginia University in 2013. He also earned a master degree in Statistics and a master degree in Physics, both from West Virginia University. Dr. Cao currently serves as an associate professor of Computer Science at Central State University. His research interests includes Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Computer Vision and Biometrics. His research has been supported by US Department of Agriculture
their Dynamics curriculum, they encountered similardifficulties in translating research to practice10. These faculty members wanted to create a newresource- and technology-rich learning environment. However, while each component of theproposed classroom had its own robust body of literature, there was little existing research tohelp integrate these diverse methods into a single course. Thus, these instructors relied on their extensive past experience as educationalpractitioners to guide an initial course redesign. The resulting curriculum, now referred to as theFreeform learning environment, was successful by many metrics. For example, grades inDynamics improved as the percentage of students earning D, F, or W (withdrawal) grades
discussions, and better understanding ofgraduate student research. Additionally, students enjoyed listening to presentations andconnecting with graduate students. During the seminar, students learned how researchers andengineers design their experiments and learned about the wide array of applications in mechanicalengineering. These preliminary findings can aid faculty and staff developing initiatives to enhancethe undergraduate experience in engineering. Future work is needed to understand the long-termimpact of participating in such a seminar course (e.g., impact on retention and participation inresearch).IntroductionClimate surveys from institutions are shedding light on the lack of diversity and how it affects thestudent experience. For example
well. For instance,it could be used to assess the impact of educational programs on student’s understanding of therole of a STEM researcher and, in fact, whether or not it is possible to modify role orientation bymeans of educational initiatives. Perhaps role orientation is a stable characteristic. If it ispossible to modify role orientation through pedagogical interventions then this could be asignificant advance in ethics education in science and engineering. For example, if aneducational program could make STEM researchers or graduate students more “dutiful” in theirrole, then one suspects that this will help motivate them to abide by the principles of responsibleconduct of research when faced with temptations to engage in research
researchexperiences, such as those offered by Summer Undergraduate Laboratory Initiative, Los AlamosNational Laboratory, Virginia Tech, or other research institutions. Presented in this paper is adescription of the technical course that was tested. Following that are the results of the fivephases of the project: (1) recruiting of undergraduates in the College for the pilot offering of thecourse sequence, (2) the one-credit spring course to prepare students for the summer researchexperience, (3) the summer research experiences, (4) the two-credit fall course that taughtstudents how to communicate those experiences, and (5) the recruitment of students for the nextoffering of the course sequence.Description of Technical Communication Course That Was Tested