professional lives. How do students acquire the skillsneeded to tackle these problems? The authors hypothesize that placing engineering challenges andsolutions in a classroom context while emphasizing social engagement and impact facilitates thedevelopment of engineering students as moral agents who understand the consequences of theirdecisions. Thus, a collaboration of investigators from the grantee universities are investigatinghow game-based educational interventions with strongly situated components influence early-curriculum engineering students' ethical awareness and decision making.This paper offers an overview of the progress to date of this three year, NSF ImprovingUndergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) grant that aims to (1) characterize the
. Quantitative and Qualitative Risk InflationSince the 1970s the literature on risk and its challenges has ballooned. Literature (and risk work)is commonly parsed into categories dealing with the practices and problematics of (1) riskidentification, (2) risk assessment, (3) risk management, and (4) risk communication. In all cases,however, risk issues are mostly assumed to be bounded: that is, to apply only to particularprojects, locations, processes, or people. Concerns about the Cold War risks of thermonuclearwarfare broke the boundaries to consider more comprehensive or catastrophic, global risks: inthe famous phrase of engineer physicist and military strategist Herman Kahn [1], it forced“thinking about the unthinkable.” Although nuclear related
Formation of Engineers (RFE)(EEC-1824856 and EEC-1824859). The primary goal of this project is to develop and testengineering education modules that link K-12 students’ classroom learning to field tripexperiences in an interactive science museum, increasing student learning and extending the fieldtrip experiences. Each Engineering Explorations module consists of one 50-minute field tripprogram completed at an interactive science center and curriculum for three 50-minute lessons tobe implemented by the classroom teacher before (2 lessons) and after (1 lesson) the field tripprogram. Our paper will present both development and research outcomes.Development accomplishments. To date, we have developed and tested 3 field trip programswith over 5,000 K-12
anintegration of process and knowledge to better serve the society are an essential part of theprofessional education of engineers [1]. Engineers, by definition, engage in problem solving on aregular basis, which has been identified as one of the 21st century skills [2]. However, researchhas shown that the problem types engineering students and practitioners solve differ [3], [4].Engineering students are typically given well-structured (also known as well-defined) problems,which have pre-defined solutions. They are used to reinforce recent course material covered inclass, and are heavily in a written and well-documented form. Practitioners, however, tackle ill-structured (i.e. complex real-world) problems, which are more vague and ambiguous
GHAHARI3,4* 1 Center for Education Integrating Science, Mathematics, and Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, 30332; 2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, 47906; 3 Department of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, 47906; *4 Lyles School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, 47906ABSTRACTEngineering graduate programs in the United States are usually diverse. Students with differentnationalities, races, ethnicities, genders, and religions work and collaborate with each other inclasses, labs, and research projects. Graduate education often is called a transformative experience,in which students
participation in an engineering team.1 IntroductionGroup work in academic settings has several benefits for students when compared to traditionallessons: studies have shown increased academic achievement [1]–[4] and greater socialinteraction and critical thinking skills [1], [4] when students participate in group work. Groupwork has also been shown to be particularly beneficial for underrepresented groups in STEMbecause group work has been linked with reinforcing students’ sense of belonging, self-concept,and self-efficacy [5]. Belonging, self-concept and self-efficacy are in turn associated withpersistence in STEM [3].However, the benefits of group work are not always universal. Underrepresented studentssometimes experience diminished or even negative
and employment in professional fields, most of the public’sexperience with the ideas, ethos, and practices of a professional field may come from either directinteraction with professionals or through popular media depictions. The influence of popular mediadepictions likewise affects public understanding and perceptions of engineering and engineers [1],[2]. While there are many forms of popular media that may affect public understanding orperceptions, videogames stand out for several reasons. First, videogames affect or engage thosemembers of the general public who play them through multiple avenues. Two predominant modesof engagement games provide are gameplay, how a player interacts with a game, and narrative,the story or storytelling the
following questions: How have investigators defined engineeringjudgment? What cognitive processes do students engage to make engineering judgments? Howdo communication tasks shape students’ engineering judgments? Finally, how is engineeringjudgment shaped by engineer identity?1. IntroductionBeginning with the 2019-2020 academic year, ABET [1] added the ability to “use engineeringjudgment to draw conclusions” (p. 6) as an explicit outcome for graduates of engineeringprograms. Notably, while engineering judgment has been an implicit component of curricula formany years, little research has been done to date to define more concretely what the term meansor how students develop engineering judgement in undergraduate education. This gap in
. 1Literature reviewIn recent years, academic libraries have reported a major shift in focus towardsscholarly communications and research management services [1]. Craft and Harlow [2]observed increased requests from graduate students for scholarly communicationstraining in a variety of topics, with the top choices being “publishing tips” and“post-dissertation publishing” [3]. This demand for training reflects the need amongstudents for guidance in navigating the publication process. Many doctoral programs,especially in the sciences and engineering, require students to publish in order tograduate. As relative novices in the complicated, often opaque arena of academicpublishing, many of these students struggle with the task and would benefit fromguidance
historical roots in earlyuniversities [1]. The resurgence of this idea in modern times began during the late 1990sresulting in Living Learning Communities (LLCs), wherein students live on the same floor of aresidence hall and share common courses and/or social structures with the ultimate goal ofcreating a shared community that gives participants a sense of belonging at the university orwithin specific disciplines [1]. Inkelas and her colleagues [1] conducted a survey of LLCs in theUnited States and estimated that there are more than 600 LLCs on college campuses across thenation. According to these authors, LLCs are most successful when they have a stronginfrastructure foundation (e.g., goals/objectives, collaboration between academic affairs
indicatedthat the proposed observational instrument resulted in seven distinctive main domains. Thesedomains included (1) unit-specific content knowledge, (2) engineering design process (EDP), (3)productive failure and success, (4) interdisciplinary applications, (5) questioning, (6) teamwork,and finally (7) discussion, feedback, and reflection. This study has both theoretical and practicalimplications. Theoretically, the study will contribute to the engineering education literature byextending the concept of PCK (Shulman, 1986) to the engineering education field and itstheoretical viability in the elementary school setting. Practically, it is paramount thatadministrators, professional developers, curriculum specialists, and teachers come to
Yerrick, Fresno State University Randy Yerrick is Dean of the Kremen School for Education and Human Development at CSU Fresno. He has also served as Professor of Science Education at SUNY Buffalo where he Associate Dean and Sci- ence Education Professor for the Graduate School of Education. Dr. Yerrick maintains an active research agenda focusing on two central questions: 1) How do scientific norms of discourse get enacted in class- rooms and 2) To what extend can historical barriers to STEM learning be traversed for underrepresented students through expert teaching practices? For his efforts in examining science for the under-served, Dr. Yerrick has received numerous research and teaching awards including the Journal
maintaining the integrity ofengineering programs within higher education. Stakeholders of programs include students,faculty, and employers. Each stakeholder can provide their own perspective as to the assessmentof the various skills that engineering programs boast to produce in their graduates. In particular,students strive to develop skills needed to be successful upon graduation within industry. Theskills required to be assessed by ABET, one of the largest international accrediting organizations,are considered to be skills that can cross many disciplines and not necessarily isolated for oneparticular field. Bennet [1] refers to these skills as generic skills. Chan, Zhao, and Luk [2]indicates that these skills include academic and problem-solving
using yoga and/ormeditation to cope with mental health challenges during the pandemic. The research questionsaddressed in this paper are: 1) What are the demographic characteristics of students who used yogaand/or meditation to cope with mental health challenges of the 2020 novel coronavirus pandemic?and 2) Does the mental health of the students who used these strategies differ in any from themental health of students who did not use yoga and meditation coping strategies? Based on 669responses from students at 140 different universities, we found that there were 20 survey items forwhich the yoga/meditation group fared statistically significantly differently than the non-yoga/meditation group. These 20 items appeared in the screens for
them, even if they seem contradictory initially. A summary of the fourframes can be seen below in Table 1. Human Structural Political Symbolic Resource Metaphor Factory/Machine Extended Family Jungle/Arena Carnival/Temple Organizational Excellence Caring Justice Faith Ethic Rules, Formal Individuals with Different Culture & meaning roles, Goals, needs, feelings, interests found in: metaphor, Policies
study of EDI-relatedstudent experiences and perspectives from both the dominant and minority groups in MechanicalEngineering.Purpose/Hypothesis – This paper aims to help enhance institutional EDI efforts by identifyingthe role of adults and peers in the engineering students’ experiences of exclusion and inclusion.Three questions are posed: (1) What pre-university experiences create barriers to pursuingengineering? (2) What helped youth pursue and enter engineering programs? (3) In what ways dothe current engineering students experience inclusion or exclusion in their program?Design/Method – Thematic analysis and rhetorical analysis were applied to the studentinterview data collected in 2018, as part of a larger study on engineering design
education has been widely noted. Thishas been driven by the need to develop a wide range of skills such as innovativeness, creativity,and problem-solving in engineering students to succeed in today’s technology-driven economy.Increasingly, graduates are expected to adapt their complex problem-solving skills to align withthe modern-day multidisciplinary practice of engineering [1], know how to integrate theirscience and technical training to enhance industrial practice [2], and successfully navigate futurechallenges through continued innovation [1]. As noted by Torres, Velez-Arocho, and Pabon [3],“The contemporary engineer must be able to (a) effectively communicate orally as well as [in]writing, (b) be capable of working in multidisciplinary teams
for K-12Science Education [1] and Next Generation Science Standards [2] call for teachers to includemore engineering in their classrooms. Drawing on research in teacher education e.g. [3]–[7] ,The Teacher Engineering Education Program (TEEP) was designed to develop both teachers’engineering content knowledge as well as their pedagogical resources for teaching engineering.TEEP (teep.tufts.edu) is an intensive 18-month program (Figure 1) where participants take twoengineering content courses and two engineering pedagogy courses. Fall 1 Spring 1 Summer 1 Fall 2 Content Course 1 Pedagogy Course 1 Content Course 2 Pedagogy Course 2Figure 1: The TEEP online graduate certificate
ongoing COVID-19 pandemicoffers a complex context in which students can experience ambiguity with an engineering designchallenge as an iterative process of divergent-convergent thinking while focusing on the bigpicture. Students can learn with an emphasis on systems thinking, making decisions in acollaborative team environment; and managing uncertainty in social processes [1]. Theconversations around how schools could function during the pandemic offered a uniqueopportunity to engage students in problem solving about a situation that they are experiencingthemselves.In the US Southwest, three state universities came together during the early stages of the 2020pandemic lockdown to create a virtual design competition for high school students. The
; hence, the first two sections of the paperare combined from our previous papers [1] - [3]. The project description section contains asummary of the four areas of change that continue to guide our efforts, and updates the actionstaken in each of the four areas. The remaining sections of this paper discuss ongoing evaluation,research, and future work.BackgroundIdentity influences who people think they are, what they think they can do and be, and where andwith whom they think they belong [4] - [7]. People’s identity shapes the experiences theyembrace, and reciprocally, those experiences shape their identities [8] - [10]. People behaveconsistently with their identities [11], [12], choosing behaviors with meanings that match theirself-conceptions
with disabilities in engineering. I join the call for greaterattention to the cultural and structural barriers to full participation evidenced by this and otherresearch.IntroductionEngineering education and engineering work that does not include robust representation from thevery publics it purports to serve is both inherently exclusionary and intellectually and creativelyimpoverished [1-3]. For decades, social scientists and engineering education scholars havedocumented the under-representation of women and people of color in science, technology,engineering, and math-related fields, and, more recent work has extended that investigation toinclude sexual and gender minorities [e.g., 4-7, 20]. However, the experiences and voices ofpersons with
previousstudies have indicated this may not be the best for retention and does not allow for collaborationbetween students [1], [2]. A different approach in teaching engineering involves engagingstudents through active learning. This approach simply breaks up or replaces the mundaneprocess of notetaking with activities that stimulate student’s learning [3]. Activities typicallyinclude collaboration with a partner or team, instant-feedback polls and quizzes, and/orapplication of learning through design projects and assignments. The effectiveness of activelearning strategies compared to the traditional lecture approach, when implemented well, hasbeen empirically validated and documented in engineering education literature [3]-[5].Implementing active
institutions increase the adoption of essentialtransfer practices [1]. These include re-prioritization of transfer student recruitment and successat Cal Poly so that Cal Poly can better serve neighboring communities. One aspect of this is toencourage deep connections for student engagement across the campuses. The PrincipalInvestigator (PI) of the grant at Cuesta identified the potential to connect through establishing achapter of Engineers Without Borders (EWB) at the community college. The PI was confidentthis would attract non-traditional students to engineering by creating opportunities for positivesocial and equity work [2]. As we began to investigate this possibility, we found that even inEWB, there are structures in place that make engagement
encounter in completing their design project. Troubleshooting skill is an importantand integral part of good engineering practice. This skill represents the ability to identify and fixa problem within an engineered system by strategizing the approach within a time-constrainedsetting. To address this weakness, our group of five Engineering faculty members formed alearning community to devise an initiative to better prepare students for troubleshooting tasks. Itis expected that this should help them not only achieve greater success in their senior designproject, but also better prepare them for the workforce. While several recent studies helpilluminate what types of short-term (within 1 course) interventions may be successful inimproving students
self-efficacy for integrating engineering. The specific magnitude of the impact and its implicationsare discussed.Keywords: engineering instruction, K-12 education, engineering pedagogical knowledge,engineering education, preservice teachers 1. IntroductionStrong pre-college STEM education is considered fundamental to foster the necessary skillsstudents will require to face the multiple challenges of an increasingly technological society [1].Driven by the need to broaden participation and increase recruitment in STEM fields,policymakers have adopted many efforts to strengthen STEM inclusion in primary and secondarygrade levels. The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and the National ResearchCouncil’s guidelines for K-12 science
subroutines. Students’ perception on the usefulness of these exercises towards improvingtheir programing skills are then surveyed.IntroductionMany researchers and educators recognized the value of enhancing computer programmingabilities of engineering students [1-4]. Such skills expand the employment opportunities ofrecently graduated engineers who can take jobs with software companies, start more easily theirown software or Internet-based businesses, perform computational research as graduate students,etc. The authors of this paper personally know two former engineering graduate students whoperfected their computer programing skills towards their PhD research, and then took jobs assoftware developers.In most engineering programs throughout the US
IEEE and serves as an Associate Editor for International Journal of Electronics American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Enhancing Student Learning via Hardware in HomeworkI. Introduction:An important problem that has come up over the years in some engineering programs is the lossof laboratory experiences in favor of more theoretical emphasis in upper division courses. InElectrical Engineering (EE) curriculums, the majority of programs now include laboratory workonly in introductory courses such as circuits and logic design [1]-[3]. Advanced courses such asElectronics II, Communications, and others have lost their labs due to the curriculum changesand the
the large volume of failed clinical trials that had previously shownsuccess in animal models [1]. Further analysis of these failures pointed to a lack of strict inclusioncriteria, insufficient statistical power, and other study design flaws as key culprits. In addition tothese examples, there have been multiple major events of data falsification and other types ofmanipulations that threaten the public confidence in scientific research [2, 3]. As many engineersand scientist get their first research training at the undergraduate level through extracurricularparticipation in research labs [4, 5], it is important to start addressing these serious ethical concernswith students from the beginning of their training. Beyond the basics of research
, Opportunity, Education KnowledgeCommunity Involvement, and Desire to Right Wrongs. The individual themes identified hereare aligned with and supported by publications in engineering education and other disciplines.The central ideas of our findings are two-fold. First, an Opportunity is often the catalyst forthe boundary-crossing between the disparate disciplines of engineering and education.Second, having an intrinsic motivation (i.e., Desire to Right Wrongs) and the external supportof Community Involvement are crucial to help the researcher continue to thrive and explorewithin this dual-discipline in which boundary-crossing is endemic.IntroductionWork on ways to improve the education of future engineers is not new [1]. For example, in theUnited
undergraduate student majoring in Computer Science.Mrs. Melanie Anne Realyvasquez, Melanie Realyvasquez is an undergraduate student majoring in Civil Engineering American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 1 Entrepreneurial intent in commuter-school students AbstractThis paper reports the results of a mixed-methods study of the factors leading students at a largepublic Hispanic-serving university, with a student body comprising primarily commuters, to choosean entrepreneurially oriented engineering major and to choose to pursue a startup. The studyinterviewed 36