"dcemitqwpf" to complete the design. 2. Design a sports facility including the evaluation of considerations such as economics, ethics, societal, environmental impacts, and constructability. 3. Write a project report that is of a quality commonly found to be acceptable in the engineering profession. 4. Orally present the results of an engineering design project to a wide audience of students, faculty, staff, including coaches and student athletes, using a presentation package such as PowerPoint that is of a quality commonly found to be acceptable in the engineering profession.B. Project SelectionThe process of selecting feasible projects is especially crucial to the success of thecourse. They must present workable
viewsocial responsibilities related to the engineering profession and perceive negative feelings fromtheir peers related to the ethics of military service? (3) How do engineering students with ahistory of military service view social responsibilities related to the engineering profession andperceive negative feelings from others related to the ethics of military service? The first RQ wasexamined using the results from two large surveys of engineering students attending 17institutions with about 3300 respondents, including 222 students attending one of the U.S.military academies. The professional connectedness element of social responsibility wasmeasured using 19 Likert-type items with a 7-point response scale. It was found that the
(TableC3 in the Appendix). Survey results indicate a majority of teachers (64%) continue to use thecurriculum units they designed as part of their RET program. Almost all respondents felt thatthe curriculum units were useful teaching resources (91.7%). One hundred percent of teacherswho enacted these units found them to: attain their learning objectives; be effectivelypresented through engaging, real life contexts; presented at an appropriate age level; includeadequate resources to support student learning; and be well aligned to the NGSS. Teacherresponded that they have made changes to the curricula after piloting to ensure the best fit intheir classrooms. Survey results confirm that teachers are disseminating the curriculum unitsto their peers
reflections. The cycle was augmented by Greenaway’s Active Reviewing Cycle,a model which provides a different way to examine experiential learning [19]. The keywordsfrom this cycle are shown within parentheses in Figure 1. FIGURE 1. KOLB EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING CYCLE WITH GREENWAY’S KEYWORDSThe concrete experience stage is used to engage students in performing some sort of activitywhere they apply their ideas and skills. Experiences from activities generate facts – the events,moments, and details associated with the activity. Next, the reflective observation stageencourages students to reflect on their experiences through mechanisms such as self-evaluation,peer discussion, and instructor feedback. Reflections generate feelings, an
(median 18-19%) and total choice (65-81%), and lower technical requirements (median47-54%), as compared to engineering degrees. The results demonstrate that environmentalengineering students have comparatively less choice and curricular balance that peers in naturalscience and math. However, there are accredited and highly ranked environmental engineeringprograms that allow both choice and greater curricular balance. These programs serve asexamples to others who may want to design programs that allow students to exercise their innateneed for autonomy and also balance their educational experience.IntroductionSelf-determination theory indicates that human beings have an innate psychological need forautonomy, satisfied through choice.1,2 Choice is
of this critical year in undergraduate engineeringeducation is warranted, and advocate for a new perspective in analyzing the social and culturalenvironments of gateway engineering mathematics courses of the sophomore year - specificallyCalculus 3 for Engineers and Differential Equations & Linear Algebra. Our study seeks toidentify how students connect to various resources, peers, and content and to what effect as theynavigate the curriculum of these high-stakes prerequisites for subsequent major-specificcoursework. We study ethnographically the experiences of undergraduate students, graduatestudent teaching assistants, and faculty instructional staff as they traverse these courses, in orderto map out the social and cultural terrain upon
how the student narratives spoke to these two questions: 1)How is SUSTAIN different than the traditional course experience? and 2) How did SUSTAINaffect you?In their interviews, students reported that SUSTAIN SLO was different than traditionalexperiences as it included 1) open assignments and structure, 2) a new look at education andlearning, 3) different relationship with faculty and peers, 4) a recognition of the importance ofspace to be yourself, and 5) significant collaboration and team building. As for the impact ofthese differences, students reported 1) increased capacity for personal reflection, 2) a new senseof ownership in education, 3) a discovery of internal motivation and the joy of learning, and 4)deepened friendships that led to
experiential learning [19]. The keywordsfrom this cycle are shown within parentheses in Figure 1. FIGURE 1. KOLB EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING CYCLE WITH GREENWAY’S KEYWORDSThe concrete experience stage is used to engage students in performing some sort of activitywhere they apply their ideas and skills. Experiences from activities generate facts – the events,moments, and details associated with the activity. Next, the reflective observation stageencourages students to reflect on their experiences through mechanisms such as self-evaluation,peer discussion, and instructor feedback. Reflections generate feelings, an assessment of theexperience from various modes of input. During the abstract conceptualization stage, studentsintegrate their
alpha (α)EFFECTS OF STEM CLIMATE ON MENTAL HEALTH 4 Lack of interpersonal Participant describes feeling 0.796 0.006 support in academic unsupported by their professors, setting mentors/advisors, peers/friends, colleagues, or general program climate within the academic setting Difficult interpersonal Participant describes difficult 0.885 0.003 interactions with peers, interpersonal interactions with staff, post-doc, etc. program staff
&I intheir everyday teaching.In this research paper, we present the journeys of 12 college level educators who have beenidentified by peers in the engineering education community as individuals practicing inclusiveteaching. These stories are intended to complement a) research that identifies issues of Diversityand Inclusion in engineering and b) research that documents efforts to address these issues.Although there are many studies that seek to understand the issues and explore potentialsolutions to different D&I concerns, these open-ended interviews highlight stories from the threesub-themes. These sub-themes show that doing work to support D&I requires communitysupport, requires learning from experiences, either one’s own or from
. Copies of the three project reports are availablefrom the authors1,2,3.B. Learning ObjectivesUpon completion of this course the student should be able to: 1. Work effectively as a member of an interdisciplinary project design team, bringing unique skills perspectives and background not shared by all team members, and using information provided outside the student’s own background to complete the design. 2. Carry out a sports facility design including the evaluation of considerations such as economics, ethics, societal, environmental impacts, and constructability. 3. Write a project report that is of a quality commonly found to be acceptable in the engineering profession. 4. Orally present the results of an
of high school take fewer science andmathematics courses, also scoring low on science achievement tests.9,10 In a recent study, Bakerand Leary interviewed forty girls in grades 2,5,8 and 11 using semi-structured protocol. The Page 12.1613.3interview focused on feelings about science, science careers, peer and parental support, and howscience is taught. All of the girls asserted that women can and should do science. In this report,Baker and Leary11 stated that teacher-student interactions are biased in favor of boys as early asin elementary schools. In the face of failure, boys are encouraged to try again, and girls areallowed to give up.12
Academic Pathway Study17. CONDUCTING A YEAR-LONG RESEARCH STUDY: During the academic year Scholars are mentored (by both peers and experts) as they finalize and implement a research study. A variety of methods are used to sustain community and provide resources for moving studies forward (e.g., just-in-time presentation of content, work-in-progress meetings, invited experts across the community). A web-based “wiki” tool, Idealog, is used to build and support a community of practice culture among the Scholars, both during the Summer Summit and when they return to their home campus18,19. The Idealog is like an informal sketchbook in which Scholars have a shared space to capture information and inspiration in ways that
Latino adolescents use engineering design processes to solve community-based projects, and how their household bodies of knowledge and social practices with their peers may connect to these design processes. Alex is particularly interested in the use of comprehension strategy instruction in linguistically and culturally diverse classrooms, physical and digital manipulatives and their application in engineering courses, and education and outreach for minorities in STEM.Dr. Amy Alexandra Wilson, Utah State University - College of Education Amy Alexandra Wilson is an assistant professor in the School of Teacher Education and Leadership at Utah State University. She studies disciplinary literacy instruction for adolescents in
22.879.2The impetus for this study is to compare this course against its peers and attempt to identify ifthere is a quantitative change in the academic performance of alumni of the course. Anothermotivation has been to quantify anecdotal evidence of changes in the spectrum of the studentpopulation taking the course and the means for this change: the number of students taking thecourse that express an interest in Aerospace Engineering has not been keeping pace with thegrowth in the course. In particular, in diagnosing team dynamics, we found that students withsome type of passion for the activity were mostly like to find the time to be available andparticipate. We have used course surveys and interviews7, but in an attempt to obtain quantitativeproof
majorrequirements. Finally, we felt it important to our retention goals to devote some time to preparingregional students for academic life on main campus through introduction to the use of the libraryand online library resources, writing center, and popular university clubs that appeal to engineers(e.g. Engineers without Borders).Thus, we decided to improvise on the current course, retaining the majority of content andtextbook and striving to bring in multi-disciplinary activities (paper based or hands-on) into thedistance setting. While we decided to forgo the cooperative learning piece; we agreed instead toplay to our perceived strong suit: a multi-disciplinary team of instructors willing tocollaboratively teach the course in order to get the Pre
, yielding findings that suggest thatwomen and non-white students who received the letter-grade C in an introductory STEM courseare less likely to complete a STEM degree than white male counterparts. Despite Black andHispanic students declaring STEM majors at the same rate as their white peers, they are pushedout of STEM at disproportionate rates regardless of academic preparation, intellectual ability, ortheir affinity for STEM [8], [17],[18]. Additionally, they are often depicted as being without ormore so, at a deficit to be academically successful in STEM.Meritocratic ideologies or the belief that individuals are successful because of their own merit asopposed to historical, social and institutional barriers in place underscore STEM culture for
], but less is known regarding howengineering students develop these recognition beliefs. Existing identity work has illustrated that students perceive recognition differentlydepending on who the recognition is coming from [10], [13], [14]. The difference betweensources of recognition is most often explored in terms of the prevalence of recognition fromdifferent groups including peers, family, and faculty. Engineering faculty have been identified ashigh impact sources of recognition, but this has been mostly explored with respect to thefrequency of interaction with engineering students in an educational context [13], [15], [16].While recognition from engineering faculty has been considered supportive of students’ overallrecognition beliefs
-engineering extracurricular activities and internship experiences, her m/c peer viewed suchactivities as encroaching on her limited time. We argue that a student‟s level of non-academicinvolvement is related to the importance she ascribes to professional and interpersonal skills inengineering. Implications for engineering educators and suggestions for further research arediscussed.IntroductionFindings from the recent Academic Pathways Study (APS) sponsored by the Center forAdvancement of Engineering Education (CAEE) have shown that intrinsic psychologicalmotivation to study engineering and confidence in professional and interpersonal skills are keypredictors of engineering seniors‟ future plans1. Sheppard et al. (2010) have also shown that,when taken
tosucceed in engineering. Entering engineering GoldShirt students participate in a two-weeksummer bridge program to orient them to the challenges of college, building community amongtheir peers, and developing leadership skills through a wide range of activities. During the initialyear, students learn in small, cohort-based classes in mathematics, introductory physics,chemistry, writing and critical thinking. These students are placed into appropriate mathematicsclasses based on an in-depth review of placement exam results and high school transcripts, withthe intent to ensure they are prepared to enter or have begun the engineering calculus sequence atthe close of their first year. Students who achieve predefined metrics in the first GoldShirt
140 paired with PHYS 211, andPHYS 212 paired with EE210. This approach is designed to foster a sense of community amongstudents and provide them with a more meaningful education, where abstract mathematicalconcepts gain practical significance in physics, and challenging physics concepts are elucidatedthrough applications in engineering. Moreover, students enrolled in this program receive supportthrough peer tutors, dedicated academic advisers and faculty mentors, and tailored mentorshipfrom alumni engineers possessing industry experience. These additional resources aim to furtherbolster the academic and career success of the students involved.The program aims to offer valuable insights to faculty and institutions currently engaged in
language patterns, nuances,and complexities. The training corpus includes various sources, such as books, articles, reviews,online conversations, and human-generated data, allowing the model to engage in non-trivialdialogues and provide accurate information on diverse topics [2].Within the field of computer sciences, we have seen that many students have integrated rapidlyinto Chat GPT to assist in writing programming code. This has now forced the academiccommunity to assess how such AI systems will impact students and, by extension, how aseducator’s aspects of their critical thinking skills are being impacted by the availability of such apowerful tool. Students can engage with the AI to seek information, solve problems, and engagein idea creation
in 2005 from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering. His main research focus is on advanced multi-scale and smart manufacturing processes and technologies for various applications. His sound-based smart machine monitoring technology led to a start-up company on smart sensing. He has authored over 150 peer-reviewed journal publications. He is an ASME fellow and Area Editor of Journal of Manufacturing Processes. He is also the recipient of the 2011 SME Outstanding Young Manufacturing Engineer Award, 2012 Canadian Society of Mechanical Engineers I.W. Smith Award for Outstanding Achievements, and 2015 Korean Society of Manufacturing Technology Engineers
marginalized graduate stu- dents in agricultural sciences by cultivating equitable mentoring relationships among students, staff, and faculty. There she coordinated M@P’s Summer Scholars Program, Peer Mentoring Program, and Invited Lecture Series. Torrie’s research interests include critical qualitative research, Black women in graduate education, equity and inclusion in agriculture + STEM, and mentoring and advising in graduate education.Dr. Yvette E. Pearson, P.E., University of Texas, Dallas Dr. Yvette E. Pearson is Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at The University of Texas at Dallas. Her university-based and consulting efforts have led to over $40M in funding to support the success of students
ZPD was proposed by Lev Vygotsky as a sociocultural theory that describes learning anddevelopment [10]. The ZPD conceives learning as the space between what a learner can dowithout assistance and what the learner can do with competent assistance. A common way totranslate implications from the ZPD to the design of learning interventions is by providingstudents with scaffolding. Scaffolding refers to all types of support and guidance offered in theclassroom either by the instructor or peers or supported by technology [11].In the context of higher education, scaffolding refers to teaching techniques or tools that supportstudents' learning. Students are provided with learning supports that help them accomplish tasksthat they normally would not be
interviewee's consent. The interview was fully structured, and the interviewersfollowed the interview protocol to ensure that all the points were covered. iv. Analysis ● Transcription: The eight completed interviews were then transcribed using the online platform “otter” [ 21]. Then the transcripts were revised by the research team to ensure transcription accuracy. ● Coding: We adopted the thematic analysis coding approach with the following six-step process [22]: Familiarization We started by reading the interviews and familiarizing ourselves with their details. In addition to memoing and writing early insights. Coding We started with one
research to maximize research impact. Each workshop includes videocontent, a workbook, and a moderator guide, with workshops designed to be deployed either in‐person or virtually facilitated by a workshop moderator.In designing our interventions, we considered alignment with guidelines provided by the Councilon Undergraduate Research (CUR), which include curating engaging and high‐impactopportunities, creating a community of student scholars, peer mentoring, opportunities for earlyand sustained involvement, and program assessment [1].To assess the impact of our workshop-based interventions on student research productivity andattitudes toward research, we developed a retrospective, post-experience survey and a one-yearfollow-up survey for students
significantly modified or new learning outcomes for Fall 2022): 1) Students will develop critical thinking, writing, technology, and research skills. 2) Students will demonstrate competency in accessing WMU resources and services and will make meaningful connections with faculty, staff, student leaders, and peers to facilitate success. 3) Students will understand the requirements to earn their bachelor’s degree in CEAS. 4) Students will be aware of neuroscience-based learning tools and will understand responsible personal, academic, and social behaviors needed to be a successful student. 5) Students will create a personalized wellness plan highlighting the importance of emotional, environmental, financial, intellectual
jointly, literally sitting together in large lecture halls,whereas at other institutions, engineering students in one discipline, say civil engineering, areentirely siloed from their peers in mechanical, electrical, computer, industrial engineering-these programs and their enrolled students are entirely separate from each other and outside ofelectives, students may never share courses, instructors, or even buildings. This latter factormakes survey distribution considerably easier at some institutions than others and influencesthe student responses we receive. These examples, and others, made clear to us how limitedthe results of survey data, and even qualitative interview data, from our study would be if1 The ESIT was developed to assess the
rules are listed below: 1. No Squelching – With just one single statement your own creativity or that of another can be destroyed. 2. Take Risks – Give yourself permission to try something new. 3. Write Every Idea Down – Do not self-edit. 4. No Say “no” or “But” – Reframe that with “yes and.” 5. No Analysis – Do not worry about the implementation of ideas. 6. Everyone is an Expert – Everyone gets to speak their mind. 7. Have Fun – Get loud, get animated, move around.The workshop process document helped students understand how negative brainstorming will beaccomplished and how to use the process worksheet. The main premise of negative ideageneration is that it is “both easier and more