currently involved in their thirdacademic year of implementation. During this time, Cohort 1 faculty were introduced to: (1) thePrinciples of Teaching and Learning [3] as a framework for thinking about and guiding changesin their practice; (2) Teaching as Research as a strategy to effect changes in their courses andassess the impact [4]; and (3) a Community of Practice to share and reflect on their efforts tochange practices. Workshops with experts in the field on active learning, deep and transferablelearning, and cross-course connections were supplemented with research on how people learn [5,6] and discipline-based education research.The extent of participating faculty and classroom transformation is being examined through thelens of limiting
practices for implementation in theeducation sector are still being explored.Methodology Mixed methods were used throughout this study and included a variety of quantitativedata (pre-/post-test instrument) and qualitative data (workshop reflections, focus group, lessonplans, student artifacts); however, this paper only reports on the lesson plans developed by thefaculty participants.Participants. A call was made to all of the Colleges of Education and of Science and Engineering toseek 20 faculty participants. Faculty participant demographics included 15 females, 5 males, 14of which taught in the College of Education (COE) and 6 taught in College of Science andEngineering (COSE). The faculty participants taught a wide range of courses
subject. The studentwho did not work hard was met with overall approval, and he said that it was likely to be in thecircumstance of the subject they were best at, and that everyone has such a class. Alice,contrastingly, rejected the questions altogether. She holds that “smart” is a subjective termdefined by the person describing it, and that everyone is smart, just smart in different ways. Herown subjective view of smart rejects the idea of tying intelligence into the amount of effortneeded to do something, but instead is reflected in an individual’s own conscious choice to tryand learn more.When Ivan was asked about a class he had to work very hard in, he claimed that the reason hehad to work so hard was that the professor was not good at
through a Service LearningProject (SLP). This existing community- oriented outreach activity, which is run through theUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, not only provides students with a sense of pride and belongingthrough their efforts during the event, but this event also has a reflection component to allowScholars to deeply connect with themselves and the community. At the end of each semester,Scholars will present their service learning project experience to their fellow Scholars, peers, andfaculty during a Scholar appreciation event. Professional Development Seminars. During the spring semester of their third year, S-STEM Scholars will enroll in the first course of a two-course sequence on ProfessionalDevelopment, 499.1. This course
Fellows:Modeled after the Action Research Fellows Program of the ESTEME@OSU community, theTeaching Innovation Fellows Program is designed to support CBEE instructors and staff totake the next step in educational innovation through participation in a Professional LearningCommunity (PLC) and action research while addressing project goals. The PLC option isdesigned to encourage teaching or co- curricular development and reflection without the needto formally collect and analyze data, though we encourage assessment of current and/orreformed teaching/co-curricular practice through evaluation of informal measures (e.g.,observations of groups, feedback from TAs and LAs) and artifacts or work products (e.g.,completed assignments, exams). Each project is
publication[8]; Book chapter (in publications and global educators review); Plenary Talk at the 11th networks. International Workshop on Design Theory; ASEE 2019 Workshop Biomimicry Educators Network contribution Evaluate the learning impact of the evidence-based instructional resources. Objecti ve 2 a. Assess student engagement in learning. Reflection analysis for JMU and
knowledge was a moredistal motivator operating through self-efficacy and identity (Figure 1). The current study usesnewly gathered student data to pursue two objectives. The first objective is to use this newsample data to assess the cross-sample reliability and validity of the Engineering Values Scale(EVS), Engineering Self-Efficacy Scale, and Engineering IDentity Scale (EIDS). The secondobjective is to apply the same information-based approaches to modeling and inference to furtherassess the plausibility of a range of causal models possibly confirming the model identified inStage 1 (Fig. 1), or refining it to reflect new information gained. Thus, the first objective is tofurther confirm the validity and reliability of the scales, and the second
the translation and the number of constraints, informationgained from this exploration is conditional, with continued dialogue and sense-making withcommunity and institutional partners regarding amendments over time.The model, now referred to as the Community-Engaged Educational Ecosystem Model (C-EEEM, pronounced ‘seam’), has been refined from the original design into core elements andcritical factors using data collected through survey, interview, reflection, and observation fromstudents, community partners, or program managers. In its final year of an initial NSF ImprovingUndergraduate STEM Education grant, researchers are bringing the C-EEEM into another city inthe region as a prelude to scaled replication. Although researchers are
received much attention in recent yearsdue to its lack of diversity and the toxic culture in these companies. The United States populationis 13% Black, but this representation is not reflected in the technology workforce. In fact, fewerthan 5% of tech company employees identify as Black. These factors lead many Blackemployees to leave, costing companies billions of dollars to fill their positions–not to mentiontheir perspectives and expertise. The lack of diversity can also affect worker wellbeing,productivity, and innovation. To interrogate this issue, our study examines the experiences ofBlack engineers through their own narratives. We aim to interview 40 engineers within thetechnology industry to understand their working conditions. The
theprogram, and had provided parental consent and student assent to participate in research. Of thissample, 53.3% were female; 60.6% were non-white; and 30.2% were first-generation students.Further, 77.1% of students reported that neither parent was an engineer. As such, this sampleaccurately reflects the target population our program aims to serve.Results Descriptive statistics revealed that the sample reported awareness, interest, enjoyment,opinion formation, and understanding of engineering that centers on the median of the scale(range = 8-27, M = 15.55, SD = 4.47). This finding suggests that high school students in thecurrent sample have average to low understanding of engineering as a potential career field.Descriptive statistics also
bemisunderstood and ignored. It is crucial for engineers to be able to communicate their ideas toprofessionals outside of the technical realm such as humanitarians, politicians, and financialadvisers. The humanitarian education of engineering students is useless without the ability tocommunicate their globally conscious ideas and environmental concerns. To combat this, oral andwritten communication skills are incorporated into the curriculum using technical reports, oral-presentations, and reflective essays. After each experiment, it is suggested that a written report iscompleted as well as periodic reflective essays that ensure students are making a connectionbetween the technical experiments and their humanitarian aspects.3.4 Curriculum
and the ways in which this identity is influenced by students’ academic relationships, events, and expe- riences. Dr. McCall holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Engineering from the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology.Dr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa D. McNair is a Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she also serves as Director of the Center for Research in SEAD Education at the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT). Her research interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures
points, first prior to the start of fall semester before taking any engineeringcourses (Time 1). They were surveyed again at the close of fall semester, their first semester inthe engineering program (Time 2). Students were provided time during summer orientation aswell as class time to complete each survey. In total, 2315 participants completed the engineeringidentity measure at Time 1 (n = 1,900) and Time 2 (n = 1083). To assess students’ persistence inengineering, retention information was obtained at the beginning of their second year, and thisinformation reflected their major status at the end of the previous academic year (Time 3).MeasuresA five-item measure of engineering identity utilized in this study was developed and validated asa
. Anagnos, A. Lyman-Hold, C. Marin-Artieda, and E. Momsen, “Impact of engineering ambassador programs on student development.” Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research 15 (3), 14-20. 2014.3. C.R. Smaill, “The implementation and evaluation of a university-based outreach laboratory program in electrical engineering.” IEEE Transactions on Education 53 (1), 12-17, 2010.4. L. Nadelson and J. Callaghan, “A comparison of two engineering outreach programs for adolescents,” Journal of STEM Education 12 (1), 43-54, 2011.5. J.R. Amos and M-C. Brunet, Pre-post assessment in a speaking communications course and the importance of reflection in student development of speaking skills, ASEE Conference and Exposition, June 25-28
need be remedied. Ultimately, these findings illuminate and help prioritizethe human, financial, and physical resources dedicated towards supporting all transfer students inengineering.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation EngineeringEducation and Centers under Grant Number DUE-1644138. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
for thisstage will come from snowball sampling methods, because non-completers are an invisible andsensitive population. Either quantitative or qualitative differences (or similarities) between the twogroups (current students vs non-completers) will be fascinating with respect to the graduateengineering socialization process in which writing is an invisible competency.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant1733594. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] Council of Graduate
topics, which would be reflected in first-semester mathperformance. The goal was to bring RESP students’ ability to transfer math knowledge to thelevel of other incoming students, who enter with higher levels of math exposure.After RESP participants complete the bridge program, those who choose to continue in STEMmust take first and second-semester calculus during the regular school year for course credit inorder to meet the math requirements of all STEM majors at Rice. Alternatively, students with theappropriate AP credits are not required to take first-semester calculus, though the programencourages participants to take the class regardless.The Current StudyThe current study was designed to explore whether RESP successfully increased
Advisory Board, we identified aset of topics for mentor training related to facilitating engineering activities. We organized thetopics into three modules: Engineering Design; Engaging Students in Engineering; and FosteringPositive Collaborations in Teams. For each of these three modules, we created pre-workassignments that consisted of a combination of pre-reading (text we created to summarizerelevant research literature), short videos, and on-line quizzes. The pre-work assignments weresent to the mentors in May 2018. We also created Tip Sheets to reflect (1) the topics emphasizedin the pre-work assignments and (2) topics specific to each specific curriculum module.Next StepsAt this time, we are analyzing data collected during the Summer 2018
, 2. Collaboration, communication and teamwork, 3. Planning and “future self”.Further in-depth analysis is continuing, including analysis of the observational notes. An important outcome of the preliminary data analysis is some changes in the campactivities. This includes shorter presentations, emphasizing the engineering design process, anda follow-up hands-on activity closely connected to the presentation ending with a “reflection”session (theme 1). The “reflection” session after each activity would be where campers coulddiscuss why a design or approach worked or failed, like in a real engineering environment. Wefeel that this would contribute towards creating an engineering identity in the participants andthat this will lead us to rich
for successfulcompletion of the Engineering pre-major. To enter the Engineering major, students must receivea C or better in core courses and achieve certain GPAs to allow entrance into enrollment-controlled majors. The intention is that this academic support and cohort building will increasethe retention of second-year Engineering students, particularly those at Penn State regionalcampuses who expect to transfer to the Penn State University Park (flagship) campus (2+2students). Jump Start participants spend the month of May at the Penn State University Parkcampus before the sophomore year at their regional campus. Many undergraduate students enterthe second year with an academic performance that reflects the “sophomore slump
whichthey were given the opportunity to come to Purdue University to engage in hands-on projectswith CISTAR researchers and to create content for their classrooms. They implemented theselessons in their classrooms when they returned to school in the fall, revised their lessons andsubmitted reflections on the implementation back to the program leaders. While on campus, theteachers attended professional development sessions including workshops about engineeringdesign, presentations about engineering majors and careers, and discussions about genderdynamics and STEM. Some had the opportunity to help Graduate Fellows with experiments atArgonne National Labs and all the teachers visited an industry partner to learn more aboutengineering careers.Seven
with graphical communication skills [2, 3].The main problem with this sketching deficiency for engineering students is the impact on thelearned design process. This problem can manifest in several ways. For one, a correlationbetween freehand sketching and regulated thinking reflects students’ understanding of anunderlying conceptual structure [4]. This link is especially important for engineers, as complexsystems often must be sketched in order to offload working memory and sketching is a standardcommunication tool. With sketch interface systems, less emphasis is placed on the tool, andmore emphasis is placed on the fundamentals of learning. Tools change over time, but thefundamentals do not. Our goal is to produce engineers who understand
patents and has over twenty-five years of experience in industry and academia. Research Interests Sylvia Wilson Thomas, Ph.D. leads the Advanced Membrane/Materials Bio and Integration Research (AMBIR) laboratory at USF. Dr. Thomas’ research and teaching endeavors are focused on advanced mem- branes/materials for alternative energy sources, sustainable environments, electronics, and bio-applications from the micro to the nano scale. Her research investigates the fabrication of inorganic and organic thin films and nanofibers for device integration. Thomas’ research group specializes in characterizing, mod- eling, and integrating membranes that demonstrate high levels of biocompatibility, thermal reflectivity
. Instead textual recognition or encouragement feedback according to thevariable-interval schedule were sent to these students. This ensures that even students not earningboosters still periodically see reinforcing messages about working productively to improve theirskills (but not too frequently). This confirms the design achieves our first design principle,ensuring the feedback was visible to students.Figure 1 reflects the proportion of students who won different numbers of boosters across all oftheir submissions on a single assignment. As mentioned, 38% of students earned no boosters,with 41% of students win a single tier1 booster( first major) across all of their submissions, and24% earning tier 2 boosters(second major). The stacked bars in
1734834. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. We also wish to thank Mr. William Michael Anderson and Ms. ClaudiaDesimone for help with data collection.References[1] S. Byun, J. L. Meece, M. J. Irvin, and B. C. Hutchins, “The role of social capital in educational aspirations of rural youth,” Rural Sociology, vol. 77, no. 3, pp. 355–379, 2012.[2] C. Carrico, H. M. Matusovich, and M. C. Paretti, "A qualitative analysis of career choice pathways of college-oriented rural central Appalachian high school students," Journal of Career Development, 2017.[3] Carrico, C.A., “Voices in the
introductory and advanced technical writing courses.Data-driven learningAs the educational marketplace expands, institutions of higher learning are experimenting withhow active learning increases student success. Freeman et al.’s meta-analysis of STEM educationstudies found that active learning significantly increased course grades over didactic methodsand was particularly effective in classes of 50 or less students. In contrast, students were 1.5times more likely to fail a course that lacked active learning strategies [1].The spectrum of active learning ranges from simple activities, such as writing minute papers orpausing for reflection, to more complex activities, such as hands-on technology and inquirylearning. Active learning is being promoted as
understanding the long-term impacts of the work being done in this area. Amongthe tools under consideration for development are the housing of certain evaluation instrumentsdirectly on the site with data to be collected from the instruments available for analysis as well asa recollective survey for past participants in activities to reflect on the impacts those activitieshad on their current education and career choices.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation underGrant Nos. 165005, 1625335, 1757402, and 1745199.References [Need to blind][1] Code.org. Available online: https://code.org/ (Accessed 4 February 2019).[2] Girls Who Code. Available online: https://girlswhocode.com/ (Accessed 4
an institution will not be representative, but can be considered a sort of upper bound on the needed mathematics at a more typical institution. • Interviews with faculty may not be completely reliable, they may overstate the mathematics they need. However, this limitation is mitigated by the analysis of course artifacts. • Opinions of faculty are only opinions, they may not reflect the true needs of their students. • The analysis of course artifacts only examined two engineering courses, and is far from comprehensive. • The response rate in the student opinion survey was poor (about10%). This decreases confidence in those results. • Engineering mathematics exists in a complicated
appreciate the valueof different aspects), teamwork and consensus-building, such as that employed in the rubricstudy, could be a valuable strategy for sustainable design. Our poster will explore additionalconnections across our studies which provide insights into how engineering students maydevelop cognitive flexibility and how we can better measure it.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1811170 Developing and Assessing Engineering Students' Cognitive Flexibility in the Domainof Sustainable Design. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience
responses is being analyzed to determine the most impactfulprogram aspects and to assess the participant’s feelings of belonging and inclusion.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1644119. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.6.0 References[1] O. Brown, M. Morris, R. Hensel, and J. Dygert, “An Integrated Supplemental Program to Enhance theFirst-year Engineering Experience,” ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, June2018.