students, and (3) a more advanced version of the latter two workshops would be usefulfor the senior graduate students (and possibly, the post-doctoral researchers). (a) (b)Figure 1. Professional development: (a) workshop on library skills and (b) resume/vitae writingworkshop.Improvement of communication skills involved three programs. First, the weekly presentationsby individual graduate students were continued in 2010-2011. Second, a new focus onimproving general writing skills was addressed by the hiring of three “wordsmiths,” seniorEnglish majors who acted as writing tutors to the group. The Graduate Student Council leadersand the wordsmiths worked together, creating a curriculum
cancontinue to delay completion of this work for up to five years from the end of their first semesterin the program. The five students that started in the fall of 2006 and have not submitted theirDirected Project have a December 2011 deadline. Distance education appeals to busy people. Page 22.1134.7However, the burden can be overwhelming. “Distance-education students tend to leave usbecause they are very busy, their lives are crammed full of things, and suddenly they findthemselves in a situation of having to rethink their priorities,” says Jacquelyn B. Tulloch, theexecutive dean of distance education and college services at the LeCroy center. “Very
narrow and academic for industry’s needs.” “The evidence collected overseas and from the Total Technology programme in the UK, indicates that these sectors of industry would benefit from a more industrially oriented engineering doctorate. Indeed we believe that the whole of the engineering industry in the UK would benefit greatly from the introduction of such a doctorate.”b) US National Collaborative Task Force As a result of its investigations, the US National Collaborative Task Force also concludes that a new, but distinctive American approach is needed for the post baccalaureate professional education of graduate engineers in the United States that supports the American model wherein the majority of US
Paper ID #10980A community of practice approach to becoming an engineering education re-search professionalDr. Robin Adams, Purdue University, West Lafayette Robin S. Adams is an Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a PhD in Education, an MS in Materials Science and Engineering, and a BS in Mechanical Engineering. Her research is in three interconnecting areas: cross-disciplinary thinking, acting, and being; design cognition and learning; and theories of change in transforming engineering education.Ms. Catherine G.P. Berdanier, Purdue University, West Lafayette
, TX, 2012, p. 25.1394.1-25.1394.13.[7] E. A. Erichsen and D. U. Bolliger, “Towards understanding international graduate student isolation in traditional and online environments,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 309–326, 2011.[8] J. L. Colwell, J. Whittington, and C. F. Jenks, “Writing Challenges for Graduate Students in Engineering and Technology,” in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011, p. 22.1714.1-22.1714.13.[9] S. L. Gassman, M. A. Maher, and B. E. Timmerman, “Supporting Students’ Disciplinary Writing in Engineering Education,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1270–1280, 2013.[10] A. A. Kranov, “‘It’s Not My Job To Teach Them How To Write’: Facilitating The Disciplinary
concerns,some particular to the 4+1 program. These concerns were: a. The 4+1 program is popular among the students and the faculty. It provides a relatively easy way to attract students into the graduate programs. Students choose it because it allows them to remain at Cal Poly, they are familiar with the system, the faculty, and already have housing and a social support system in place. On the down side, the 4+1 program blurs the lines between being an undergraduate and graduate student. Students and faculty are unclear when the transition is made. They are treated more as super seniors. b. Students felt that the number of undergraduate students (many 4+1 students) taking 500 level courses during their senior
http://census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/international_statistics.html.[4] Alfattal, E. (2017). “International students’ college choice is different.” International Journal of Educational Management. Vol. 31. No 7.[5] McMahon, M.E. (1992). “Higher education in a world market: an historical look at the global context of international study.” Higher Education. Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 465-482.[6] Gereffi, G. (2008), V. Wadhwa, B. Rissing, and R. Ong. “Getting the Numbers Right: International Engineering Education in the United States, China, and India.” The Journal of Engineering Education. January 2008. pp. 13-25. Accessed Jan. 14, 2018, from https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00950.x[7] Personal interview with Annette Leps
steps will help guide the future success of the GEECS peer mentoring activities.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank the remaining members of the peer mentoring groups for theirparticipation. Page 25.677.7Bibliography1. Lohmann, J. R. (2005). Building a community of scholars. The role of the Journal of Engineering Education as a research journal. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 1-6.2. Lohmann, J. R. (2011). JEE and its Second Century. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 1-5.3. Thomas, L. D., Sattler, B., & Carberry, A. R. (2010). Work in Progress – Developing a Graduate Consortium in Engineering
future useby all students.4.1. Recommendations for ImprovementFrom student comments two issues are identified for future improvement: a) the discussion andfeedback on homework, b) some students had trouble with the streaming technology, presumablydue to limited local bandwidth.4.1.1. Homework IssuesBy far the primary weakness of the course was identified with the homework. This wasconfirmed with a response of only 41% finding the homework useful and appropriate as well asmany comments indicating complaints about the homework. The students‟ primary concernswere about the appropriateness of the assignments (some too difficult, too much time spent onlooking up data and not always supporting the topics of the lecture) as well as too
− 0.02𝑡 0 ≤ 𝑡 ≤ 10 yr Determine the following: a. Verify that 𝑓(𝑡) is a valid pdf b. the cumulative distribution function of 𝑇 c. the probability the drive train fails within two years d. the probability the drive train fails between the 6th and 8th year e. the expected time to failure of the drive train f. the time to failure exceeded by 95% of drive trains Figure 1. Example Class Activity – Probability Calculations Background Information For this activity we are going to conduct hypothesis tests and report on the results in a professional format. For each of the cases below, your team will design an appropriate statistical test, conduct the test, and report
project management tools to develop implementation strategies, characterize contemporary technology projects, understand system perspective of projects, align projects with strategic objectives and learn advanced tools and techniques used in projects. Examples and case studies from a wide range of fields are utilized.To be admitted into the program a student must meet the following prerequisites: a) 1 SemesterObject Oriented Programming (sophomore level or above); b) 1 Semester Statistics/Probability(sophomore level or above); and c) 2 Semesters Calculus (Differential and Integral), or 1Semester discrete mathematics or numerical methods (sophomore level or above).Table 5
Schools, Ph.D. Completion and Attrition: Policies and Practices to Promote Student Success. Ph.D. Completion Project, 2010.[8] D. F. Feldon, J. Peugh, B. E. Timmerman, M. A. Maher, M. Hurst, D. Strickland, J. A. Gilmore, C. Stiegelmeyer, “Graduate Students’ Teaching Experiences Improve Their Methodological Research Skills,” Science, vol. 333, pp. 1037-1039, Aug. 2011.[9] Houston Independent School District. General Information: HISD At A Glance. [Online.] Available: https://www.houstonisd.org/domain/7908. [Accessed: Feb. 4, 2019].
all deliveredthrough one textbox via the student MEA portal. So, the GTAs were asked to “Please usea), b), and c) (or similar) to separate your feedback on the three individual questions.”The faculty facilitator noted for Q1 that, as a group, the GTAs assigned the same scoresas the expert 95% of the time. However, for Q2, the GTAs assigned the same score asthe expert 75% of the time. These particular problems were identified: • “If students do not specify that the procedure will rank the shipping companies, but rather it finds the best, best and worst, or allows the client to select a shipping company, this is wrong. This should be considered as if the student provided no criteria for success (rank description). This
Paper ID #23904’I Came in Thinking There Was One Right Practice’: Exploring How to HelpGraduate Students Learn to Read Academic ResearchWendy Roldan, University of Washington Wendy is a first-year PhD student in Human Centered Design and Engineering at the University of Wash- ington.Dr. Jennifer A. Turns, University of Washington Jennifer Turns is a Professor in the Department of Human Centered Design & Engineering at the Univer- sity of Washington. She is interested in all aspects of engineering education, including how to support engineering students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make
content knowledge.,” J. Educ. Comput. Res., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 131–152, 2005. [2] P. Mishra and M. J. Koehler, “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge : A Framework for Teacher Knowledge,” Teach. Coll. Rec., vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054, 2006. [3] C. Angeli and N. Valanides, “Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT – TPCK : Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge ( TPCK ),” Comput. Educ., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 154–168, 2009. [4] B. S. Cox and C. R. Graham, “Diagramming TPACK in Practice: Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge,” TechTrends Link. Res
industry. The professional curricula is being designed asa matrix of studies integrative with engineering practice that match, support, and correlate with themodern paradigm of engineering practice and progression of professional abilities required forresponsible leadership in engineering innovation from entry level engineer through chief engineer levelresponsibilities. The evolving model is centered around five major components: a) Relevant advancedstudies; b) Self-directed learning; c) Experiential-learning; d) Project-based learning [advancedtechnology development project directly relevant to industry / socio need]; and e) On-going engagementin engineering practice for innovation and creative works. The process is centered around the
Paper ID #21613Lessons Learned from a Chemical Engineering REU: The Importance ofTraining Graduate Students Who are Supervising REU StudentsJoseph C. Tise, Pennsylvania State University Joseph Tise is a doctoral candidate in the Educational Psychology program at Penn State University. His research interests include self-regulated learning, measurement, and connecting educational research to practice.Ms. Kirsten Susan Hochstedt, Pennsylvania State University Kirsten Hochstedt is a graduate assistant at Penn State Student Affairs Research and Assessment. She received her M.S. in Educational Psychology with an emphasis in
Paper ID #30945A Systematized Literature Review of the Factors that Predict theRetention of Racially Minoritized Students in STEM Graduate DegreeProgramsMiss Fantasi Nicole, Purdue University, West Lafayette Fantasi Nicole (Curry) is a doctoral student and graduate research assistant in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her overall research aim is to broaden participation for Black engineers in graduate school and industry by addressing systemic inequalities and promoting inclusive pedagogy. Her interests stem from her experiences in engineering as a Black woman throughout her undergradu- ate
even hard to get recognition for a sabbatical in industry … Please understand that I am not criticizing the current faculty. I am one of them, and I respect my colleagues greatly. Rather, I am criticizing a system that prevents us from enriching faculty with a complementary set of experiences and talents.”B) Responsive Universities ─Relevancy to the Creative Professions in the 21st CenturyThe National Collaborative agrees with president Wulf’s point of view of the need for watershed reformin the U.S. system of engineering education and suggests as the Kellogg Commission has pointed out ─in order to remain relevant to their constituencies, and to be more effective ─ universities must change.2Whereas universities have traditionally
school educators work with graduateinstructors to ensure participating students understand fundamental and relevant scientific theory;secondary school educators are solely responsible for student assessment. Instructors Secondary Students A B Week 0 Background Lecture Key background theory *Initial Skill Lab Visit Initial Skill Lab Visit
that some time has elapsed between thesurveys, which may correspond to changes in some responses from two years (beginning) to oneyear (post). Despite the elapsed time, we observed an increase in the number of participantsindicating that they would apply for positions in 3 years. This shift may be a result of anincreased awareness of participant preparedness and the effort required for the applicationprocess. A delay in a faculty candidate’s job search may enable them to apply for jobs with abetter sense of confidence and preparedness. Overall, participants indicated that they wouldrecommend iFEAT to others, indicating a program rating of 4.3 ± 0.9 on a scale from 1-wouldnot recommend to 5-would recommend.Figure 2: Perceived (a) most and (b
; Teasley, S. D.) 63–82 (American Psychological Assossiation, 1991).7. Adams, R. et al. A community of practice approach to becoming an engineering education re- search professional. in 121st ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. (2014).8. Sattler, B., Carberry, A. R. & Thomas, L. D. Graduate student peer mentoring: A means for creating an engineering education reseracg community. in Am. Soc. Eng. Educ. (2012).9. Jesiek, B. K., Newswander, L. K. & Borrego, M. Engineering Education Research: Discipline, Community, Page 26.1783.14 or Field? J. Eng. Educ. (2009).10. Katehi, L. et al. Development of Graduate Programs
presenting ourwork-in-progress paper and hearing what other universities/programs have done in the face ofthese common challenges.AcknowledgementThe authors would like to acknowledge the support from Leonhard Center for Enhancement ofEngineering Education at College of Engineering in Penn State.References[1] Fischer, B. A., & Zigmond, M. J. (1998). Survival skills for graduate school and beyond. New directions for higher education, 1998(101), 29-40.[2] Baker, V. L., & Pifer, M. J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 5-17.[3] Lovitts, B.E. (2005) Being a good course‐taker is not enough: a theoretical perspective on the
SessionsThe workshop was organized into two four-hour sessions. The first discussed what is meant bysuccessful research groups and the second focused on a specific case study to make concreterecommendations for fostering success. These sessions were organized using a series of smalland large group breakout sessions as shown in Figure 1. Examples of the workshop agenda canbe found in Appendix B. Page 25.356.3Figure 1: After the topic intoduced, eeach workshop session consisted of focused small groupdiscussions, presentations of each groups’ results to the larger group and then the large groupgave feedback/added to the findings of the small groups. The
contribution b) Order of authorship – Typically the leader of the overall project will be senior author or last author, the student or researcher who did the most work and writing as the first author; other authors in supporting roles as 2nd, 3rd, 4th author 2. Scope of work. Agree on the scope and the “story” in advance; stay away from least publishable units. 3. Maintaining momentum is essential to completion without losing gumption. a. Reasonable turnaround on revisions – I try for returning comments within a week; one collaborator always acknowledges and sets a target date for her response – we all have ups and downs in our workloads, but it really helps your co
improve undergraduate engineering education. Prior to his academic career, Dr. Connolly worked as a systems integration engineer on the Space Station and Space Shuttle programs at the NASA Johnson Space Center, and as a reliability engineer on the B-2 Stealth Bomber program for the Depart- ment of Defense. Dr. Connolly earned a B.E. in Mechanical Engineering from the State University of New York at Stony Brook, an M.S.E. in Aerospace Engineering, and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, both from UT Austin. He served as a graduate teaching assistant for six years during his graduate studies. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Graduate Teaching Assistant Certification as a
abstracting overall themes that honor our uniqueperspectives while capturing broader areas of focus for enriching graduate education.ReferencesAdams, R. S., Allendoerfer, C., Bell, P., Chen, H., Fleming, L., Leifer, L., Maring, B. & Williams, D. (2006, June). A model for building and sustaining a community of engineering education research scholars. Paper presented at the 2006 Annual American Society for Engineering Education Conference, Chicago, Illinois. https://peer.asee.org/1003Adams, R. S., Allendoerfer, C., Rhoulac Smith, T., Socha, D., Williams, D., & Yasuhara, K. (2007, June). Storytelling in engineering education. Paper presented at 2007 Annual American Society for Engineering Education Conference & Exposition, Honolulu
of Higher Education [Internet]. 2012 Aug 16 [cited 2013 Oct 17]; Available from: http://chronicle.com/article/Colleges-Struggle- to-Respond/133699/4. Goplerud EN. Social support and stress during the first year of graduate school. Prof Psychol. 1980;11(2):283–90.5. Brandes LCO. Graduate student centers: Building community and involving students. New Dir Stud Serv. 2006;2006(115):85–99.6. Grant-Vallone EJ, Ensher EA. Effects of Peer Mentoring on Types of Mentor Support, Program Satisfaction and Graduate Student Stress: A Dyadic Perspective. J Coll Stud Dev. 2000 Jan;41(6):637–42.7. Mallinckrodt B, Leong FT. International graduate students, stress, and social support. J Coll Stud Dev. 1992;33(1):71–8.8. Felder
-2014-Undergraduate-Research-And- STEM-Grad-Enrollment.pdf[5] Seymore, E., Hunter, A., Laursen, S.L., & Deantoni, T. (2004). Establishing the Benefits of Research Experiences for Undergraduates in the Sciences: First Findings from a Three-Year Study. Science Education, 88(4), 493-534.[6] Graham, M. J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A. Hunter, A-B., & Handelsman, J. (2013). Increasing Persistence of College Students in STEM. Science, 341(6153), 1455-1456.[7] Nagda, B .A., Gregerman, S. R., Jonides, J., VonHippel, W., & Lerner, J.S. (1998). Undergraduate student-faculty research partnerships affect student retention. Review of Higher Education, 22(1), 55-72.[8] Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007
., Lee, Y.-G., & Hill, L. B. (2016). Building a better future STEM faculty: How doctoral teaching programs can improve undergraduate education. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison.9. Adams, K. A. (2002). What colleges and universities want in new faculty: Preparing future faculty occasional paper series. Washington, D.C: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/pff/pdfs/PFF_Adams.PDF10. Austin, A. E., Campa III, H., Pfund, C., Gillian-Daniel, D. L., Mathieu, R., & Stoddart, J. (2009). Preparing STEM doctoral students for future faculty careers. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Spring(117), 83