S. Jeff is white.Sarah and Jeff initially felt welcomed by CTA. Sarah was attracted by the opportunity to applyher course work in discipline S to a practical application: "I really wanted to see something [fromdiscipline S] work, I wanted to know that everything I was learning in all these classes was goingto do something." Sarah envisioned herself taking on a specific technical role on CTA. Herinterest in subsystem S was driven by the specific mission of CTA that year, which wasunusually highly weighted toward discipline S.Sarah and Jeff attended weekly CTA meetings for about two months. While they initially feltwelcome, they were never able to socially integrate into the clique of discipline A majors that ranthe team. Sarah explained
Page 26.548.3lasting changes in how outsiders/novices themselves participate in STEM. Too often theorganizing goal (as perceived by learners) in didactic learning contexts that focus on “knowledgeacquisition” is to satisfy the teacher that particular information has been received rather than touse that knowledge to accomplish practical outcomes with “real world” impacts. By contrast,research across the learning sciences has shown that when learners themselves are compelled toexplain or demonstrate what they are beginning to understand they engage in a transformativeand lasting acts of knowledge-creation19. Our program attempts to put these theories intopractice using digital media as a creative platform to catalyze productive meaning-making
future student users.Other Trainees noted that they specifically mentioned in the materials the relation of the conceptspresented to real-world topics that high school students find interesting, like technology. MostTrainees used a variety of pedagogical engagement strategies to keep students interested, throughdividing the lesson into parts, employing team learning strategies, and using visualdemonstration and hands-on activities to promote problem-based and challenge-based learningenvironments. “When we were writing for the students, I think that we tried our best to help students not be bored by the reading…after all, if they are bored with the reading, they’ll likely be “bored” with the science concepts as well
diversity that can be seen may influence the way that others interact with a student, theydo not necessarily represent how the student experiences, interprets, or responds to thoseinteractions. The diversity of engineering students is not entirely driven by what we can directlyobserve. Demographic variables capture not only elements of a student’s social identity (i.e., theidentity with which the external world interacts) but also their personal identity (i.e., the identitywith which the student views the world). A complete accounting of student diversity inengineering must capture dimensions that influence how students process their experiences, notjust dimensions that may affect their experiences with others.Additionally, demographic variables do
include real-lifeexamples and interactive format to address student challenges.Although more comprehensive approaches like ethics across the curriculum and standalonecourses provide deeper coverage and increased opportunity for students to engage with thetopics, there are logistical and institutional challenges that make these approaches harder tointegrate [8]. Ethics across the curriculum requires widespread faculty support and commitment,including individuals’ willingness to coordinate efforts across the degree program and teach ESIin their own courses. Given shrinking credit hours for engineering degrees and an increasingnumber of topics, it can be challenging to find space in the curriculum for standalone ethicscourses [9]. These courses can
, one that threatens to undermine the credibilityof the professions and poses truly vexing problems for journal reviewers and editors: how to dealwith plagiarism on a professional level.The academic community understands the challenge to add to a discipline’s body of knowledge,to generate original ideas, using previously acquired and disseminated knowledge, asfoundations for building new perspectives, theories, and models. And what they produce as anextension of prior knowledge makes the world a better place and honors the contributions oftheir predecessors but only if given proper credit. However, if scholars do no more thanregurgitate the words of others, no progress can occur. Those who violate ethical standards bypilfering intellectual
introduce underrepresented,underprivileged high school students (mentees) to engineering and help them prepare for thechallenges of an undergraduate engineering degree program. DREAM has three main goals thathave evolved and come into focus over the four years of the program’s existence. First, DREAMseeks to change mentees’ perceptions of what is possible, leading them to a better quality of lifethrough college education and subsequent rewarding and lucrative engineering and STEMcareers. Second, DREAM prepares mentees for the rigors of undergraduate STEM education byforming connections between engineering applications and high school classes, and promotingenrollment in upper-level math and science courses. Third, DREAM prepares mentees for
].In terms of local community engagement, Trott et al. [11] introduced a theoretical model tointegrate participatory action research (PAR) into UREs, where researchers and participantscollaboratively examine the issues that directly impact the participants and work together tocreate change. This approach contrasts with traditional STEM UREs which can limit students’autonomy over the research process [11]. The PAR-based URE model creates an opportunity forSTEM UREs to address real-world issues in a local community context and moves away fromdetached and impersonal knowledge generation associated with positivist STEM research [11].Trott et al. [12] and Weinberg et al. [13] described the implementation of the PAR-based UREmodel for a nine-week
Page 23.1164.3femininities breaking down the “binary opposition between male and female”10 and allowing for“creative interrogation of the ways in which people ‘do’ gender”.15Engineering as MasculineAfter World War I, engineering was, according to Ruth Oldenziel, a “project inmasculinization”. 16 The word “engineer” was originally given to the military troops who created,built, and operated machinery [engines] of war.17 This link between military and engineering hasled to construction of a hegemonic masculinity that pervades the professional and educationalenvironments of engineering. The term hegemonic refers to the cultural ideal of masculinity thatis dominant and is associated with men who are in power.18Not only is this masculine image of
psychologist Professor Thorndike. “The real purpose for which engineering schools were established is to increase industrial production, because the ultimate aim of engineering is more intelligent production. But every production project requires the coordination and adjustment of three factors, namely scientific theory, mechanical practice, and cost. A theoretically perfect machine that cannot be built is no more useless than one that costs so much that no one is willing to buy it. Success in engineering comes to him who most often judges soundly concerning the best adjustment of these three complex factors” (p91) […], “It is customary in designing curricula to keep these three essential phases of engineering distinct from one another and to teach
put forth.I. IntroductionProblem formulation often occurs at the early stages of a problem solving process when it has thegreatest potential for affecting the direction and success of all succeeding stages1-3. If theproblem formulation step is not successful, the result is often an incomplete, over-simplified andunclear problem solution, or even worse, an incorrect problem solution4-5. An importantemphasis in problem formulation is the resolution of the open-ended engineering problem in itscontext with its multiple dimensions6-9. By nature, open-ended problems are ambiguous, andthey potentially have multiple solutions. Open-ended engineering problems requireunderstanding clients and their needs. In the business world, clients do not come for
So Few Textbook ChoicesLet's define Engineering Technology (ET), in contrast to what it isn’t: it's not Engineering orIndustrial Technology or Technician study. ABET’s website compares ET & Engr. thusly: “Engineering programs often focus on theory and conceptual design, while engineeringtechnology programs usually focus on application and implementation. Also, engineering programs typically require additional, higher-level mathematics,including multiple semesters of calculus and calculus-based theoretical science courses.Engineering technology programs typically focus on algebra, trigonometry, applied calculus, andother courses that are more practical than theoretical in nature.” 1Engineering Technology is a young
patterns. Overall, such research suggests professional engineering practice, whileheterogeneous, involves interplays between the social and technical dimensions of complexproblems. For instance, a longitudinal study that involved over 300 interviews with practicingengineers, survey data from nearly 400 engineers, and multiple years of participant observationsof Australasian engineers found that, “…more experienced engineers…had mostly realized thatthe real intellectual challenges in engineering involve people and technical issuessimultaneously. Most had found working with these challenges far more satisfying thanremaining entirely in the technical domain of objects” [5]. Another study, an overview of mostlyU.S. workplace studies, focused primarily
knowledge areas and knowledge units that provide a foundation for cybersecurity education programs [5]. ThePedagogic Cybersecurity Framework extended the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model to include three additional layersto help explain the non-technical areas that influence security within an organization [6]. The National Security Agency andDepartment of Homeland Security sponsors the National Centers of Academic Excellence (CAE) program to certify colleges anduniversities that meets their requirement by aligning their curriculum to cybersecurity knowledge units that are validated bysubject matter experts [7].A study by IBM to understand cybersecurity academic programs around the world found that less than 60 percent of students
1.36 Engaging in real-world science research 5.21 6.00 1.05 Feeling like a scientist 5.14 6.00 1.10Ratings of specific REU experiences were obtained from participants through six items assessingparticipant ratings of the following areas: working relationship with research mentor, workingrelationship with research group members, amount of time spent doing meaningful research,amount of time spent with research mentor, advice given by research mentor regarding graduateschool and careers, and the research experience overall. The items demonstrated adequatereliability (α = .70) and were measured on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from ‘Poor’ to ‘Verygood
student is “now at the proficient stage of [their]reflective practice.” However, the syntax and content of the reflection is indeed deeper and morein line with what the program seeks to solicit, compared to the student’s first reflection for thesame class. The sentences are longer with a more varied structure and closer syntacticalconnection between them. The student also probes their own emotional state and deepermotivations: “when I can’t clearly draw a connection to real world application in a class, I tendto put in minimal effort to get by; it is easy for me to get in the mindset that the things I perceiveas less important are detracting time from the things I really want to learn. Sometimes, it takesthat extra push or outside perspective for
applied with real consequences, such as preferential treatment for those positivelyinfluenced, and psychological stress for those negatively influenced.25 These biases manifestthemselves in many ways, one of which are microaggressions: small slights, slurs or snubs thataccumulate over time to affect the way individuals experience their environment.26 Inengineering, for example, they can manifest through the questioning looks a black male receiveswhen he walks into an advanced mathematics course – looks that ask, without words, “Are yousure you’re in the right room?”27 Similarly, the surprised tone that accompanies a compliment ona white female student’s computer code implies “I didn’t think a woman could do that.”Given, then, that gender and race
this paper. This may be notably different fromthe typical undergraduate as described by Balakrishnan and Tarlochan 10 who share aboutengineering students’ attitudes towards ethics in the engineering curriculum. They found thatinterest in socio-ethical issues is typically low. However, at the University of Notre Dame, allundergraduate students take multiple philosophy and theology courses 11 . These required coursesengender social consciousness in our students. We find that engineering students frequently askthe question, “How can I engineer for good in the world?” this aligned with the university mottoof being a force for good in the world. Balakrishnan, Tochinai and Kanemitsu 12 compare theintegration of ethics in the engineering curriculum
ofexamples and assignments respectful of a diversity of student learning styles; makingconnections between technical and scientific problems and their social contexts; the use of thecurve (or alternative bases for grading); the weighting of lab work; the role of critical thinking;reduction of student's sense of anonymity; and the style of feedback in the classroom. Facultyalso affect the pedagogical techniques of graduate assistants, in labs, grading, and other activitiesthey may be assigned. It will be faculty, if anyone, who will reconfigure courses to improvelearning5, or reconfigure curriculum to make engineering more real and more engaging duringthe first semesters of coursework (when attrition rates are highest).Method I conducted semi
improved attitudes toward the subject, increased engagement, greater sense of ownershipin learning, and better academic performance [20], [51], [57], [63].Authentic formative assessmentsCentral to the philosophy of student-focused education are authentic and formative assessments[62], [64]–[66]. Authentic assessments are aimed at creating a testing environment which closelymodels real-world professional settings in which students are expected to be able to deliverfollowing graduation or the completion of the course [62], [64]. Formative assessments, on theother hand, are those geared toward supporting the learning process and the development ofstudents’ skills throughout the course [16], [65]. Authentic formative assessments are thereforedesigned
introduce scientific and engineering practice in K–12 science educationto help students “understand how scientific knowledge develops and [to give] them anappreciation of the wide range of approaches that are used to investigate, model, and explain theworld.” Central to this practice-and-process focus is encouraging students to share their ideas,and the reasoning behind them, and work together to build deeper understandings of scientificphenomenon and their applications. By eliciting students’ knowledge of science garnered fromexperiences both inside and outside the classroom, teachers can empower students to make senseof the world around them by refining the ideas they already possess through a dynamic processof argumentation, experimentation, and
and independent experiences in a meaningful environment; Experiences these facilitate autonomy, cultivate engagement-belonging, and foreground leadership importance Scaffolding providing—and gradually withdrawing—needed structures and guidance; provides support for developing more complex frameworks and behaviors Group peer group engagement during learning; clarifies and strengthens ideas Learning while promoting reflective reasoning Diverse engagement with those with differing backgrounds, experiences, or Perspectives perspectives; important to distinguishing one’s own way of being Technical Skills capabilities directly relating to the application of
traditional lecture/homework format. Thus there was arelatively low barrier to develop the online content and in-class materials. Finally, due to recentcampus-wide educational infrastructure investment, several high-quality open classrooms withthe right capacity (70~90 people) became available.If and how engineering courses should be flipped is an active area of research and debate [4].This paper does not comprise a rigorous study of the flipped classroom format. Rather, this paperis a field report by an educational practitioner on our department’s real-world experiences withflipped classroom instruction in chemical engineering. This paper describes what worked andwhat didn’t work in our particular implementation. It also highlights a feature of
colleagues who led successful international travel courses November December January • Scouting trip to visit IES Abroad London and engineering marvel sites February • Prepare and submit course proposal to relevant committees March April May • Correspond with IES Abroad to finalize international travel plans June 2016 July August September • Advertise and recruit students for travel abroad course October • Students complete travel abroad applications November • Notify students
doctoral degrees in Civil En- gineering from North Carolina State University in the USA. Her disciplinary research interests lie in the area of sustainability in asphalt pavements using material considerations, green technologies, and efficient pavement preservation techniques. Her doctoral work focused on improving the performance of recycled asphalt pavements using warm mix asphalt additives. As a postdoctoral scholar at North Carolina State University, she worked on several NCDOT sponsored research projects including developing specifica- tions for crack sealant application and performing field measurements of asphalt emulsion application in tack coats and chip seals. Her undergraduate teaching experience includes
expand the number of students who can benefit from conducting research as the designprojects are embedded directly into the curriculum and are taken by all students in the program.Undergraduate research has been shown to help students take ownership of their own learningand helps them to see the real-world relevance of research as they learn problem-solving skills[1 – 3]. Inquiry-based projects are beneficial because they require a significant investment ofstudent time and effort over an extended period with frequent constructive feedback from facultyand regular opportunities for reflection [4, 5]. This paper addresses the process of developmentof performance indicators and presents the results of assessment and evaluation of both ETACABET and
Paper ID #30807The Pitt STRIVE Program: Adopting Evidence-Based Principles ”TheMeyerhoff and PROMISE Way”Ms. Deanna Christine Easley Sinex, University of Pittsburgh Deanna C.E.Sinex is a Bioengineering Ph.D. candidate at the University of Pittsburgh. She earned her B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Her research involves the development and application of engineering concepts and active learning techniques in clinical and institutional learning environments to help improve the literacy of fundamental, yet critical aspects of health.Dr. Mary E. Besterfield-Sacre, University of
targetresponse rates, in the range of 90% or 95%, and associating them with a bonus to the upcomingmidterm exams or the final student scores. In addition to achieving very high response rates, thisstrategy also instils a sense of responsibility to the students towards their peers and the class,because lack of responsiveness of few students could strip the bonus from the entire class.Examples of common student concerns that can be (or have been) identified by these surveysinclude the general structure of the course (particularly for courses including labs and othercomponents different from traditional instruction), the structure of the lectures (e.g., number ofin-class examples, pace of the material presentation, relation of theory to real world