students.Dr. Emily Dringenberg, The Ohio State University Dr. Dringenberg is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Ohio State Uni- versity. She holds a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering (Kansas State ’08), a M.S. in Industrial Engineering (Purdue ’14) and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education. Her current career purpose is to learn about and reveal beliefs that are widely-held as an implicit result of our socialization within systems of oppression so that she can embolden others to reflect on their assumptions and advance equity in their own ways.Dr. Elif Miskioglu, Bucknell University Dr. Elif Miskioglu is an early-career engineering education scholar and educator. She holds a B.S. in Chemical
informs the culture, climate, and discourse of engineering education,leading to an exclusionary culture within engineering as reflected by the lack of diversity andlower retention of students and faculty of color, and contributes to systemic barriers negativelyimpacting racial equity. Moving towards racial equity in engineering education requires afundamental shift in thinking in two important ways: 1) we must reframe how we think aboutunderserved populations from minority to minoritized by a dominant discourse, and 2) to beginto dismantle the impacts of Whiteness, we must first make this barrier visible.In the first year of this project, the diverse team of PIs began to explore scripts of Whiteness inengineering education by conducting a
vouchers.OrientationPrior to the start of the program, an orientation meeting introduced the available researchprojects and allowed students, faculty, and the graduate student mentors to meet each other. Anoverview of Research Contracts, which were used to structure the individual summer researchprojects of each student, a brief introduction to the online communications platform (Basecamp),where students turned in materials and engaged in weekly reflections on the program and theirresearch projects, and a Lab and Campus Safety information session were also covered in theorientation meeting.Program Website https://stem.northeastern.edu/summer/reu/pathways/Arduino/SparkFun WorkshopThrough this workshop series and a 10-week long engineering design project, students
implemented in the respective firstyear classes this semester, Spring 2023. The team is piloting several assessments this semester. Toassess the perceived impact on learning and perceived difficulty we will be asking the students tocomplete a simple survey (See Appendix D.) To assess a delta in comprehension of diversity,equity, inclusion, and social justice, we will be giving the same pre- and post-assessment askingstudents to define each of the above. (See Appendix E.) After the hands-on activity students willalso reflect on how they think the activity is related to diversity, equity and inclusion. The teamseeks to investigate if there is any correlation between a student’s learning style and theircomprehension of DEI and justice. Hence, each
extant model of empathyin engineering design on which the initial instrument was founded, then we invited critique of theinstrument and identification of parts missing from their pre-reflection stories. We leveragedMiro and this extant model and asked participants to share their stories within the extant model.We also prompted participants to expand the model, naming parts of the model that failed tocapture their pre-reflection stories. In this way, we began prompting participants to help usexpand the model to other design phases, other empathy types, or other directions. For example,similar to the first co-creation workshop, some participants focused on empathy within the team,with one participant considering this a predecessor or affordance to
experience, teachers benefit professionally through integrateddevelopment activities and cultivate greater self-awareness and understanding of culture.First, this paper will summarize the project to date. Then, we present observations fromparticipants’ reflections, semi-structured interview, and pre/post intercultural assessments. Next,we highlight the collaborative outreach and capacity-building efforts which resulted in a newcommunity partner and immersion site. Finally, we discuss the unique opportunities andchallenges associated with navigating international travel and immersion experiences during theCOVID-19 pandemic.Project SummaryThe Global STEM Research Experience for Teachers (RET) is a collaborative program betweenCentral State University
computing is the reality of the computing education “culture” in the U.S.being primarily one-note (e.g., white-men)—including faculty, students, and professionals—which instigates perpetual curricular and non-curricular hurdles for members of non-majoritygroups to overcome. To attain their fit within computing, students must navigate the computerscience culture by adopting norms and values that are reflective of the majority-group [22]. Notbeing able to adopt these norms and values impacts students’ fit within computing contexts and,ultimately, their retention.Culture is a compelling explanation for underrepresentation in computer science. This identifiedone-note cultural concern in computing contexts where non-majority computing students
engineering. YES has developed three curricula:All YES units engage youth in real-world engineering problems.An equity-oriented approach to learning grounds YES. As youthengage in socially engaged engineering design challenges, theydraw upon their communities and cultures, consider who isimpacted by problems, and reflect upon the implications of theirsolutions. Youth develop facility with engineering practices asthey use an engineering design process to generate and iterateoriginal solutions. Scientific concepts, computational thinking, andasset-based approaches strengthen design ideas and solutions. Byengaging in meaningful engineering activity, youth develop engineering identities
-minute TA-leddiscussion section once a week. In a typical semester (before the change in grading scheme)students would submit weekly graded homework consisting of textbook problems, take a“homework quiz” during the first 10-15 minutes of discussion section, take two preliminary(midterm) exams, and take a comprehensive final exam.Changes for Fall 2022The main goals of the new grading scheme were to: stop collecting and grading writtenhomework; require correct answers for credit; give ample opportunity for reflection and feedbackon mistakes. To accomplish these goals, we devised the following outline for the logistics of thecourse. • Textbook practice problems were posted each week, and full solutions posted a few days later. These were
ledincluding a process of learning, reflection, and support by colleagues. One way in which it canbe effective for faculty to acclimate is by doing small implementations through micromoments.Micromoments are rapid and easy active learning implementations that encourage students’learning. These activities can help support faculty who often struggle with competing demandsand lack of time, limiting improvement in teaching aspects. This work-in-progress paper showsthe authors’ reflections and suggestions to engage faculty in promoting micromoment activitiesin lecture-based teaching.At the University of Dayton - an R2 university, the lead engineering faculty started a FLC tosupport the integration of entrepreneurially minded learning (EML) using the KEEN
shown varying levelsof empirical data demonstrating improved student learning [1,19]. One example of a positive impact is fromForte and Guzdail [11], who observed improved motivation and computational thinking when data scienceskills were put into the context of a given major. According to Yardi [16], appropriately formatted andscoped content can enhance conceptual understanding, problem-solving skills, and reflective learningamong other benefits. Other research indicates that both faculty and students are more satisfied with coursesthat adopt this approach, leading to higher course success rates and increased enrollment [20]. However,there is still a need for further research to fully understand the potential impact of contextualized
motivate and retainthose students in a program of study. Ensuring that students remain motivated by theireducational program greatly increases the likelihood that they will successfully complete themajor.The study presented within this paper used a course-generated student essay that reflects on whystudents at a particular academic institution selected the civil engineering major. The essayassignment has been used over multiple course administrations during a five-year period. Essayswere reviewed for reference to a series of nine specific motivations for selecting the academicStudents at the United States Military Academy (West Point) select their academic major duringthe spring of their first year. They start coursework in their major during the
onefemale student. Proper human subjects’ approval was obtained prior to conduct of the study.Survey DevelopmentThe engineering graduate EVT instrument was developed based upon the engineering specificEVT instrument from Brown & Matusovich [7]. Brown & Matusovich instrument’s validity wasconfirmed by consulting three experts for content validity and through factor analysis forconstruct validity. Cronbach’s alpha was used as a measure of reliability for internal consistency[7]. In the first step of the survey development process, all original survey prompts werereviewed and rewritten to reflect a graduate program setting. Some examples are found in Table1 where the added words are presented in italics. The wording changes made were simple
development. To support the continuedgrowth of this nascent field, reflection on past research history combined with recognition of current and future challenges is vital todeveloping a relevant research agenda. Such a research agenda may inform future growth by meeting intellectual demand withrelevant insights informed by prior work. An end-goal of the EL research enterprise is strengthening the field’s impact on the ELcommunity and the engineering education field more broadly. A substantial portion of the research on EL is published through theAmerican Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). In particular, EL thought leaders often publish through a division focused onsupporting EL education, educators, and researchers, the Engineering Leadership
are working to find better ways to evaluation teaching. Peerevaluation of teaching is used by many institutions; however, these evaluations commonly lacksubstance. Teaching portfolios are also commonly used as a tool for teacher reflection leading toefforts of improvement. Yet concerns persist about the nature and effectiveness of teachingevaluation.Over the past five years, Brigham Young University has developed a process built on the conceptthat peer review can be an effective tool for the evaluation of teaching just like it is for theevaluation of scholarship. In this process, the faculty member is responsible to providesubstantive evidence of the effectiveness of their teaching efforts in a teaching portfolio. Peerreviewers then evaluate
program dedicated to that purpose is essential to prepare them for their future roles asleaders in their respective fields [2]. All should be encouraged to build up their individualleadership portfolios [3]. The graduate students in such a program can acquire knowledge andlearn and practice distinct and direct skills and values relevant to leadership. Included in these areethical decision making, communication, and networking [2–6]. Throughout its course, theprogram can continually improve in terms of both its curriculum and the leadership skills it confers[4], adapting to the current academic environment and reflecting the members’ evolving leadershipgoals. The following work outlines a pathway to address the need for leadership
much betterDoes your system display a low pass response or a high pass response? How do you know?Students displayed errors in identification and terminology that are anticipated for any laboratoryexperiment on frequency response. In their written reflections, some students correctlyqualitatively described a highpass response, but incorrectly classified it as a lowpass response.Students in both the speaker completed first and resistor completed first groups bothemphasized the behavior of the speaker when justifying whether their circuit was high or lowpass. One student in the resistor completed first group reversed their judgment of the filternature after doing the speaker version of the experiment. After completing the resistor-onlyportion of
them upon graduation.” [3] In the HES program at Mines, we seek to transform traditional graduate education practices toensure that research products reach these audiences in relevant, useful, and empowering ways.First, our graduate students receive formation, i.e., a socio-technical education and mentoringthat invites them to critically reflect on their background and assumptions, especially concerningdevelopment, engineering, and the communities they want to serve. Second, they learn researchtranslation skills so they know how to translate research into languages and formats accessible tocommunities who, in turn, can make this research actionable to enhance their well-being. Third,they map extensions of their research into undergraduate
GIFT has been implemented in its current form for five semesters, beginning in Spring2019. In GIFT, GSs are supported by the project faculty and a one-credit course to constructadult-level, inquiry-based, 30-minute lessons based on specific topics related to elementary(K-6) Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS; [19]). The GSs meet with elementary teachercandidates (TCs) to teach the lesson and serve as disciplinary experts on the topic. The TCssubsequently turn this knowledge into 15-minute mini-lessons for elementary students. To bringGIFT full circle, the GSs observe the TCs teaching the lesson and reflect on the entireexperience (see [20] for more details on this intervention).Methods & Design We undertook a pragmatic
their responses to math-related survey items changed betweenpre and post survey administrations. Of particular interest were responses to a math-identityrelated item, “I see myself as a math person.” Along with this, transcripts from focus groupinterviews were reviewed for quotes from these same students related to their math experiences,skill development, sense of math identity, and efficacy. Most students’ responses to the mathidentity survey item either remained the same or changed only slightly however, students’ focusgroup reflections on their math experiences were wide-ranging. The results of this study provideinitial evidence that the summer bridge program is a positive experience for students, but themath placement exam is a barrier to
due to the COVID-19 pandemic),approximately 30 students from three middle schools participated. Some students attended boththe academic year activities and the summer academy. In contrast, others took part in one or theother. Although demographic information of the students was not collected, 100% of studentparticipants were from underrepresented minority groups, and 100% qualified for free/reducedlunch.Data Collection Qualitative data was collected from the participants and facilitators to understand theprogram's impact on students. 40 students completed reflections via Google Forms at the end ofthe Summer Academy. At the same time, two facilitators participated in semi-structuredinterviews. Using a grounded theory approach, we
was high (95.3%), it was not perfect. We were unable to obtainthree books. Of these, two were different editions of Moran et al., which we substituted using the6th edition. The final unobtained book was a textbook on combustion by Turns (ISBN:9781260477696). Given the small fraction of the corpus that this single book represents, thisomission does not seriously threaten the external validity of our findings.While reserve lists reflect an important aspect of curricula, textbooks are only an approximationof the curriculum as-taught and as-intended. Textbooks are often only partly aligned with theteaching goals of a particular class; in some cases, there is no textbook that reflects the content ofa course. Given this approximate alignment, our
engineeringeducation.ConclusionThe workshop will conclude with a summation of the ACJ system, the key factors to beconsidered when setting up an ACJ assessment session and an overview of the mainadvantages and disadvantages identified through the preceding discussion.AcknowledgementThis work was made possible by a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF#2020785). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References[1] RM Compare, “An altogether different approach to assessment,” 2020. https://compare.rm.com/ (accessed Jul. 01, 2022).[2] A. Pollitt, “The method of Adaptive Comparative Judgement,” Assess. Educ. Princ
-solving approaches. This approach values each person’s experiences, including those fromhistorically underrepresented populations in engineering and computer science [2].One intervention, adapted from Finelli and Kendall-Brown [3], uses observation and role-play todemonstrate how to approach biases within peer group settings, behave inclusively, and createinclusive and productive environments within their field [2]. Students in a first year “EngineeringProblem Solving 1” course at a large, R1 institution in the mid-Atlantic region were required toattend an Interactive Theatre Sketch and answer several reflection questions about the contentand their own related experiences.Before COVID, the sketch was performed live in an auditorium and students
real-worldexamples ultimately used in the tool are reflective of the engineering concentrations of the capstoneteam. The biomedical track used an example of controlling the glucose level within a human body;and the mechanical track used an example of controlling car speed. Figure 1. Screen capture of the track selection page 4The material covered is identical between the two tracks, and students can also easily flip betweentracks for maximum flexibility and to understand the same topics with different examples.There were many other areas of flexibility that the capstone team wanted to ensure. The curriculumitself was divided into 6 main modules based on the most prominent
Advance Trainingfor Research and Teaching Activities”. In it, Chuchalin establishes the following classificationof competencies for engineering professors : technical, pedagogical, social, psychological,ethical, didactic, evaluative, organizational, communicative and reflective competenciesAdditionally, we have utilized the investigative work of Ramón Bragós Bardía, which proposessix actions to promote the development of generic competencies in engineering with referenceto framework standards 9 and 10 of CDIO, including: relevant experience in the industry, designof courses that develop these competencies, experience exchange activities with the industry,and mentoring by professors with extensive professional experience. Methods The method used
%), and their own capabilities (11%). Students frequently describedsolution requirements as constraints (38%) though in many instances these might be moreappropriately framed as objectives that do not necessarily constrain the solution. Thedevelopment of engineering requirements represents an important transition point in problemframing that moves the problem from a qualitative representation (e.g. needs statements,operating principles) to a quantitative one (i.e. metrics and values that reflect performanceobjectives and constraints). Students who overall lack of experience with ill-structured problems,and design problems specifically, have limited experience with this qualitative to quantitativetransition that is common in practice. Another
- andpost-STEM interviews with a member of the research team. Of these 16 students, four alsoparticipated in the mentoring experience. The interviews (conducted remotely) focused onstudents' career interests, understanding of what STEM entails, and reflection about the 3Dprinting unit. Students (n=214) completed a STEM Interest survey consisting of four sets ofquestions, each set focusing on one element of STEM. Students took this survey twice, once atthe start of the quarter (pre) and once at the end of the quarter (post). The survey was takenverbatim from Kier et al. (2013) [7] with eight additional negatively worded questions to checkfor response consistency. Additionally, following each mentoring session, students (n=16),mentors (n=12), and
differences among individuals and groups6. Protects human health and physical safety of users and society7. Promotes human well-being and enhances quality of life for usersand society8. Evaluates economic impacts of environmental design criterion9. Evaluates economic impacts of a social design criterion10. Considers affordability for users and/or demonstrates costcompetitiveness or cost reduction for client/sponsor11. Evaluates economic costs and benefits to inform decisions12. Final design impacted by trade-offs among environmental, social,and economic criteria and reflects balance of dimensions13. Uses and/or creates innovation(s) in its specific field to achievesustainability14. Worked with experts from other disciplines (i.e., outsideengineering
OERdevelopment and ownership of the Champions course by the Mines Library aligns with thisdemonstrated role of academic libraries.Much of the published literature on OER adoption in higher education acknowledges the need forprofessional development opportunities for faculty. 8,9,10,5 These studies are largely focused onfaculty perceptions of OER based on large scale OER programs or efforts. In their study ofOregon community colleges, Lantrip and Ray found, “the adoption process should providetraining for faculty on pedagogical best practices and technology associated with the OER inaddition to time to reflect on how to incorporate these into their adoption process.” 11 Many ofthese studies do not go into much detail regarding the creation and assessment