the existing knowledge. The authorsreflect on future research paths in collaborative learning as well as in soft skills training anddevelopment for majors from the construction industry. Implications for research and practiceare provided.MethodologyThe first part of this exploratory study, which is reported in this article, uses a qualitative methodapproach to measure the performance cognition among civil engineering and architecturestudents when working together. The data was collected during the Fall 2021 semester withstudents from the engineering course Statics (n=38 students) and two sections of the architecturecourse Structures-1 (n=20, n=20 students) for a total sample size of n= 78 students. Theinstructor remained the same for all
as Senior Director of Research and Evaluation at PowerUP, a national nonprofit organization dedicated to expanding technology access and providing youth development resources for underserved youth. Schneider’s current research interests include race, class, and gender inequality in educational access and retention, in particular, issues of access, climate, and the quality of student learning in undergraduate engineering education.Ms. Maria Terrell, Cornell University Page 22.798.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Impact of Collaborative Problem-solving
, "Promoting enterprising: A strategic move to get schools' cooperation in the promotion of entrepreneurship," in Handbook of Research in Entrepreneurship Education: Contextual Perspectives, Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 2007.[5] T. Astebroa, N. Bazzaziana and S. Braguinsky, "Startups by Recent University Graduates and Their Faculty: Implications for University Entrepreneurship Policy," Research Policy, no. 41, pp. 663-677, 2012.[6] D. Maresch, R. Harms, N. Kailer and B. Wimmer-Wurm, "The impact of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention of students in science and engineering versus business studies university programs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, no. 104, pp. 172-179, 2016.[7] T. Kriewall and K
alignedwith needs of the industry; this was the primary motivating force urging the authors tocollaborate and conceive an interdisciplinary project. The successful experiences of otherpioneers in this area were without question, another encouraging factor.Student ProjectsStudents enrolled in selected courses that the collaborating faculty members offered during theFall 2002 semester were challenged to work cooperatively on a project of their choice. Thestipulated requirement for the project was that it had to contain at least one major component thatwould require utilization of skills derived from each of the three courses taken. Table 1 showsthe dispersion of student enrollment for each of the targeted course. Table 1. Student Enrollment
AC 2007-2197: GATEWAY INTO FIRST-YEAR STEM CURRICULA: ACOMMUNITY COLLEGE/UNIVERSITY COLLABORATION PROMOTINGRETENTION AND ARTICULATIONMichele Wheatly, Wright State University Michele Wheatly (PI) is Dean of the College of Science and Mathematics at Wright State University. She has had a 25 year history of continuous NSF funding to support her lab research, as well as significant experience directing large projects targeting increasing representation in the STEM disciplines (including the Creating Laboratory Access for Science Students, heralded as one of the most innovative projects in undergraduate STEM curriculum in the US). Her career funding from competitive sources has totaled
collaborative work both on classroom and online. • In the case of partial experiences, except just one exception, the concept collaborative work and student-centered environments was strange for them, generating rejection among the students, as there was a common trend at the start aiming for individual work, instead of splitting tasks and gather all work afterwards. • The search for creative answers to questions proposed was encouraged by the fact that results and conclusions had to be presented online, avoiding simple plagiarism. • The creation of random working groups generated some conflicts at the start of the experience, caused by the differences of skills and involvement attitudes of the group’s members
design the project sequence to build up student skills, but leave room for exploration and invention; Don’t underestimate the students’ ability and creativity. • Strategy #4: Focus on Learning Process, not the Results! Do incorporate as many key learning factors in project design; Don’t set the goal to be just completing the project. • Strategy #5: Provide guidelines to foster collaboration Page 24.454.5 Do use team-building activities and provide guidelines; Don’t assume students can work well in teams naturally. • Strategy #6: Build an online community to provide scaffolding Do build a learning community to provide
, potentiallyexplaining this difference in the perception. Furthermore, we quantitatively confirmed that evenwhen student groups collaborate with identical ChatGPT settings, the resulting product ideasdemonstrate a similar degree of linguistic diversity as those found in ideas generated solely by thestudents.While this paper introduced an application of genAI in the context of group brainstorming, itmerely scratched the surface of a much broader landscape filled with more complex questions. Tocomprehensively unravel the intricate relationship between human creativity and genAI, furthersystematic research is needed. For example, as highlighted in [26], creative ideas, particularlywithin the domain of engineering, require exploring the nuanced interplay of various
HPLframework, being part of a close-knit community of learners, actively interacting with each other,can be of great help to the individual student in developing his or her knowledge and understand-ing of the particular discipline; we will elaborate on HPL later in this section. Given this, andgiven the potential that online technologies provide for interaction and collaboration, a number ofresearchers have, over the last several years, explored ways to exploit such technologies to effectcollaborative learning. These researchers have developed a number of tools and techniques, someof which we will briefly review later in the paper, and demonstrated their use in a variety of disci-plines and settings ranging from K-12 through college programs
NACME’s50 partner universities. We limited ourselves to a purposive sample from among the 28 thatwere “block grant” institutions, which receive substantial scholarship funding from NACME andare held accountable to specific goals in terms of retention of both NACME scholars andunderrepresented minorities. Institutions are expected to implement programming that has beenshown to improve the likelihood that students, especially minority students, are successfullyretained to graduation including but not limited to: mentoring, supplemental instruction, bridgeprogramming, tutoring, support groups, etc 21.Selection of institutions was purposeful. In order to examine the issues for MEP and WIE within
commitment and motivation [7], [9]. faculty. - Faculty members serve as inspiration and as partner of discussion improving the aspiration of the students [3], [7], [10]. - Learning requires cooperation between student and faculty. Enhanced student-faculty contact promotes the cooperation [11]. 2. Promote student collaboration and - After graduation students will enter jobs where team-work-skills are often a requirement or at least appreciated [12]. responsibility for own learning. - Collaboration promotes
., The Citadel Robert Rabb is an associate professor and the Mechanical Engineering Program Director at The Citadel. He previously taught mechanical engineering at the United States Military Academy at West Point. He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the United States Military Academy and his M.S.E. and PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. His research and teaching interests are in mechatronics, regenerative power, and multidisciplinary engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Student Veteran Leadership Skills in an Engineering Technical Writing CourseTechnical proficiency is a
Page 24.1291.2include social justice; a consideration of the distribution of advantages and disadvantages insociety.4-6. The extent to which engineering students view the profession of engineering througha lens of SR with consideration of social justice is unclear.The Association of American Colleges & Universities (AAC&U)7 includes SR among theiressential learning outcomes for all college students, noting as sub-elements within this learningoutcome ethical reasoning and action, as well as civic knowledge and engagement. They alsostate: “in a democratic society, the goal must be to extend opportunity and excellence toeveryone, and not just to a fortunate minority.” 8 Toward meeting these aims, the AAC&Usupported the initiative Core
different major.IntroductionThere is strong evidence of student flexibility and vacillation around career options post-graduation from college. Specifically, a single interaction or experience (such as a co-op) cansometimes mean the difference between taking a job after graduation in engineering or anotherfield.1 Further, research suggests that cooperative education and internships result in increasedsocial and cultural capital of those who participate, which can contribute to their ability to secureemployment after graduation.2 Student perceptions of the engineering field, which can be shapedby undergraduate work experiences, can also impact persistence in engineering programs.3-7While there is a growing literature examining the relationship
, Levine and Hewer34, 1983). A study by Jones and Watt31(2001) looked at 182 male and female undergraduate students, and while they found that both Page 12.295.15sexes used both moral perspectives (the justice perspective and the care perspective), womenwere found to possess a significantly higher ethic of care. Recent research has producedconsistent gender differences in moral reasoning. For example, when asked to give a personalmoral dilemma, women more often discuss family issues and interpersonal relationships thando males, and women used more care-based reasoning than did males (Golombok andFivush23, 1994).Some consider the idea that females are
. To support students and faculty, the NRTleadership team encouraged NRT trainees to publish a conference paper. Another challengingaspect of organizing an interdisciplinary Capstone course was forming the teams so that researchtopics aligned with all students’ academic backgrounds. The NRT leadership team explored howto make interdisciplinary research more central to graduate work and discovered that it variesamong departments and disciplines at our university. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 2024 ASEE Midwest Section ConferenceIn addition, we learned through the formative evaluation feedback that it is useful to use a visual-ization tool, such as Loopy, to teach
, webdevelopment and network skills are the most rapidly growing sets of IT skills. Gallivan et al.(2004) also reported that soft skills were important factors with communication skills the mostoften reported, followed closely by leadership and interpersonal skills.Similar information comes from a recent research report. In 2009 a research report on The ILL-Prepared U.S. Workforce (Exploring the Challenges of Employer-Provided WorkplaceReadiness Training) was released by a consortium of organizations, including SHRM (Societyfor Human Resource Management), ASTD (American Society for Training & Development),The Conference Board, and Corporate Voices for Working Families.9 The report was directed atexploring the need for workforce readiness training in
students in different fieldswill have different levels of wellbeing as well as perceptions of stress, competition, andachievement. This relationship is hypothesized because they would be socialized in differentcharacteristics that are deemed particular to their fields. In this exploration, we first use largegroups to identify any specific differentiation of engineering compared against the other twolarge categories considered. However, future work will involve the exploration of differencesbetween engineering and specific majors individually.MethodsDataWe used data from the Healthy Minds Study (HMS), a web-based survey administered throughthe Healthy Minds Network for Research on Adolescent and Young Adult Mental Health(HMN). The initiative was
. Page 26.650.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Engineering, Society and the Environment in the Teaching Goals and Practices of Engineering InstructorsIntroductionConsidering societal, institutional, professional and accreditation-related expectations andrequirements, and the interest from students in applying their technical skills to social andenvironmental issues, engineering undergraduate programs are expected to encourage students toconsider the impact of engineering’s work on society and the environment, explore therelationships between technology and society, and encourage students and graduates to engage incitizenship and action – defining characteristics of STSE
to make meaning of theselived experiences using the interview as a collaborative mechanism49,54. Roulston55(p76)describes using interviews to aid in “research for understanding” with the research questionsdriving the approach. Since we are seeking to interpret, and make meaning of, HSB from theperspective of the student in the context of an undergraduate engineering environment, this studywill be an interpretive, qualitative, interview study49,52,55,56.Semi-structured interviews allow for flexibility in question order and direction based on datafrom the participants’ responses while providing a conversational, comfortable atmosphere57–60.A preconceived question list including a suggested order of questions provides scaffolding;however, in a
engineeringstudents with a mentoring faculty member and, occasionally, a graduate student who is an expertin the area of “innovative design”. The collaborative team works to solve a real-world problemthrough the application of various design techniques. In addition, the collaboration can improveor even identify enhanced design techniques and processes. For example, past research effortsimproved the design method in two areas: 1) the understanding of how to develop and implementprototyping strategies which are effective and efficient [11] - [15] and 2) new methods toenhance ideation based on analogies to biological systems [16]. The sponsor organizationresearch partners take keen interest in the design methodology research; oftentimes adoptingthese techniques
and relate to new concepts, improving learning outcomes. Wang and Wang [9] formalized the use of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) maps – a type of conceptual model developed for operations research – as a tool for teaching systems thinking in a classroom setting. The SODA map allowed students to practice collaborative and higher level problem-solving by deriving and visualizing different strategies for a case study. Eppler [12] discussed applications of concept maps in the classroom and the benefits of complementary visualization by combining different mapping methods to enable a “richer learning experience for students.” Tranquillo et al. [15] explored various one-page canvas frameworks as tools to help students model and
instruments. A number of observations from this data led to refinementsin our project protocols. Some of these refinements have been reported in an ITiCSE panel [53]and research paper [54], as well as in a SIGCSE special session [55] and poster [56].One significant observation from the pilot study was that students rated every disposition as maxi-mally important for their career and course, except for adaptable and collaborative. This is likelybecause questions on dispositions elicited idealized responses from students. To avoid such re-sponses, the rating questions on the pre- and post-survey were changed to refer to behaviors insteadof dispositions. Students rated their application of dispositions in course assignments statisticallysignificantly
, Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education.20. Grandy, J. (1994). Gender and ethnic differences among science and engineering majors: Experiences, achievements, and expectations. (RR-94-30). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.21. Morozov, A., Kilgore, D., Yasuhara, K., & Atman, C. (2008). Same courses, different outcomes? Variations in confidence, experience, and preparation in engineering design. Paper presented at the 2008 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA. https://peer.asee.org/348622. Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), 447-457. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1804_423. Center
engineering techniques. His recent research focuses on the effect of high-impact practices on engineering and computer science undergraduate student outcomes around academic success and persistence.Dr. Candis S. Claiborn, Washington State University Professor Emeritus Candis Claiborn has been at Washington State University since 1991. In 2016, she returned to faculty after serving for 10 years as Dean of the Voiland College of Engineering and Archi- tecture at WSU. Prior to that, she served as interim dean and as associate dean for research and graduate programs. Dr. Claiborn received her PhD in chemical engineering from North Carolina State University in 1991. Her research interests are in engineering education
electronics often begins withmath, memorization, and lecture are not really engaging students, and there is a significant gap inteaching power electronics controls and thermal aspects in undergraduate courses. Practicum andlaboratory experience is instrumental in student professional development, and often the powerelectronics courses have no laboratory. These are main reasons for us to strongly advocate for theintegration of the laboratory in our power and energy minor. Continuity in hardware andsoftware is quite often infrequently preserved between undergraduate, graduate, and research,contradicting the outcome k of the ABET. Power electronics control topics, their goodunderstanding and knowledge must be included into the course content in the
Paper ID #33752The PEERSIST Project: Promoting Engineering Persistence Through Peer-ledStudy GroupsMs. Thien Ngoc Y Ta, Arizona State University Thien Ta is a doctoral student of Engineering Education Systems and Design at Arizona State University. She obtained her B.S., and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering. She has taught for Cao Thang technical college for seven years in Vietnam. She is currently a graduate research associate for the Entrepreneurial Mindset initiative at the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. Her doctoral research focuses on Entrepreneurship Education and Innovation in
to meet the demands of growing enrollment. This was viewed as anundesirable situation for a major research university; therefore, it was deemed necessary toreduce the large number of graduate assistants and non-tenured instructors. Of course, thisrequired major restructuring of the English Department, which phased out the technical writingcourses being offered. Since engineering relied upon these courses for all of its disciplines, thisforced a re-thinking of how students would receive this type of skill.The loss of technical writing was not met with a sense of loss of historic proportions becausethere had been many engineering faculty members who had already questioned the value of thisresource. Among the issues raised were:• Return on
graduate students still struggle tofind the most effective models for ensuring that their students internalize professional values andmake them part of their scientific and technical practices4,5,6. This paper will report on the firststage of a three year NSF-funded research project to develop and assess four differentinstructional models that introduce and educate science and engineering graduate students to themicroethical and macroethical issues in their work.Graduate education in science and engineering ethics has typically focused on responsibleconduct in research (RCR) issues and has had a microethical focus (although collectiveresponsibilities are sometimes explored). Topics such as public policy on stem cell research orthe societal
internationalization. This is vital to maintain “Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright© 2004, American Society for Engineering Education”leadership of the United States in this interdependent global economy. The goal is to develop andpromote peaceful and fruitful cooperation and collaboration within and across boarders1. Today’sengineers and technologists are expected to be an integral part of a much boarder society. Alsounderstanding of teamwork in terms of inter-human relations when executing projects isnecessary. Only 4% of all engineering and technology students participated in a study abroadexperience during 2000-2001 as a part of internationalization of