focus on the subset of these students who havegraduated with an undergraduate degree in engineering technology or who majored inengineering technology during some point in their studies. To capture that information, thefollowing research question is intended to document these findings. Who are engineering technology graduates?MethodologyTo answer this and other questions, a Qualtrics survey was developed. The survey covered in thispublication was aimed at graduates and gathered information concerning demographics,information about education, mentoring, and religious commitment prior to college and incollege. The survey also gathered information about how confident the students were in theiracademic ability
intellectually.With the addition of undergraduates, the program not only utilized the intellectual capital of thegraduate students but also gave them managerial experience. This forced the graduate studentsto develop people skills and cultivate leadership skills; two skillsets that are not necessarilydeveloped in the confines of a graduate research lab.In return, the College of Education undergraduates received invaluable classroom teachingexperience before their student teaching semester thereby increasing their success as a studentteacher. The College of Engineering undergraduates were given the opportunity to improve theirpresentation and communication skills. As one, male, engineering undergraduate commented,“If you can explain something to a third
graduate students who areconducting engineering research would be more likely to need to use critical thinking skills suchas analysis, interpretation, etc., than undergraduates. However, the finding that graduate studentshad more difficulty completing the instrument is consistent with other results from the literature.In a study that allowed students to take as much time as needed to complete the CCTST Form A,it was found that longer completion times were correlated with higher scores.22 This tended tosupport the authors’ “slow and careful” hypothesis, namely that an important disposition towardscritical thinking is the tendency to careful analyze situations, while those who are quicker arebeing less careful and tend to make mistakes. The “smart
Paper ID #37179Fostering Community at the Graduate Level: One University’s Student-ledApproachHaroula M. Tzamaras, Pennsylvania State University Haroula is a 3rd year PhD candidate studying human factors at Penn State and is the current president of GradWIE.Sierra HicksGabriella M. Sallai, Pennsylvania State University Gaby Sallai is currently a graduate student in the Mechanical Engineering department at Penn State. She is working under Dr. Catherine Berdanier in the Engineering Cognitive Research Laboratory (ECRL) studying the experiences of engineering graduate students. She received her Bachelor’s degree from
, assembly, parts, operation and budget) and non- technical perspective (project management, team work, communications etc.) What was the outcome of the failure reports? This includes solutions and recommendations proposed. What is your observation? What alternative solution would you have proposed? Could this mission be done better? If so, how?Some example case studies from graduate students are provided below (only executivesummaries):Case Study 1: NASA DART Mission“The Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology (DART) program began in May2001 as a part of a NASA Research Announcement (NRA) from the 2nd Generation ReusableLaunch Vehicle Program (2GRLV). The DART program was
by industry from Bachelorand Master graduates. For this research, engineers working in the European engineeringindustry who recruit or work with recent graduates were approached.The following research questions are addressed in this paper: 1. Which transversal competencies does industry require for engineering graduates? 2. Which competency levels does industry require at Bachelor (BSc.) and Master (MSc.) graduations? 3. Is there a difference between BSc. and MSc. competency level? 4. Are there differences in competency levels between respondents’ experience? 5. Are there differences in competency levels between respondents’ company size?The findings of this pilot study reveal some interesting preliminary insights which
discussion of these topics, the course also included reviews of actual industryprojects on lean manufacturing and six-sigma implementation, published research articles around Page 23.536.6these topics, and one semester project on real world problem. 5B. Survey of student learning of the graduate classAs mentioned earlier, the survey was voluntary and anonymous. The students were asked abouthow they viewed the impact of different components of course such as case study, articlereviews, and project in addition to the regular texts on their learning. The
, thereis broad interest in aspects of visual perception. These interests include work on basic models ofmacular degeneration (BMS), psychological studies of human motion perception (HF/IO),computational models of depth perception (CSE), and the development of prosthetic devices(Eng), all leading to research on the design of pedagogies for teaching STEM students withvisual impairments.Students’ learning outcomes are shaped by a curriculum that combines a thorough discipline-specific training with interdisciplinary studies and research experience in assistive methods, toolsand technologies. To ensure that all graduates have the opportunity to develop a deepunderstanding of all dimensions of disability, its consequences, and possible interventions
based on those identities? 2. How does existing as a marginalized person in a graduate engineering program and experiencing bias and discrimination affect engineering identity? 3. How does engineering identity mitigate the effects of experiencing discrimination and bias? 4. How can racial, gendered, and other identities support engineering identity development? How can identity be leveraged to support student persistence, performance, and participation in graduate engineering?A mapping of the research questions (RQ) to the study design can be found in Figure 1. Analysis & Phase 1: Interviews with Phase 2: Nationally
AC 2011-1396: ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESS FOR ENGINEERING PH.D.S:PERSPECTIVES FROM ACADEMIA AND INDUSTRYMonica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette Monica F. Cox, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue Univer- sity. She obtained a B.S. in mathematics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Pri- mary research projects explore the preparation of
women engineering leaders in academia.Increasing the number of women leaders in engineering, for both industry and academia, willweaken masculinist norms around leadership in the profession and provide role models foraspiring engineers. Research focused on GEPs is also needed as both quantitative and qualitativeresearch within engineering education has focused on the undergraduate level within the USenvironment, and we lack studies addressing the unique needs of graduate engineering studentsin Canada, with a few notable recent exceptions [8, 9].Using quantitative and qualitative data collected and analyzed from a larger research project, thispaper seeks to answer the following two research questions: 1. How has the proportion of women
board member position in the Indo American Chamber of Commerce (IACC) Education Council and part of the strategic planning committee of International Federation of Engineering Education Societies (IFEES).Dr. Rajendra Kumar Joshi, WIPRO Technologies Dr. Rajendra Joshi is the Head of Research Center, Mission10X. Dr Joshi completed his PhD from Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, after his post graduation in Philosophy from Bangalore University. Joshi taught for 17 years as lecturer, Reader in philosophy and Vice-principal of Chowgule College-Goa. Later he worked as Dean Education at International Academy for Creative Teaching, Bangalore and as founder Director of Indus Training and Research Institute, a training
achieved bydeveloping an infrastructure that substantially changes the graduate school experience for URMstudents by preparing them for academic teaching and researching positions thereby catalyzinginstitutional change. AGEP was established in 1997 and to date consists of 21 Alliances thatrepresent over 80 institutions. While several studies have looked at a variety of factors that mayinfluence career choice2 this study focused specifically on a group being groomed for academiccareers.Quantitative ResultsTo determine the effect of participating in such a program with respect to career choices, oneAGEP conducted an explanatory case study of 29 AGEP program alumni to attempt to explainthe reasons behind their career choices. The goal of the project
goal was to prepare future academics/scholars, and ithas thus focused on the creation and conservation of disciplinary knowledge [1], [2]. However,the reality today is that most engineering graduate students (GSs) go on to non-academic careers[3], [4]. As educators, it should be our aim to equip GSs for success, regardless of careeraspirations, and to be more thoughtful about what ‘success’ in a particular field means. Boyerstates that, …graduate study must be broadened, encompassing not only research, but integration, application, and teaching, too. It is this vision that will assure, we believe, a new generation of scholars, one that is more intellectually vibrant and more responsive to society's shifting needs [5, pp
follow-up to these inquiries, we have learned that these professionals often areworking in functions such as production control, marketing, accounting, and human resources.Market ResearchA market research project for our Program was conducted in 19965. As part of this study, thepossibility of offering a professional certification that did not require an undergraduate degree inengineering or involve graduate technical engineering courses was investigated. The results ofthe study indicated that certification is seen as on-going professional development, which is avery competitive market. Certification programs vary tremendously in scope, cost, andphilosophy. At the same time, these programs are in a constant state of flux often disappearing
AC 2009-1211: A NOVEL PARADIGM FOR TRAINING GRADUATE STUDENTSIN SOFT SKILLSSundararajan Madihally, Oklahoma State University Dr. Madihally is an Associate Professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University. He received his BE in ChE from Bangalore University and his PhD from Wayne State University in Chemical Engineering. He held a research fellow position at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School/Shriners Hospital for Children. His research interests include bioreactor development for tissue regeneration and the development of therapies for traumatic conditions
in government, industry and academia. Research projects include anundulating towed vehicle known as ECOShuttle that allows researchers to obtain high resolutiondistributions of chemical, physical, and biological parameters to study complex processes in theocean. Researchers at the Boston campus are also working on miniaturizing laser based sensorsfor incorporation into autonomous underwater vehicles for long term monitoring of the ocean.Dartmouth: Eleven departments are involved in teaching and research programs in marinesciences and technology at this campus. A graduate program in electrical engineering orientedtowards marine sciences and technology is one of these. This program offers both MS and PhDdegrees. A recently established School
Student Peer Mentorship in Academia,” Mentor. Tutoring Partnersh. Learn., vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 549–576, 2019, doi: 10.1080/13611267.2019.1686694.[14] M. Jennings, “A Review of the State of LGBTQIA+ Student Research in STEM and Engineering Education,” p. 24.[15] N. Kalkunte, M. Nagbe, and M. Borrego, “Climate Survey Report,” Cockrell School of Engineering, Feb. 2022. [Online]. Available: https://cockrell.utexas.edu/images/pdfs/CockrellSchool-ClimateSurveyReport2022.pdf[16] N. H. Choe, M. Borrego, L. L. Martins, A. Patrick, and C. C. Seepersad, “A Quantitative Pilot Study of Engineering Graduate Student Identity,” in 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, Colum, 2017.[17] relating to diversity, equity
from the research results and recommendations provided alongwith posssible directio ons for futurre research. Engineering E managemennt program directors d anddcourse deevelopers caan utilize the findings of this study too help orientt and restructture theirquality/process manaagement couurses to betteer reflect currrent trends inn graduate engineering emanagem ment program ms, with partticular emphhasis on certaain topics ovver others.Importaance of Quallity / Processs Managem
at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, theprogram has accommodated a group of new Army employees every year since 1988, giving theman opportunity to earn a master’s degree in software engineering during the first few years oftheir employment. In addition to providing an opportunity for new employees to earn a master’sdegree the Army makes available a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program fortheir new employees. In a recent study, the CPD program and its links to the graduate programwere reviewed by the authors from the perspective of the combined ability of the master’sprogram and the CPD program to meet the ongoing needs of technical professional employees.In this paper, we present a summary of the literature relevant to future trends in
1997 graduate study in Electronics was available by research (a non course work optioninvolving a major thesis) but it was believed that the course work options would attract a largenumber of part-time students working in industry, for whom a research qualification is often notpracticable. It was also felt that the course work options would attract overseas students,particularly from the Asia Pacific region. This was substantiated by the fact that the then recentlyintroduced graduate programs by course work in Telecommunications attracted many part timestudents from local industry plus full time students from the Asia Pacific region. It was felt thatthe new programs would complement the Telecommunications program, providingopportunities for
children, and people withdisabilities, are more likely than their traditional graduate student counterparts to report climate-related issues [4]. While some studies of university or campus-level climate for students haveincluded doctoral students in general, few studies disaggregate findings by discipline or bydemographic categories beyond gender identity and race/ethnicity. In engineering, Riley, Slaton,and Pawley’s [5] observed that the engineering education research community tends to take upissues of diversity focused on “women and [racial and ethnic] minorities while queerness, class,nationality, disability, age, and other forms of difference are for the most part not seen asrequiring address”. This literature review was conducted as
graduate studies such as financialsupport for graduate school, selection of a research project, or taking appropriate support classesfor their chosen thesis topic. To better understand the preconceptions students have prior toentering graduate school, we surveyed seniors and graduate students in engineering at MichiganTech.II. SurveyThe authors felt we had some anecdotal information about why students do not go to graduateschool. To try to substantiate these ideas we composed a survey to measure the reasons whycurrently enrolled graduate students decided to pursue graduate degrees. The survey is given asTable 1. The survey was distributed via listservers to all the graduate students in engineering.The survey was filled out by 27 engineering
, Stanford University Dr. Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Be- sides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford Univer- sity, she conducts research on engineering education and work-practices, and applied finite element anal- ysis. From 1999-2008 she served as a Senior Scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, leading the Foundation’s engineering study (as reported in Educating Engineers: Designing for the Future of the Field). In addition, in 2003 Dr. Sheppard was named co-principal investigator on a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant to form the Center for the Advancement of
Medicine, and the Chair of the newly-established Designated Emphasis in Neuroengineering. His research and teaching interests are at the intersection of micro-/nano-technology and its applications to microelectronics and medicine. He received his PhD degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Virginia (UVA) in 2007 and held postdoctoral positions in the Department of Chemistry at UVA and at the Center for Engineering in Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital. He is the recipient of a UC Davis – Graduate Studies Distinguished Graduate and Postdoctoral Mentorship Award, UC Davis – Academic Senate Distinguished Graduate and Professional Teaching Award, an NSF CAREER Award, and an
, fostering a culture of writing productivity and accountability. [17]. Whileexisting studies have highlighted the benefits of writing accountability groups in improving writingskills and manuscript development [17], there is a paucity of research examining theirincorporation into professional development initiatives targeting graduate students across multipleSTEM disciplines [18].This paper contributes to bridging this gap by elucidating the strategic utilization of professionaldevelopment workshops and writing accountability groups to enhance graduate trainees'scholarship in a multi-STEM educational program. By providing insights into the planning,implementation, and assessment strategies employed, the paper offers valuable guidance foreducators
vehicles. 10 Following completion of their graduate studies all three wereassigned to space-related duties within Air Force Space Command. Students in other programs at AFIT may also conduct research in space-related areas. Forexample, Capt Bergren, a student in the Graduate Aeronautical Engineering program, conducteda study on cold flow through a configuration of ten nozzles and a diffuser that is related to theoperation of a space-based laser. A paper has been prepared on this research. 11 Capt Ralph Bordner, received a Master of Science in Astronautical Engineering in 2001 withhis thesis entitiled “Estimation of Relative Satellite Formation Element Positions in NearCircular Orbits.” A paper based on his thesis was recently presented. 12
with a M.S. degree). Faculty, staff, and academic units within the university who interact with a graduate student directly and contribute to the student‟s graduate training are first level secondary stakeholders. Along that line, companies (employer who sponsors employee(s) for graduate study), companies who hire the M.S. graduates, and the bank and organizations who offer loans or scholarships to the M.S. students during their study are considered Page 25.103.3 second level secondary stakeholders.In the U.S.A., the research conducted in higher education systems is tightly coupled withthe graduate programs. Graduate students (M.S. and Ph.D
) whatmotivates students to study engineering; and (3) how students conceive of their engineeringfuture. While the findings from the APPLES research have been disseminated through suchtraditional venues such as conferences and journal publications, an innovative institution-specificworkshop model was designed and piloted in spring 2009. This paper describes this new formatfor disseminating national research findings which is specifically aimed at engaging faculty inconversations that directly lead to changes in local educational practices and policies. Feedbackfrom the faculty participants and the impact of the workshop on teaching and learning practicesin subsequent months are presented. The broader implications of a national-local workshopmodel for the
comprehensive list of skill sets desired by theconstruction industry for graduates in 2015. The research team consisted of executives,managing principles from the industry, as well as faculty members at Texas A&M Universityfrom both the Civil Engineering and Construction Science Departments. The skills list andassociated definitions were further clarified and the research team found that constructionindustry skills are relative and that every person entering the construction industry does not needexpertise with all skills. In response to this aspect of skill-level attainment, the research teamdeveloped a proposed evaluation criteria for each skill set that is based upon BloomsTaxonomy.21 Final evaluation criteria for this study, shown in Figure 1