discourse identity. Although the rationale for developing engineering judgment inundergraduate students is the complexity they will face in professional practice, engineeringeducators often considerably reduce the complexity of the problems students face. Student workintended to train engineering judgment often prescribes goals and objectives, and demands a one-time decision, product, or solution that faculty or instructors evaluate. The evaluation processmight not contain formal methods for foregrounding feedback from experience or reflecting onhow the problem or decision emerges; thus, the loop from decision to upstream cognitiveprocesses might not be closed. Consequently, in this paper, our exploration of engineeringjudgment is guided by the
student survey is reflective qualitative remarks from individual commentssubmitted after course completion. The individual comments were in the form of an open endedessay with the writing prompt framed with three questions: What are the things you reallyappreciated about the course or things that could have be done better, what are the concepts thatyou learned that you think will help you in your continued career at Fulbright (and beyond!), andwhat are the things that surprised you that you learned about yourself through your time inCreating & Making.Students wrote between 500 to 1500 words for their personal reflections and the information wasthen compiled and evaluated as to congruence with the breakdown of elements in active learning
learning as a required outcome and graduate attribute for our engineeringstudents, and advocates for careful deliberation regarding the definition of lifelong learning,especially in regards to the recently proposed changes to ABET EC-2000 Criteria 3.1. Introduction and objectives In the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Manitoba, a large research university incentral Canada with an accredited engineering undergraduate program, two studies wereundertaken to explore students’ educational experiences and perceptions. One study was designedto be a formative assessment tool for an introductory Thermodynamics course that wasrestructured using Student Centered Learning methods to explore the instructor’s and students’experiences and
decision-makingprocess are those that are challenging and applicable, provide students with new perspective, andstimulate self-reflection. Strategies should be focused on an orientation to learning includingbreaking down myths and basing a search process on individual identity. However, interactionswith others including faculty members, alumni, administrators, and other students influence astudent’s learning process and increase self-efficacy. Collaboration with other campus officesmore often provides load-leveling when staffing is slim as it is in most career services units ofcolleges and institutions. By partnering with academic units, career services can shareresponsibility in shaping students’ decision-making processes. This collaboration can
to be a role model 38 . In the long-run, we take much greater pride in the examplewe have set for students rather than the knowledge our students have gained from us. It is whatthey remember after they graduate. Yet in most teaching situations we are an idealized role model- measured by how “smart” someone can become after years of study. We keep our cool and makerational decisions because we already know where the class is going. The Faculty Ulysses Contractcan establish a faculty member as a much more realistic role model. We can display for them goodhabits of mind and action when they matter the most - when conditions are uncertain 30,31 .Courses that use a Ulysses Contract reward students who adopt a learning mindset. In the ab
education include service-learning, sustainable engi- neering, social responsibility, ethics, and diversity. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Fourth Year Engineering Students’ Descriptions of the Importance of Improving Society Through their Engineering CareersAbstractAs engineering students graduate and enter the workforce, they gain significant responsibility forindividuals and society through their future decisions. Problematically, multiple recent studieshave shown that over their time in college, students tend to become more disengaged from theimpact of their work and their feelings of social responsibility decrease. The question explored inthis research was to determine the
and applicant’s desires provides arobust environment to explore whether professional skills truly matter in the hiring process. Content analysis of job advertisements was used to research recruitment effectiveness[33] and to identify gaps between skills needed on the job and skills advertised [34]. For this study, the development of a list of terms from the existing literature (Table 4)provides a framework to support the identification of soft skills being sought by employers. Thelist of specific skills in Table 4 represents an aggregation across 5 years of academic researchinto engineering education, based on responses from students, alumni, professionals, andacademics. This additional validation step checks the skills
Humanities, Arts & Social Sciences and an affiliate faculty member in the Department of Engineering, Design & Society and the Robotics Graduate Program at the Colorado School of Mines. Dr. Zhu is Editor for International Perspectives at the Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Science, Associate Editor for Engineering Studies, Program Chair of American Society for Engineering Education’s Division of Engineering Ethics, Executive Committee Member of the Society for Ethics Across the Curriculum, and Treasurer of the Society for Philosophy and Technology. Dr. Zhu’s research interests include the cultural foundations of engineering ethics, global engineering education, and ethics and policy of computing
Paper ID #15266Student Persistence Through Uncertainty Toward Successful Creative Prac-ticeNajla Mouchrek, Virginia Tech Designer, Doctoral Student in the Individualized Interdisciplinary PhD in Human Centered Design at Vir- ginia Tech. Master in Design at the Graduate Program in Design, Innovation and Sustainability, School of Design, University of the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Bachelor in Social Communication at the Faculty of Philosophy and Human Sciences, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Her current research fo- cus on the application of co-creation and participatory design activities on education
Further, well-implemented undergraduate research programs allowstudents to develop mentoring relationships with faculty members that have been linked toacademic success.5 Participation in undergraduate research has also been linked to increases ingraduate school attainment and in students’ interest in science and engineering careers.1,6,7,8,9In contrast to the above findings, there is little information on the relationship betweenparticipation in summer (or other semester-long) research experiences for undergraduates andgrowth in STEM-specific professional identity. Hunter et al.10 conducted a seminal study thatfocused on the development of professional identity, among other factors, experienced by risingseniors due to participation in a
faculty members, the pipelineextends through graduate school, an academic appointment, and promotion through the ranks ofassistant, associate, and “full” professor. Interviews of women engineering deans illustrate thelimitations of the pipeline metaphor for describing the careers of female engineering academics.BackgroundThe pipeline metaphor reinforces the myth of linearity in education and career progression. Flowthrough the pipeline is linear, with no provision for changes of direction or speed, and no reentryonce one exits, or “leaks” out of the pipe. While not overtly gendered, the unidirectional,constant flow image of fluid in a pipe is similar to that of the (male) ideal worker who gives fullattention to his job, without distraction or
can be more genuine with my class, it makes it more impactful to them.Another interviewee who is chair of a civil/environmental engineering department with five ofits six faculty members holding profession engineering licenses noted that students have positivereceptions to this perspective because it relates to what they might encounter after graduation. If you have a faculty member who has done professional work or you have a professional engineer from industry who is working as an adjunct, that’s looked upon different than someone from the history department who students perceive as not really ever having a job.Although not all engineering faculty have industry experience, those who do can leverage thisexperience in their ESI
. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Reclassifying Teaching Methods based on a Comparison of Student and Faculty Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility in the ClassroomAbstract Though Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been identified as an important part ofundergraduate and graduate curriculum for the Mining and Petroleum Departments by both industry andprofessors, there seems to be a difference between student identification of CSR content that could indicatea difference in teaching styles and possible effectiveness. We know very little about engineering professors’experiences of teaching CSR to engineering students. Previous research has investigated how
the Collaborative Lounge for Understanding Society and Technology through Educational Research (CLUSTER), an interdisciplinary research group with members from engi- neering, art, educational psychology and social work. He has conducted qualitative educational research in a number of contexts ranging from formation of students’ professional identity, the role of reflection in engineering learning, and engineering students’ creativity development. He was the first international recipient of the ASEE Educational Research Methods Division’s ”Apprentice Faculty Award”, was se- lected as a 2010 Frontiers in Education ”New Faculty Fellow”. In 2011, he received a National Science Foundation CAREER award (#1150668) to
Colorado Boulder.Dr. Samantha Ruth Brunhaver, Arizona State University Dr. Samantha R. Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor within The Polytechnic School, one of six schools in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. She is a mixed-methods researcher with focus on the preparation and pathways of engineering students. Her specific research interests include engineering student persistence and career decision-making, early career engineering practice, faculty pedagogical risk-taking, and entrepreneurial mindset. She completed her B.S. in Mechanical Engineering at Northeastern University and her M.S. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Prior to ASU, she worked as an
, learning, motivation, and other concepts underpin many diversity efforts and are tied to positive outcomes, there are minimal examples available in the literature that purely explore the theories from the perspective of Black women and their identity in the context of STEM. Womanism, a theoretical perspective grounded in the experiences of Black women across the diaspora has the opportunity to inform STEM education efforts that focus on Black women in an exciting and informative way. Presently, there is a gap between this critical, yet often absent social science theory and STEM education research and practice. Through the experiences of eight Black women in STEM disciplines at various levels (e.g. current students, graduates, or working
-disciplinary research initiatives among students and faculty. Reframingthe seminar as a research group meeting will allow the faculty members to focus more onproviding opportunities to grow as a researcher and develop professionally. For example, facultymembers have explored hosting a session to discuss how to become an interdisciplinary scholar,and students are now regularly bringing work (grant proposals, abstracts, talks) to share with oneanother for feedback – and consequently deepening their awareness of one another’s fields. Byexplicitly discussing with students how to think interdisciplinarily and how to conduct researchacross disciplines, students will be more likely to develop a functional understanding of theinterdisciplinary space.We
embedded within engineeringdepartments [9]. By using the expertise of graduate student and postdoctoral peer coacheswithin a given discipline, the Communication Lab provides a scalable, content-aware solutionwith the benefits of just-in-time, one-on-one [10], and peer [11] training. When we firstintroduced this model, we offered easy-to-record metrics for the Communication Lab’seffectiveness (such as usage statistics and student and faculty opinion surveys), as arecommonly used to assess writing centers [12], [13]. Here we present a formal quantitative study of the effectiveness of Communication Labcoaching. We designed a pre-post test study for two related tasks: personal statements forapplications to graduate school and graduate
to change to environmental awareness. He is a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), Chi Epsilon (XE), Institute for P-12 Engineering Research and Learning (INSPIRE), and Engineering Education Graduate Student Association (ENEGSA).Miss Jessica Erin Sprowl Jessica Sprowl is currently a graduate student at Purdue University, pursuing a master’s degree in School Counseling. She earned her B.S. in mathematics teaching from Purdue University, Fort Wayne, in 2009. She worked as a high school math teacher for two years before returning to Purdue to continue her ed- ucation. She is actively involved in Chi Sigma Iota, an international honor society in the field of school counseling. She is also
research seeks tounderstand the forces that motivate educators to blend engineering learning with liberal studies,the institutional and pedagogical strategies used in different integrative programs, and theimpacts of liberal learning on students’ understandings of engineering and its social context. Inthis paper, I focus on a subset of the research questions posed for the dissertation: ● What motivates students to study engineering in a liberal education environment? ● In what ways does the experience of “a liberal education for engineers” assist students’ personal growth and career development? ● To what extent does students’ understanding of engineering take into account the social dimensions?MethodsMy dissertation
—amechanical engineering professor, a liberal arts professor, and an art museum director—bringtruly multidisciplinary perspectives to the STEAM challenge of coherently integrating art andengineering education. The paper describes a unique relationship that has developed betweenone university’s engineering curricula and the collection of an art museum on its campus. Thepaper presents a longitudinal study of engineering students at this institution who engaged withart as part of their curriculum at both the freshman and junior levels.Among our findings: • Students liked the flexibility and freedom, the self-guided discovery that using art as a starting point afforded. No students were put off by the art. • The decision to integrate art
“rigid classroom dynamics.” This resonates with another respondent’s descriptionof AB Engineering Studies classes as “more collaborative” than BS engineering. (Although thiswas a common observation, a single respondent felt that BS classes had “more camaraderie” thanAB classes.) Another response described the effect of different classroom styles on the student:“In BS classes, my thinking was myopic, and I was focused on simply absorbing the curriculum.In AB classes, I felt much more curious and open-minded.”Each of these responses related to an aspect of the “Faculty/Classes in Engineering Studies,”suggesting that a strength of the program is its faculty members and the classroom environmentsand experiences they facilitate. One aspect of this
shaping and supportingstudents’ group-learning experiences.6 While faculty practices are important in all group-learningapproaches, they can be particularly important for supporting under-represented students, whooften experience marginalization in such settings. Both faculty and peers can marginalizeindividual students in a variety of ways, including through assignment of work tasks, validationof work tasks, validation of ideas or perspectives, and the nature of the group task itself.First, at the onset of an activity, task assignment biases can often result from unconsciousexpectations about who may be more (or less) suited to certain tasks.7, 8 While each team isdifferent, with a different set of identities and personalities, there is also
, function to privilege and perpetuate certainunderstandings of the field. Autoethnographic techniques are used to construct three accounts ofthe student’s encounters with an upper level administrator, various members of faculty, and anacademic advisor. Critical analysis of these experiences using a prior evidence-based model ofstories ‘told’ about engineering in the public discourse reveals tensions between the freshmanstudent’s values and career interests and the emergent, dominant discourse he observed in hisundergraduate program. These tensions are described in terms of: i) The prioritization of nationaleconomic recovery and growth over the life and career goals of individuals; ii) A predominantfocus on the quantitative and technical aspects of
ways of thinking?The purpose of this strand of the course was to challenge the students to answer the question“Are there engineering ways of thinking? If so, what are they?” The concept of what it means tothink like an engineer was explored through readings and open-ended seminars that focused onthe writings of philosophers of engineering. The selections included a wide range of authors,lengths, and contexts that challenged students to be open-minded. Table 1 lists each readingassignment, the instructor’s motivation for including it, and the average rating of the students(where 1 = poor and 5= excellent).Students analyzed and reacted to these readings by pulling from their personal experiences,which in many cases were heavily influenced by
contacted the identified expertsand interacted with them in person or over the Internet. They also explored media coverage of their topics. Theywere not mandated but expected to meet their mentors on regular basis. Some of them carried out surveys to getinsight into their topics.Synthesize: Students were expected to put together all the things that they had learnt and understood to create acoherent whole. Such a synthesis was required to be done at information, knowledge, or wisdom levels, butstudents mostly ended up doing it at information or knowledge level. As an example, gathering informationabout a particular regime and just organizing it in a particular way is called ―information synthesis‖. Analyzingthe reasons for the fall of a regime and
Paper ID #12150Something to Write Home(work) About: An Analysis of Writing Exercises inFluid Mechanics TextbooksNatascha M Trellinger, Purdue University, West Lafayette Natascha Trellinger is a second year Ph.D. student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received her B.S. in Aerospace Engineering from Syracuse University where her interest in the teaching and learning aspects of engineering began. At Purdue, Natascha is a member of the Global Engineering Education Collaboratory (GEEC) and is particularly interested in graduate level engineering education.Ms. Rebecca R Essig, Purdue University
three and half years as the Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs of the College of Engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Developing an Integrated Curriculum-wide Teamwork Instructional StrategyAbstractGraduating engineering students need many technical and professional skills to be successful intheir careers, including those in communication and teamwork. The School of Chemical,Biological and Environmental Engineering (CBEE) at Oregon State University administers threeundergraduate degree programs, and the curriculums have many courses, which incorporateteamwork and group activities (often multidisciplinary). However, until recently
virtues. 1IntroductionTeamwork is an integral component of engineering education. This significance is reflected inABET Student Outcome 5, which guides programs to graduate students that have “an ability tofunction effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborativeand inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” [1]. Employers,engineering graduates, and faculty recognize teamwork as an important professional skill [2],[3]. In fact, one study showed that engineering alumni rated teamwork as the most important ofall ABET outcomes [4]. Other recent studies report that teamwork is one of the
through a worksheet. This personality assessment connects individualinterests to related occupations, provides a vocabulary for students to discuss their careerinterests, and suggests relevant occupations based on the individual’s “type” [36]. Educationalopportunities beyond their current program were discussed, including education that can proceedafter their biosystems engineering degree, such as prosthetist training, medical school, orgraduate study in engineering [37]. Through this career development support, we explored theinterdisciplinary nature of biosystems engineering and the broad options for graduates of theprogram both within and beyond engineering, building on the course content covered by theprofessors of the course, and supporting