J.E., The Future of Engineering Education I: AVision for a New Century, Chem. Engr. Education, 34(1), 16–25 (2000).[3] Felder R.M., Woods D.R., Stice J.E., Rugarcia A., The Future of Engineering Education II:Teaching Methods that Work, Chem. Engr. Education, 34(1), 26–39 (2000).[4] Prince M., Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research, Journals of EngineeringEducation, Volume 93, Issue 3 Pages 223–231 (2004).[5] Bonwell, C.C., and J. A. Eison, “Active Learning: Creating Ex-citement in the Classroom,”ASHEERIC Higher Education Report No.1, George Washington University, Washington, DC ,1991.[6] Smith, B., and J. MacGregor, “What is Collaborative Learning?,”in Goodsell, A., M. Mahler,V. Tinto, B.L.Smith, and J. MacGreger,(Eds
reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton University Press, 3175 Princeton Pike, Lawrenceville, NJ, 1990.9. P. J. Fensham, Defining an identity: The evolution of science education as a field of research, Vol. 20, Springer Science & Business Media, 2004.10. Thorsten Bell, Detlef Urhahne, Sascha Schanze, and Rolf Ploetzner, “Collaborative Inquiry Learning: Models, Tools, and Challenges,” International Journal of Science Education, 32 (03), pp.349-377, 2010.11. B. Morgan, “Research impact: Income for outcome,” Nature, 511(7510), pp. S72–S75, 2014.12. G. Cohen, J. Schroeder, R. Newson, L. King, L. Rychetnik, and A. J. Milat, “Does health intervention research have real world policy and practice impacts: Testing a new
success in STEM through psychological stress, inter- rupted STEM career trajectories, impostor phenomenon, and other debilitating race-related trauma for Black, Indigenous, and Latinx doctoral students.Dr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University at West Lafayette Joyce B. Main is Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and a Ph.D. degree in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University. Dr. Main examines student academic pathways and transitions to the workforce in science and engineering. She was a recipi- ent of the 2014 American Society for Engineering Education
, C. (2018). Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/10/12/about-three-quarters-all-faculty- positions-are-tenure-track-according-new-aaup[3] Ginder, S. A., Kelly-Reid, J. E., & Mann, F. B. (2019, January). Enrollment and Employees in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2017 and Financial Statistics and Academic Libraries, Fiscal Year 2017. Retrieved February 1, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019021REV.pdf[4] Rogers, C. B., McIntyre, M., & Jazzar, M. (2010). Mentoring adjunct faculty using the cornerstones of effective communication and practice. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 18(1), 53–59.[5] Smith, C. (2003). Working systemically
and rubric, collected in course evaluations, is perhaps the most useful for theindividual instructor’s professional development. The main objective of the work-in-progress(WIP) is to develop a methodology to: (a) automatically extract assertions of perceived quality ofteaching using machine learning techniques. (b) provide a mechanism to compare instructors basedon the extracted assertion/qualities. The contributions of the paper are (a) methodology to mineteaching evaluation and (b) an open-source tool to facilitate educational establishments executeempirical studies and students perform exploratory analytics on the teaching evaluations. The toolsupports a wide variety of data formats, does not require any domain knowledge for its
Paper ID #29698To Be, or Not to Be, a Professor: Views of Engineering PostdoctoralScholarsDr. Sylvia L. Mendez, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs Dr. Sylvia Mendez is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Leadership, Research, and Foundations at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs. She earned a PhD in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies from the University of Kansas, a MS in Student Affairs in Higher Education from Colorado State University, and a BA in Economics from Washington State University. Dr. Mendez’s research centers on the educational attainment and schooling experiences
funded by the National Science Foundation REU site grants: AdvancingCalifornia Community College Students through Engineering Research (NSF Award 1461157)and Propelling California Community College Students through Engineering Research andSustained Online Mentoring (NSF Award 1757690). The Transfer-to-Excellence Program ishosted and supported by the Center for Energy Efficient Electronics Science, a National ScienceFoundation Science and Technology Center (NSF Award 0939514).References[1] F. Linnehan, “The relation of a work-based mentoring program to the academic performanceand behavior of African American students,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 59, no. 3, pp.310-325, Dec. 2001.[2] J. Foertsch, B. B, Alexander, and D. Penberthy, “Summer
research team collectivelyand consensually developed the features of the workshop to include: (a) the topics to address; (b)how to most effectively sequence the topics; (c) what pedagogical approaches to employ toactively and meaningfully engage the participants. We also identified that a useful end productfor participants in the workshop would be a self-customized guide for their desired next steps ineducational research, where the workshop experiences would facilitate and support informeddevelopment of this customized guide. The results of this effort in terms of workshop design arepresented below.RecruitmentStaff from the University’s center for faculty development advertised the workshop on theirwebsite as well as by emailing faculty and
explicitly encouraged.NEO presents the holistic benefits of the skills TAs are learning, not just for their role as a TA,and use this as a framing for the whole training program. We approach the design of NEO withthe perspective that if we can help TAs develop skills to succeed in their own goals that they willhave more capacity to help their students succeed. More than simply training and onboarding, wepresent new TAs with these perspectives so they have the tools to mindfully approach their workas instructors, graduate students, members of the engineering and scientific communities, andabove all, as human beings. Further study is required to determine effectiveness of the training.Sources[1] Meyers, Chet, and Thomas B. Jones. Promoting Active
Evidence-based Teaching and Learning Practices into the Core Engineering Curriculum," Proceedings of the 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2019.[17] A. P. Samaras, M. Hjalmarson, L. C. Bland, J. K. Nelson, and E. K. Christopher, "Self- Study as a Method for Engaging STEM Faculty in Transformative Change to Improve Teaching," International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 195-213, 2019.[18] L. A. Baker et al., "Cottrell scholars collaborative new faculty workshop: Professional development for new chemistry faculty and initial assessment of its efficacy," Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 91, no. 11, pp. 1874-1881, 2014.[19] A. F. McKenna, B. Yalvac, and
pooledparameter estimate and standard error parameter for both steps can be seen in Table 2. In stepone, teaching support and chair support were entered into the regression equation. In step 2,teaching self-efficacy was entered into the regression equation such that the equation consistedof teaching support, chair support, and teaching self-efficacy. Step 1 of each analysis provided ananswer to question (1) above while step 2 provided an answer to question (2).Step one of the analysis indicated that teaching support significantly and positively predictedteaching satisfaction (b = .42, t = 3.80, p < .001), while chair support was not a significantpredictor of teaching satisfaction (b = .11, t = .93, p > .05). Combined, the two predictorsaccounted
actually get to talk to them a whole lot more regularly. I think it is more fun. (P1909) Confidence Participant describes more At the very least I am more confident of myself, confidence in teaching after knowing myself, knowing my role in what I can offer implementing their redesigned for the students. I think that is legitimately, a) what course. makes me want to be better and b) that the students can see I want to be a better educator, that is an
, D. W. Jacobson, S. McKilligan, and A. Khokhar, “Riding the Wave of Change in Electrical and Computer Engineering,” Proc. 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, OH, June 2017.[11] J. E. Froyd, S. M. Lord, M. W. Ohland, K. Prahallad, E. D. Lindsay, B. Dicht, “Scenario planning to envision potential futures for engineering education,” IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) Proceedings, pp. 1-6, October, 2014.[12] E. Alpay and R. Verschoor, "The teaching researcher: Faculty attitudes towards the teaching and research roles," European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 39, (4), pp. 365-376, 2014.[13] A. J. Stewart, D. LaVaque-Manty, and J. E. Malley, “Recruiting female faculty
Paper ID #29135WIP: Mentoring Early-career Engineering Faculty - A Faculty DevelopmentCoordinator ModelDr. Julie Walters, Oakland University Julie Walters, J.D., Ph.D. Is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science at Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan. Her research and teaching address issues of law and public policy in the United States, particularly in the context of institutional and cultural dynamics. Recent work focuses on legal and normative issues surrounding the employment environment of women in STEM.Miss Leanne DeVreugd, Oakland University Leanne DeVreugd is the Program Coordinator for the
Paper ID #29242Working toward tenure in a teaching focused branch campusDr. Shannon L. Isovitsch Parks P.E., University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown Dr. Shannon Parks is a registered Professional Engineer with 20 years of broad-based experience in the water resources and environmental engineering fields. She holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the Pennsylvania State University and a Masters of Science and doctoral degree in Civil & Environmental Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University. She is currently teaching water resources and environmental engineering at University of Pittsburgh at
Paper ID #29123Extending Faculty Development through a Sustainable Community of Prac-ticeSarah Hoyt, Arizona State University Sarah Hoyt is currently the Education Project Manager for the NSF-funded JTFD Engineering faculty development program. Her educational background includes two Master’s degrees from Grand Canyon University in Curriculum and Instruction and Education Administration. Her areas of interest are in student inclusion programs and creating faculty development that ultimately boost engagement and per- formance in students from lower SES backgrounds. Prior to her role as project manager, Sarah worked as
streamline them into their letter category:A-/A+ were categorized into the A group, etc. We followed this classification system for A, B,C, D, E, and W. [10] The cleaning process for this examination included removing any coursethat didn’t have an RTOP score associated with the pre and post, as well as courses that didn’tmatch those that were observed. Similarly, courses that had higher than 75% As in the pre wereremoved. We also removed any courses with fewer than 10 A-E grades. After all of theseclassifications, we ended with a sampling of 108 courses.Data Analysis ResultsThe original data analysis involved a two-step process. Initially, SPSS was used to find theaverage grade distribution for A,B, C, D, E, and W. Then, multiple linear mixed
Paper ID #28993ASME Early Career Leadership Intern Program to Serve Engineering(ECLIPSE): A Talent Pipeline Model for Developing Early CareerMechanical Engineers into Future LeadersDr. Khosro Shirvani, Farmingdale State College Khosro Shirvani, Ph.D. is an assistant professor in the Mechanical Engineering Technology at Farming- dale State College (FSC). His research areas include surface engineering and tribology, additive manu- facturing, fabrication and characterization of novel materials, and manufacturing processes. He joined FSC following a faculty position at Rowan University. He is active in the American Society of Mechan
Paper ID #28673Intercollegiate Coaching in a Faculty Professional Development Programthat Integrates Pedagogical Best Practices and the EntrepreneurialMindsetDr. Heather Dillon, University of Portland Dr. Heather Dillon is an Associate Professor in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Portland. She recently served as the Fulbright Canada Research Chair in STEM Education. Her research team is working on energy efficiency, renewable energy, fundamental heat transfer, and engineering education. Before joining the university, Heather Dillon worked for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) as a senior
Paper ID #29649Faculty Development Mini-Modules on Evidence-Based Inclusive Teachingand Mentoring Practices in EngineeringDr. Sarah Ilkhanipour Rooney, University of Delaware Sarah I. Rooney is an Assistant Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Biomedical Engineering at the University of Delaware. She seeks to bring evidence-based teaching prac- tices to the undergraduate curriculum. She received her B.S.E. and M.S.E. in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) and her Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia).Prof. Joshua A Enszer
behavior: Its nature and antecedents," Journal of applied psychology, vol. 68, no. 4, p. 653, 1983.[5] P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J. B. Paine, and D. G. Bachrach, "Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research," Journal of management, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 513-563, 2000.[6] T. M. Nielsen, G. A. Hrivnak, and M. Shaw, "Organizational citizenship behavior and performance: A meta-analysis of group-level research," Small Group Research, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 555-577, 2009.[7] J. L. Buller, Change leadership in higher education: A practical guide to academic transformation. John Wiley & Sons, 2015.[8] American
Machining, HVAC, Power and Green Energy Technology,Mining, Oil & Gas etc. Figure 1(b) shows a random PLC troubleshooting equipment at the trainingfacility. (a) (b) Figure 1: (a) First batch of students receiving FANUC training certification in Engineering Technology department at SHSU and (b) PLC troubleshooting station at Amatrol Training.CNC Training and Certification:According to the 2018 Deloitte [1] and The Manufacturing Institute skills gap and future of workstudy’, programming skills applied to industrial robots and automated manufacturing system suchas computer numerical control (CNC) machine are one of the five critical skills expected to beneeded to succeed in the future
be just goin there and repeat what I already know to the students, so mechanical. And the thing is thatafter I hear so many people - everybody’s issues - I feel that teaching itself is a lively thing. It’salive. Teaching is not just mechanics. It’s really dynamic. So, I think that’s the most - that is, Ithink, something influenced me most. And because of this change, this viewpoint change, I thinkmy way of approaching students is also different.We suggest our lessons learned paper be presented as a lightning talk in order to supportdiscussion with other participants who are also developing communities of practice.References[1] E. Wenger, B. Trayner, and M. de Laat, “Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a
College. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 WIP: Virtual Writing Group Participation: Surprises & Unintended Outcomes Dr. Lisa B. Bosman, Dr. Erin McCave, Dr. Molly Goldstein, and Dr. Kelli ChelbergIntroduction & BackgroundThis work-in-progress paper emerged from the shared experience of participation in a VirtualWriting Group (VWG) composed of early career engineering education researchers (EER) in avariety of positions at different institutions. In general, this particular group of EERs had limitedresources and access to a peer community at their respective institutions, therefore, the VWGwas formed with the intention to spur EER scholarly activity
Paper ID #28612Managing Dual Academic CareersDr. Yuting W. Chen, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Yuting W. Chen received the B.S. degree from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign in 2007, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 2009 and 2011, all in Electrical Engi- neering. She is currently a Teaching Assistant Professor with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Prior to joining ECE Illinois, she worked at IBM Systems Group in Poughkeepsie, NY in z Systems Firmware Development. Her current interests
, s=1where 1, there exists b ∈ S s.t. as,i = ab,ia Zs,i = 0, elseS is the set of all students, as,i indicates the response of student s to question i, and ia is the associatedquestion for restrictive question i.Isolation QuestionsIsolation questions allow users to prevent groups in which students with a specified majority responseoutnumber other students. For example, studies in STEM courses have shown that female students reporthigher self-confidence and are more likely to major in a course’s subject if placed in groups with a higherpercentage of women, and student outcomes for all students in a group improve as the percentage ofwomen in
faculty development.References[1] L. McAlpine and R. Harris, “Lessons learned: Faculty developer and engineer working as faculty development colleagues,” Int. J. Acad. Dev., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 11–17, May 1999, doi: 10.1080/1360144990040103.[2] D. Little, D. A. Green, and C. Hoption, “A lasting impression: the influence of prior disciplines on educational developers’ research,” Int. J. Acad. Dev., pp. 1–15, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1080/1360144X.2018.1458617.[3] A. Repko and R. Szostak, Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage, 2017.[4] J. B. Holbrook, “What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration,” Synthese, vol. 190, no. 11, pp. 1865–1879, Jul. 2013
(detailed below). The secondworkshop will repeat this model (specified below) in order to iterate upon ideas generated in thefirst workshop.Workshop 1: Part A: Inspiration (the Discovery Section) - A Human Centred Design Approach will be used for mind-mapping. In this mind-mapping exercise, the goal is to use divergent thinking framework, allowing the faculty to explore variety of issues they face or are aware of in context of engineering teaching. Further, we will use Cause-Effect Analysis, Stakeholder Mapping and Problem Statement Building that allows our key stakeholder participants (i.e. engineering faculty) to explore barriers for adopting best practices in teaching and learning. Part B: Ideation – Creative Thinking will be used
breakfast, and a lecturer appreciation event to express anddemonstrate support to lecturers.Conducting focus groups to collect dataOne of the first endeavors the Lecturer Advisory Committee oversaw was the organization ofcollege-wide focus groups to assess the needs of the lecturers. In the fall of 2017, we conductedfocus group sessions that allowed lecturers to voice their opinions around questions about whathas worked well and what are requests that they have. Each focus group session ended withrobust discussion periods of questions and answers with the participants and a review of the maintake-aways (see Appendix B).The main message we garnered from the data collection about what was best for communitybuilding and educational event efforts was
efforts, especially if they are untenured.References[1] M. Davis, “Engineering as profession: Some methodological problems in its study,” in Engineering identities, epistemologies, and values, S. H. Christensen, C. Didier, A. Jamison, M. Meganck, C. Mitcham and B. Newberry (Eds)., Springer, 2015, pp. 65–98.[2] J. R. Lohmann and J. E. Froyd, “Chronological and ontological development of engineering education as a field of scientific inquiry,” in Cambridge handbook of engineering education research, A. Johri and B. M. Olds, (Eds). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 283–309.[3] S. M. Lord, E. J. Berger, N. N. Kellam, E. L. Ingram, D. M. Riley, D. T. Rover, N. Salzman, and J. D. Sweeney