informaladvancement structures in other labor market sectors.15-17 Of course, this does not imply thatovert and subtle processes of discrimination and bias are absent in federal agencies; just that (a)LGBT employees have baseline legal protections not guaranteed in other sectors, and (b) moreformalized advancement structures in federal agencies mean that, at least in theory, hiring,promotion, and disciplinary procedures are under greater scrutiny to align with anti-discrimination policies. As such, although organizations in the private, non-profit and educationsectors likely vary widely in their treatment of LGBT professionals, the differential experiencesof LGBT professionals in STEM agencies documented here may be equally if not more extremein other
Paper ID #33908Exploring Student Academic Motivation and Perceptions of Teamwork andCommunicationMr. Hamidreza Taimoory, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Hamid is currently a Ph.D. student in the Engineering Education program and a Master’s student in Man- agement Systems Engineering. He likes to utilize his quantitative and engineering knowledge to conduct research to encourage young people to pursue the engineering field.Dr. David B. Knight, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University David B. Knight is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education and Special As- sistant
the community of DBER.” (participant B)Some members have a community within their own major, “We tend to interact fairly frequently,in lab groups,” (participant F), “A lot of it is informal, like talking in the hallways, or stoppingby someone else’s office, it’s not always formal,” (participant B) while others do not have thatluxury, “there’s no one else who does [redacted] education and that’s partially why we startedthe group” (participant A). For many members, the DBER meetings are their main source ofcommunity with other educational researchers. Page 26.298.4PracticesMeetings include sharing educational research practices and critiquing
. Year 2. Nationality 3. Gender (Male, Female, Prefer not to answer) 4. High school type (International/Private or Independent) 5. Religion Questions on perspectives 1. Would you choose courses based on the gender of your professor? 2. Do you feel comfortable approaching a professor of the same gender? 3. Do you think the gender of professor affects his/her teaching style? 4. Do you feel the need for more female professor at your program? Appendix B Interview Questions 1. Do you believe that your childhood upbringing affects your perception on gender preferences on professors? Explain. 2. Do you believe the schools you have attended affects your professor’s gender
workinglives of engineers in different contexts.The last learning factor that was coded in the transcript was the spectrum of student choice andprofessor guidance. Students in the focus group noted what aspects of the project were chosen bythe professor and what aspects were left for the students to work out among themselves. B: But you know if we are sitting in a group and we’re giving a project andnobody decided what or who to do what exactly? So that’s a big mess. C: Like last semester, I was with Dr. ----. She assigned us to do communityresearch and to write a whole research about it. And collect data by doing surveys and such andsuch. [...] So my interests were about nature and [...] climate change researchers. So
Society (APICS) and a member of the Society of Women Engineers (SWE). She is a licensed Professional Engineer in Kansas.Dr. Cheryl B. Schrader, Missouri University of Science and Technology Cheryl B. Schrader became Chancellor of Missouri University of Science and Technology, formerly the University of Missouri - Rolla, in 2012. Prior to her current leadership position she served as Associate Vice President for Strategic Research Initiatives and as Dean of the College of Engineering at Boise State University. Dr. Schrader has an extensive record of publications and sponsored research in the systems, control and STEM education fields. She received the 2005 Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and
events organized by the department, ▪ Presenting work to other students (not classwork), ▪ Community or K-12 outreach (voluntary or for a course), ▪ Interacting with students in different year(s) (lower year or more senior students), ▪ Research Experience Question B: Which of the following ▪ Students in the class people, if any, have helped you with ▪ Students outside the class who have taken it before classwork? Mark all that apply. ▪ Teaching or Learning Assistants
Makerspaces, 1 being not at all and 7 being very much.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This material is based upon work supported by the NationalScience Foundation under Grant No. EEC 1531375. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation.REFERENCES:[1] D. N. Beede, T. A. Julian, D. Langdon, G. McKittrick, B. Khan and M. E. Doms, "Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation," Economics and Statistics Administration Issue Brief, vol. 04, no. 11, 2011.[2] R. M. Marra, K. A. Rodgers, D. Shen and B. Bogue, "Women Engineering Students and Self- Efficacy: A Multi-Year, Multi-Instituion Study of Women Engineering Student Self
University of Central University of Washingtona Floridaa Tuskegee Universityc Utah State Universityb Ohio Northern Universityd a R1 Doctoral University b R2 Doctoral University c M3 Master’s University d Baccalaureate College: Diverse Fields e Associate’s College: Mixed Transfer/Career & Technical-High NontraditionalData collected during the interviews were coded using thematic analysis [8] of the responsesfrom the chapter representatives. In this thematic analysis, data from the interviews wereanalyzed separately for each participant and then in
] S. Hillman, G. Salama, E. O. Eibenschutz, S. M. A. Awadh, and L. El Said, “Being Female and an Engineering Student in Qatar: Successes, Challenges, and Recommendations,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Columbus, OH, 2017.[6] H. Baytiyeh, “Women Engineers in the Middle East from Enrollment to Career: A Case Study,” in Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio, TX, 2012.[7] D. W. Sue, C. M. Capodilupo, G. C. Torino, J. M. Bucceri, A. M. B. Holder, K. L. Nadal, and M. Esquilin, “Racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for clinical practice,” Am. Psychol., vol. 62, no. 4
analysis indicates that this trend has been consistent for atleast the last three decades [24]. b. Testing Bias. Maeda & Yoon added that some of this research was influenced by other factors beyondspatial skills such as testing procedure and measurement bias against females such as providingtest time limitations [17]. In an earlier study, they recognized that testing affected the magnitudeof the gender difference gap. They noted that the gender difference increases in favor of malestudents if there was time pressure due to the testing instrument as compared to no time. Thus,the testing results would include a measurement error due to procedural bias [17]. The procedural impact on gender differences is of
. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basic of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing Grounded Theory. 2014: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.19. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.20. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition.21. Meyer, M., & Marx, S. (2014). Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why undergraduates leave engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(4), 525-548.22. Bean, J., & Eaton, S. B. (2001). The psychology underlying successful retention practices. Journal of College Student
American (7.7%), Hispanic (15.2%), Asian (17.6%), Female (20.7%), LSES (14.6%). Supplemental Instruction can now be counted as one of the many programs that successfullydecreases the academic performance gap between ethnic minority students and Caucasians. Thisgap was decreased to within 3% of course averages for all groups excluding African Americans.One of the most surprising things about these findings is that the SI program was not designed togive additional benefit to minority, female, or low-socioeconomic students. Through activelearning and inclusion, the SI program at LSU has shown to have a substantial impact on allpopulations of students7 References[1] E. Brothers, B. Knox, “Best Practices in Retention of Underrepresented
’ experiences and may retain women inengineering. It also presents new data to show that instead of just discussing the social or thetechnical factors of an engineering concept separately, but the two combined together, can affectstudents’ sense of belonging and attitudes toward engineering, especially for female students.However, future research is still needed to get a more complete understanding of the effects thata sociotechnical approach can have on engineering students’ sense of belonging/attitudes towardengineering.References[1] B. Cohen and K. L. Sanford Bernhardt, "Introducing Engineering as a Socio-technical Process," in Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, USA, 15-18 June, 2014.[2] National Academy
personality factors do appear in STEMand FYE TA literature and that some TA personality factors may be linked to student successand retention in FYE and STEM.References[1] R. A. Louis and H. M. Matusovich, “Work in progress: Describing the responsibilities ofTeaching Assistants in first-year engineering programs,” 2012 Frontiers in EducationConference Proceedings, 2012.[2] M. Ohland, C. Brawner, X. Chen, and M. Orr, “A Comparative Study of EngineeringMatriculation Practices,” 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings.[3] I. B. Myers and P. B. Myers, Gifts differing: understanding personality type. Palo Alto, CA:Davies-Black Pub, 2002.[4] D. Keirsey, Please understand me II. Del Mar: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company, 1998.[5] P. T. Costa
pandemic transition that a lot of students were having issues withbeing able to access their work. Indeed, that was because they didn't have adequate access tointernet at their home. Some students would tell me that they were only able to get internet at arelative's house, one day out of the week, in order to be able to do their work. The reason beingis that at they at their home, they didn't have the internet or they didn't have a computer. So, theywould have to go to their grandmother's or their aunt’s house to be able to do all theirassignments” (Research Participant 23) b) Student cheating behavior, cheating factors and prevention approaches During faculty interviews, student cheating was a common and serious complaint havinga
captured student demographics, awareness of topics, and 5-point Likert scales evaluating students’ familiarity, perceived importance, interest, and perceived relevance of HD and SDOH for drug delivery. Review papers on delivery systems written by groups of students were evaluated using inductive thematic analysis to capture codes related to the translation of DDS to society and potential HD and SDOH topics. Controlled with the same rubric and traditional course content, three group report sets (total N=23 reports) including the current cohort of students receiving HD and SDOH content (Semester A, N =8 reports) and previous cohorts (Semester B, N = 7 reports; Semester C, N = 8 reports; both without additional content) were
American Society for Engineering Education ByLaws, 20172. University of Puerto Rico Office of Institutional Planning and Continuous Improvement 2018-19 Data Enrolment. Downloaded from https://oiip.uprm.edu/dtos-estadisticos/3. B. L. Yoder, “Engineering by the numbers,” report for the American Society for Engineering Education, 20164. Robert G. Bringle & Julie A. Hatcher (1996) Implementing Service Learning in Higher Education, The Journal of Higher Education, 67:2, 221-239, DOI: 10.1080/00221546.1996.11780257
Paper ID #26833Tips and Tricks for a More Effective You: Lessons Learned From a USAFACadetMr. Alexander Samaniego, United States Air Force Alexander is a second class cadet at the United States Air Force Academy, originally from San Diego, CA, who is working towards a bachelors of science in systems engineering.Martin Span III, United States Air Force Trae is the Deputy Director of the Systems Engineering Program and Instructor of Systems Engineering at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), Colorado Springs, Colorado. He is commissioned as Captain in the United States Air Force (USAF). In his role as Deputy Director
Paper ID #28576How to Be a Graduate Student (Before I Forget): A Collection ofExperiential WisdomDr. Stephen Secules, Florida International University Stephen is an Assistant Professor Engineering and Computing Education at Florida International Univer- sity. He has a prior academic and professional background in engineering, having worked professionally as an acoustical engineer. He has taught a number of courses on engineering and education, including courses on engineering design, systems in society, and learning theories. Stephen’s research interests include equity, culture, and the sociocultural dimensions of engineering
Paper ID #17106Bridges to STEM Careers: A Student Mentor PersectiveMr. Christopher Emmanuel Early, The University of Houston-Clear Lake Christopher Early is a student at The University of Houston-Clear Lake. He is currently pursuing a Bachelors of Science degree in Computer Science and Mathematics. Christopher works as a Research Assistant and Student Mentor in the School of Science and Computer Engineering. He has also engaged in research at the University of Houston-Downtown.Jose Daniel Velazco, University of Houston-Clear Lake Jose Daniel was born in Jalisco, Mexico. Since his childhood, he has had an interest in
Paper ID #29699Hands-on Engineering Experience, a Liberal Arts CaseDr. Niloofar Kamran, Cornell CollegeMr. Qingbao Wang, Cornell CollegeMr. Andy GroveWilliam Nitschke Dragon II, Cornell College c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Hands-on Engineering Experience, a Liberal Arts Case Will Dragon, Qingbao Wang, Andy Grove, Niloofar KamranAbstractOur project was a part of the 2019 Cornell College Summer Research Institute (CSRI), whereCornell College students and faculty work in close collaboration on a research project for eightweeks during summer. The program includes one faculty
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Online Engagement and Outreach Activities in an ASEE Student Chapter during Turbulent TimesAbstractFollowing the shelter-in-place guidelines enacted across California in the early spring of 2020,many institutions transitioned nearly all student programming to online offerings. On the heels ofthe burgeoning public health challenge followed a long overdue reckoning with systemic andracial inequity catalyzed by George Floyd’s murder. In response, our ASEE Student Chaptermade major pivots in its mission to address both (A) the pressures and stressors students andeducators faced coupled with their desire for engagement and (B) the integration of anti-racistpedagogy into their engineering
Paper ID #34363Development and Employment of a Course Feedback Classification ToolCassie Wallwey, The Ohio State University Cassie Wallwey is currently a Ph.D. candidate in Ohio State University’s Department of Engineering Education. She is Graduate Teaching Associate for the Fundamentals of Engineering Honors program, and a Graduate Research Associate working in the RIME collaborative (https://u.osu.edu/rimetime) run by Dr. Rachel Kajfez. Her research interests include engineering student motivation and feedback in engineering classrooms. Before enrolling at Ohio State University, Cassie earned her B.S. (2017) and M.S
Paper ID #27377Work in Progress: Discovering Pathways of Engineering Undergraduate Stu-dents Related to Engineering IdentityMiss Pearl Elizabeth Ortega, Texas A&M University Pearl Ortega is a PhD student at Texas A&M University, College Station studying Interdisciplinary En- gineering with a focus on Engineering Education. Ms. Ortega received her undergraduate degree in Industrial Engineering from St. Mary’s University, San Antonio, TX and a M. Eng. degree in Industrial Engineering from Texas A&M University with a research focus in remote healthcare. She currently works as a graduate assistant for the Aerospace
ofthe 45 CFR 46.101.(b) by the U-M Institutional Research Board (HUM00135376).References ¨ Eris, and N. Tatar. Work in progress—taking one for the team: Goal orientation [1] B. Linder, M. Somerville, O. and gender-correlated task division. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, pages F4H–1, Oct. 2010. [2] L. A. Meadows and D. Sekaquaptewa. The influence of gender stereotypes on role adoption in student teams. Proc. 120th ASEE Annual Conf. Exposition, pages 1–16, Oct. 2013. [3] E. A. Strehl and R. Fowler. Experimental evidence regarding gendered task allocation on teams. Proc. 126th ASEE Annual Conf. Exposition, pages 1–14, Oct. 2019. [4] E. Scanlon. How gender influences learners working
Paper ID #11803Interactive Panel: Improving the Experiences of Marginalized Students onEngineering Design TeamsDr. Lorelle A Meadows, Michigan Technological University Dr. Lorelle A. Meadows is the Dean of the Pavlis Honors College at Michigan Technological University.Prof. Denise Sekaquaptewa, University of Michigan Denise Sekaquaptewa, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Her research in experimental social psychology focuses on stereotyping and intergroup dynamics, in partic- ular how being in the numerical minority in terms of gender or race influences academic outcomes and
Paper ID #25452Board 130: Engineering Education Collaborations: Exploring ”Ways of Think-ing” Using a Mixed Methods ApproachDr. Medha Dalal, Arizona State University Medha Dalal has a Ph.D. in Learning, Literacies and Technologies from the Arizona State University with a focus on engineering education. She has a master’s degree in Computer Science and a bachelor’s in Electrical Engineering. Medha has many years of experience teaching and developing curricula in computer science, engineering, and education technology programs. She has worked as an instructional designer at the Engineering Research Center for Bio-mediated and
-based models impact the validation and recognition of students and communities of color as holders and creators of knowledge. His current work seeks to analyze and describe the tensions, contradictions, and cultural collisions many Latino/a/x students expe- rience in engineering through testimonios. He is particularly interested in approaches that contribute to a more expansive understanding of engineering in sociocultural contexts, the impact of critical conscious- ness in engineering practice, and development and implementation of culturally responsive pedagogies in engineering education.Dr. Susan M. Lord, University of San Diego Susan M. Lord received a B.S. from Cornell University in Materials Science and
andprobability in team settings. Specifically, only one of the five prompts demonstrated significantlydifferent interpretations across the age and student status demographic. This finding, however,does not encapsulate the extreme levels of variation witnessed across demographic groups in thevarious prompts within this study, as noted in Appendix B and C. The variation suggests thatambiguous terminology elicits extremely different interpretations in both collegiate andprofessional settings; however, interpretation cannot be predicted based on demographics.As a result, educators must take measures to teach students about ambiguous terminology andhow teammates can perceive both time and probability based vague language completelydifferent from one another