withcontrollable variables, and (b) consider interactions of a system with its environment,which Gharajedaghi associates with uncontrollable variables, Thinking holistically in theCDIO Syllabus is related to Gharajedaghi’s multidimensional principle because bothemphasize the wide range of disciplinary perspectives that should be considered whenstudying the interactions of a system with its environment. These interactions includephysical exchanges (mass, energy, charge, momentum, angular momentum), economic Page 12.1340.6exchanges, social interactions, and interactions explored from perspectives associatedwith the humanities. Table 1. Framework for
Paper ID #9695Faculty Perceptions of Student Engagement: A Qualitative InquiryMariaf´e Taev´ı Panizo, James Madison University Mariaf´e Panizo is a second year graduate student in JMU’s Graduate Psychology program. She has been working on engineering education research projects for one and a half years, focusing on non-cognitive factors that impact engineering student success. She is currently working on her M.A. thesis on Beliefs on Depression.Mr. John Hollander, James Madison UniversityDr. Jesse Pappas, James Madison UniversityDr. Olga Pierrakos, James Madison University OLGA PIERRAKOS is an associate professor and
changingthe values of individual variables by one unit will allow educators to determine the resultingvalue in intervention efforts. The most valuable variables for developing intervention programswill be those that are directly controllable and have the greatest impact on increasing theestimated probability of a STEM outcome.Bibliography[1] National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Graduate Students and Postdoctorates inScience and Engineering: Fall 2002, NSF 05-310, Project Officers: Julia D. Oliver and Emilda B. Rivers (Arlington,VA 2004). (available from NSF website http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf04318/ )[2] Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology (CPST), data derived from the American Associationof
examination of indicators of engineering students' success and persistence. Journal of Engineering Education, 2005. 94(4): p. 419-425.13. McLoughlin, L.A., Spotlighting: Emergent gender bias in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 2005. 94(4): p. 373-381.14. Potts, G., B. Schultz, and J. Foust, The effect of freshmen cohort groups on academic performance and retention. Journal of College Student Retention: Research Theory, & Practice, 2004. 5(4): p. 385-395.15. Kimball, J., A study of engineering student attributes and time to completion of first-year required courses at Texas A&M University, in Educational Administration and Human Resource Development. 2006, Texas A&M
purpose of our next interview to elicit responses to questions that we have and navigate through the interview. For this next interview 1. Please find 4 pictures (although you may use as many as 6): a. One that represents something about you as a person b. One that represents something about you as a professional c. One that represents your (primary) discipline d. One that represents your cross-disciplinary work 2. Make sure the pictures are in JPEG format. 3. Email your pictures to – [project email] no later than [date]. In the subject line include your name (Last name, First name) and date (mm/dd/yy). (Note: the photos will be on a password protected system) Figure 1. Instructions provided to
Journal of Engineering Education. All of Dr. Borrego’s degrees are in Materials Science and Engineering. Her M.S. and Ph.D. are from Stanford University, and her B.S. is from University of Wisconsin-Madison.Dr. David B. Knight, Virginia Tech David B. Knight is an Associate Professor and Assistant Department Head of Graduate Programs in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. He is also Director of International Engagement in Engineering Education, directs the Rising Sophomore Abroad Program, and is affiliate faculty with the Higher Education Program. His research tends to be at the macro-scale, focused on a systems-level perspective of how engineering education can become more effective, efficient
= 0.06, p = 0.002), and higherStatics grades (ρ= 0.14, p <0.001) as illustrated in Figure 1b. The SAT/ACT scores werematched using 2009 concordance tables8, and the improved performance in math scores, GPA,and Statics grades could partially explain the large drop in DFW rates6. Interestingly, and a notefor future work, Statics has just begun to implement some aspects of the Freeform environment.(a) (b)Figure 1. Since the inception of Freeform, (a) the DFW rate for Dynamics has decreased, and (b)Static grades have increased.The odds ratios (ORs) as well as the p-values for the coefficient estimates of our full logisticmodel are listed in Table 1. The odds of DFW are defined as the probability of DFW
, learning-oriented, support-oriented,challenge-oriented, and disruptive. The coding book is included in Attachment B. Table 2 showsa short episode from one of the teams. As seen in this table, both the students who engaged in theaction (action by) and the student towards whom the action was directed (action towards) wererecorded during coding.Table 2. Sample CodingStudent Code Discourse Action Discourse ActionName By Move TowardsA2: Alex I think one of our priorities should be distance A2 IDE from the building when you lower it down. Like having a little hang up away from the
andPractice, vol. 14, (1), pp. 309-322, 2014.[17] *S. B. Wortel, "No title," STEM Identity Formation through Undergraduate MentoringExperiences and Middle School Learning in an Urban Informal Afterschool Program, 2019.[18] *M. R. Gates, Middle School Mathematics and Self-Efficacy at a SoutheasternMassachusetts Middle School. 2015.[19] *R. Reynolds, Reconstructing “digital Literacy” in a Constructionist Computer Club: TheRole of Motivation, Interest, and Inquiry in Children's Purposive Technology Use. 2008. [20]*D. C. Smith, The Effects of Title I-Funded Mathematics and Language Arts Tutoring onRENAISSANCE Standardized Test Scores. 2006.[21] *B. Gallegos, "The Role of Virtual Avatars in Supporting Middle School Students fromCulturally and
course project. Peer-teachers helpedstudents in groups of four to five to design and present final course projects on energysustainability that modeled a similar project designed as a K-12 outreach activity.Students in the various project groups developed posters, short movies, and presentations.Some conducted interviews with people on campus.The delivery of the ENGR 101 course at our research campus differed from traditionalengineering course offerings in two ways: (a) peer teachers led the recitation activitiesand (b) weekly homework assignments were essays rather than problem solvingassignments. It is not uncommon that many students view engineering practice as simply
evaluating preparation in mathematics and physics, incor- porating non-traditional teaching methods into the classroom, and engaging her students with interactive methods.Miss Manisha Tripathy, Texas A & M University Manisha Tripathy is a Masters student in Computer Science and Engineering Department at Texas A&M University.Currently she is working as a Student Worker with Engineering Academic and Student Affairs at Texas A&M University.She did her B Tech in Electronics and Telecommunication Engineering from KIIT University,India . Prior to joining as a master’s student,she worked as an Assistant System Analyst at Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.Her work primarily included java development and application manage
University Fullerton, the Office of the Vice Provost for Graduate Education at Stanford University, the School of Medicine at Stanford University, and the School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.Dr. Carol B. Muller, Stanford University Carol B. Muller is the Executive Director of WISE Ventures, an internal initiative at Stanford located in the Office of Faculty Development, designed to communicate, build networks, and help amplify existing and seed new and needed ventures across the Stanford campus to advance equity in science and engineer- ing. She also serves as executive director for Stanford’s Faculty Women’s Forum. A longtime university administrator, educator, and social
’ perceptions of andapproaches to problem-solving over the course of their first engineering science course?Data Collection and AnalysisTo investigate this research question, we conducted a series of three cognitive interviews withfour students over the course of a one-semester statics and dynamics course. All students had thesame instructor for this course and were enrolled in their third semester at a highly selectiveuniversity in the eastern United States. They all earned high grades (mostly A’s with theoccasional B) on homeworks, quizzes, and exams. Each interview had two phases. First, studentswere asked open-ended questions about their methods of problem solving and conceptualquestions. Second, they were asked to think aloud as they solved
AC 2012-5094: EXPLORING THE EFFECT OF DESIGN EDUCATIONON THE DESIGN COGNITION OF SOPHOMORE ENGINEERING STU-DENTSDr. Christopher B. Williams, Virginia TechDr. Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is an Associate Professor of engineering education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC). Her research focuses on communica- tion in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and design education. She was awarded a CAREER grant from NSF to study expert teaching practices in capstone design courses nationwide, and is Co-PI on several NSF grants to explore identity and interdisciplinary collaboration in engineering design.Mr
through college.Dr. Kristen B Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Associate Professor of Education at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Out- reach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college- level engineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school ex- perience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of the U.S. Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE). https://engineering.tufts.edu/me/people/faculty/kristen- bethke-wendellProf. Chris Buergin
Paper ID #19892Making Connections: Challenging the Perceived Homogeneity of MakingDr. Gina Navoa Svarovsky, University of Notre Dame Gina Navoa Svarovsky is an Assistant Professor of Practice at the University of Notre Dame’s Center for STEM Education and the College of Engineering. She has studied how young people learn engineering for over a decade.Dr. Marjorie B. Bequette, Science Museum of Minnesota Marjorie Bequette is Director of Lifelong Learning at Science Museum of Minnesota.Lauren Causey, Science Museum of Minnesota c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Making Connections
, and CEIA, and published in the Journal of Engineering Education, the Journal of Language and Social Psychology, the Journal of Applied Social Psychology, the European Journal of Social Psychology, and the European Review of Social Psychology.Christine B. Masters, Pennsylvania State University Christine B. Masters is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Science and Mechanics at The Pennsylvania State University. She earned a PhD from Penn State in 1992. In addition to raising four children with her husband of 20 years, she has been teaching introductory mechanics courses for more than 10 years, training the department graduate teaching assistants for 7 years, coordinating the
his Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of Notre Dame and his interests include social movements, political sociology, Latin American Studies, sociology of disasters, digital media communication, and research methods. Most of his work is cross-national, comparative, and with a regional focus on Latin America, Mexico and the US-Mexico Border. His work has been published in Mobilization, Sociological Inquiry, Sociological Perspectives, and Qualitative Sociology, among others.Lorissa B. B. Humble, New Mexico State University Lorissa Humble is a recent graduate from New Mexico State University with a Bachelor’s in sociology and a minor in math. She is set to begin her Master’s program in applied statistics in Fall
Engineering Professor. With this opportunity, Hern´an is able to further his understanding of both engineering and education to aid the generations who aim to become future engineers.Dr. Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of the U.S. Presidential
Path A Unit Level Influences Adjustment For example: • Faculty • Discipline • Student characteristics Evaluate & Adjust Environment Path B Path C Modify Perceptions & Interpretations of Educational EffectivenessThe academic plan model is also informed by two studies48, 49 that clarified the components thatToombs and Tierney identified. These studies defined the content dimension as including thosethings that faculty members bring to the table when they plan a course: their backgroundcharacteristics and experiences, their views of their
, many participants’ commented on the challenge of an engineering major inseveral ways, but in general they made it clear that the challenges they faced in majoring inengineering shaped their identity and how they saw others. Ava from HSI1 reported that, “…[B]ut every time I meet an engineer, they’re very passionate about challenges. The morechallenging a question, the better; like the more that they can think like out of the box, thebetter.” Michael from HBCU1 even faced some doubt, “…I thought about changing my majorseveral times. I probably think about changing my major every other week because it is hardand…it’s just hard. It’s difficult, you know.” Daniel from HBCU2 did not share Michael’sdoubt, he stated: I feel like I wanted to be
AC 2011-1244: PHENOMENOGRAPHIC STUDY OF HUMAN-CENTEREDDESIGN: EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONSCarla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University, West Lafayette CARLA B. ZOLTOWSKI, Ph.D., is Education Administrator of the EPICS Program at Purdue Univer- sity. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering Education, all from Purdue University. She has served as a lecturer in Purdue’s School of Electrical and Computer Engineering.William C. Oakes, Purdue University, West Lafayette William Oakes is the Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue University, one of the founding faculty members of the School of Engineering Education and a courtesy faculty member in Mechanical Engi- neering and Curriculum
AC 2012-4747: DECIPHERING STUDENT IDEAS ON THERMODYNAM-ICS USING COMPUTERIZED LEXICAL ANALYSIS OF STUDENT WRIT-INGDr. Luanna B. Prevost, Michigan State University Luanna Prevost is a Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Center for Engineering Education Research (CEER) at Michigan State University. She is a member of the Automated Analysis of Constructed Responses program, an NSF-funded cross-institutional collaboration of interdisciplinary science, tech- nology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education researchers interested in exploring the use of automated text analysis to evaluate constructed-response assessments. Her research activities focus on instructional material development, learning assessment, and
benefit 20% 0% a) Take more time to figure out 67% 73% the solution2. What is the challenges did you feel b) As freshmen, it is hard to work 20% 55% when the instructor used the on a problem from scratch problem-based learning (PBL) in c) No much challenge for me 20% 9% this course? d) Other 0% 0% a) Give more time to work on the 67% 27% problem if time is permitted3
that all but two of the participants agreed or strongly agreed thatthe use of LC-DLMs helped promote interactive forms of engagement such as discussion withpeers, asking and answering questions and clarifying understanding with peers through robustdiscussions. A key feature of the venturi LC-DLM is the changing diameters. We were interestedin how participants’ ability to see the changing diameters in the venturi LC-DLMs helped themunderstand key concepts about velocity changes, energy transformations and pressure changes.Appendix B shows the descriptive statistics of participant responses on three items about thechanging diameters. Results from Appendix B show that the changing diameters in the venturiLC-DLMs fostered robust understandings of
system development for water purification as well as membrane manufacturing. She is an avid hiker and enjoys spending time with her family in the Boundry Waters Canoe Area of Minnesota.Dr. Alison B. Hoxie, University of Minnesota Duluth Dr. Alison B. Hoxie is an Assistant Professor in the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Department at the University of Minnesota Duluth. Her education includes a B.A. in Natural Science from the College of Saint Benedict (1999), a B.S.M.E (2001) and a Ph.D. (2007) from the University of Minnesota Twin Cities. She has held positions as a consulting engineering in power and energy sector, and as an Instructor at the University of Utah. Her current research focuses on cost effective
AC 2011-941: UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING STUDENTS AND CRIT-ICAL THINKING: A PRELIMINARY ANALYSISJames E. Lewis, University of Louisville James E. Lewis, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Fundamentals in the J. B. Speed School of Engineering at the University of Louisville. His research interests include paral- lel and distributed computer systems, cryptography, engineering education, undergraduate retention and technology (Tablet PCs) used in the classroom.Dr. Cathy Bays Page 22.1566.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Undergraduate
solve a problem? When afaculty tries something that requires student involvement in class, does it usually work? What ifit doesn’t work? Site B is a smaller public institution in the Southeast designated a Historically Black Collegeor University (HBCU). It is designated as the nation’s leading producer of African-Americanengineers. Focus groups were conducted with 9 participants in 3 sessions. Students were allrecruited through their introductory materials science and engineering course by their instructor.The focus groups were conducted by researchers visiting from another institution. Mostparticipants were underrepresented minorities, consistent with the HBCU mission of Site B.Sample items from the focus group protocol include:Q. How would
Education as a Rigorous Discipline: A Study of the Publication Patterns of Four Coalitions,” Journal of Engineering Education, 96, pp. 5–18, 2007.3 Spalter-Roth, R., N. Fortenberry, and B. Lovitts, What Sociologists Know About the Acceptance and Diffusion of Innovation: The Case of Engineering Education, Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 2007.4 Henderson, C., A. Beach, and N. Finkelstein, “Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, pp. 952–984, 2011. doi:10.1002/tea.20439.5 Jamieson, L.H. and J. R. Lohmann, Innovation with Impact: Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering
slightly from this, but only the common questions between thethree surveys (#1 through #12) and the open-ended comments were analyzed and compared. Page 22.109.6ME 422 SurveyFor the purpose of this survey, [online textbook] materials include Assignments, Quizzes, ReadingContent, Cases, Video Clips, Simulations, MP3 Files, Interactive Learning Resources, Flash Cards,and Crossword Puzzles. 1. I reviewed [online textbook] materials on a weekly basis, outside of the classroom. a. Strongly Disagree b. Disagree c. Neutral (neither agree nor disagree) d. Agree e. Strongly Agree 2. The [online