universityafter more than 20 years in industry or other nonacademic positions. These faculty benefited from a moretargeted set of discussions focused on learning with understanding. Important here was attention to whatstudents bring to the learning environment (prior knowledge), organization of facts and ideas around aconceptual framework to facilitate its use in various contexts (connections within and across courses), andhelping students reflect on what they do or do not understand (metacognitive strategies) [6].Faculty and student data were collected over the five years of the project. Three sources of faculty datainclude interviews (subset each year beginning Spring 2016), reports/presentations (subset each yearbeginning Fall 2016) and teaching
. Helen L. Chen, Stanford University Helen L. Chen is a research scientist in the Designing Education Lab in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She has been involved in several major engineering education initia- tives including the NSF-funded Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education, National Center for Engineering Pathways to Innovation (Epicenter), as well as the Consortium to Promote Reflection in Engineering Education. Helen holds an undergraduate degree in communication from UCLA and a PhD in communication with a minor in psychology from Stanford University. Her current research and scholarship focus on engineering and entrepreneurship education; the pedagogy of portfolios
materialsdevelopment activities that seek to support the success of all students. AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.(DUE-1625378). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF. References[1] E. Cech, B. Rubineau, S. Silbey, and C. Seron, “Professional role confidence and gendered persistence in engineering,” Am. Sociol. Rev., vol. 76, no. 5, pp. 641–666, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1177/0003122411420815.[2] K. A. Robinson, T. Perez, J. H. Carmel, and L. Linnenbrink-Garcia, “Science identity
opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation.References[1] M. K. Orr, M. W. Ohland, R. A. Long, C. E. Brawner, S. M. Lord, and R. A. Layton, “Engineering matriculation paths: Outcomes of Direct Matriculation, First-Year Engineering, and Post-General Education Models,” Proc. Front. Educ. Conf. FIE Proc. - Front. Educ. Conf. FIE, 2012.[2] K. Reid, D. Reeping, and E. Spingola, “A Taxonomy for Introduction to Engineering Courses *,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 2–19, 2018.[3] H. Matusovich, R. Streveler, and R. Miller, “Why Do Students Choose Engineering? A
. Researchers have used a rangeof approaches to categorize students’ questions, varying in complexity depending on the contextin which student questions were being solicited (e.g., [2], [3]). Marbach-Ad and Solokove [4]used a large sample of questions generated by biology students to develop a six-level, "semi-hierarchical” taxonomy based on question sophistication. Encouragingly, their work also showsthat students are able to pose more high-quality questions after being instructed in the taxonomyfor classifying the quality of their questions [5]. This approach has also been adapted forclassifying questions asked by physics students as part of a written reflection on their learning[6].Along with explanatory question taxonomies, question-asking can be
. Whilecorrelation coefficients between items were all positive, there were only four eigenvalues greaterthan 1.0 on both ECTD beta A and B versions. This indicates there were four independent factorsmeasured by the instruments. Most items were loaded onto one factor and only one or two itemsloaded onto each of the other three factors. As the factor analysis results from the ECTD beta Aand B versions were not the desired model that can reflect the five computational thinkingfactors, there was a need for another round of revisions.Instead of designing two compatible versions A and B, the 30 items from the beta versions of theECTD were revisited for reanalyzes of content and face validity. The research team selected fourbest items to be indicators of each of
for funding this work underGrant # 1834465. Any opinions, findings, or conclusions found in this work are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.References[1] O. Ashour and C. Tucker, “Leveraging Virtual Reality to Connect Learning and Integrate Course Knowledge in the Industrial Engineering Curriculum,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1834465.[2] J. E. Rudin, “Using virtual reality in education,” in STC, Education, Training and Research, 1995, pp. 55–58.[3] Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs 2018-2019,” 2017.[4] J. E. Froyd and M. W. Ohland, “Integrated Engineering
, recruit the new cohort of ACCESS scholarshiprecipients, and continue to connect students with peers, mentors, and industry and governmentprofessionals, providing them opportunities to network, learn from, and interact with potentialemployers for internships or full-time positions.The material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1930282. 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.8.0 References[1] “Heatmap,” cyberseek.org. [online]. Available: https://www.cyberseek.org/heatmap.html. [Accessed March 3, 2021].[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of
participants had differentperceptions about the centrality of their Black identity and mixed feelings about enacting thisidentity while attending school. That is, although all participants were Black students, theyplaced race in different places of the identity circle (or, not at all), reflecting the relative salienceof the identity for each of them.From the FIE 2020 Paper: Brawner, Catherine, Marisa Orr, Rebecca Brent, and Catherine Mobley. 2020. “Experiences of Black Persisters and Switchers in Computer, Electrical and Mechanical Engineering in the USA.” Proceedings of the IEEE/FIE Conference, October.In this paper, we begin to provide information about institutional policies that may influencestudent persistence and attrition
motivational beliefs and learningstrategies. Qualitative data collected from individual interviews and focus groups is being codedand analyzed to provide a more complete understanding of what helps students persist tograduation in an engineering major. Recommendations for future work include investigationsinto the role student mindsets (growth vs. fixed) and student workload expectations play in theirretention.The material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1644119. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.6.0 References[1] O. Brown, M. Morris, R. Hensel, and J
pilot of this class prior to this grant combined a small,bioinspired robotics course with PSTs in the educational technology course, where the UESs andPSTs could work together on a larger project. Therefore, future collaborations will include eitherthe bioinspired robotics course or electromechanical systems course, both which have smallerclass sizes.Preliminary results [7,8] suggest that the instruments developed for collaborations 1(engineering design process) and 3 (computational thinking) may not be sensitive enough todetect changes in content knowledge. Therefore, additional research is being implemented toimprove those assessments. The reflection assignments provided valuable information on bothwhat students learned and how they viewed
and persistenceto graduation. Scholarship recipients also participate in focus groups and one-on-one interviewsand that data is being analyzed with the goal of gaining a holistic understanding of studentretention and finding trends in longitudinal change in students’ perceptions of the engineeringprofession as well as in their motivation and persistence.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNo. DUE-1644119. 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.References[1] J. Kruger, and D. Dunning, “Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in
trips.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1852161. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] Pariyothorn, M, Autenrieth, R.L, “Strategic use of summer undergraduate research experiences,” ASEE Annual Conf. & Expo, San Antonio, USA, 2012. doi: 10.18260/1-2--21934[2] West, M., Cross, W., Kellogg, S. Boysen, A., “A novel REU program to develop the skills of the engineer of 2020,” Proceedings – Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Rapid City, SD, USA, 2011. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2011.6143019[3] American Speech
game and 10for DZ-Man game) in all the cases. The significance levels are 0.0051 for 2014 DZ-Man data,0.0006 for 2015 DZ-Man data, and 0.0006 for 2015 Angry Curves data. This means the increasesof students’ understanding on the targeted concepts (reflected by the quiz scores) are statisticallysignificant. a) 2014 DZ-Man data b) 2015 DZ-Man data c) 2015 Angry Curves data Figure 7. Matched Pairs T-Tests for Different Experiments Pre/Post Scores4. Beyond the CampusAt this stage of the project, we allow users from all over the world to have access to the games.This means the users of the games will no longer be limited within campus. The players’ datawill still be collected for further research purpose. The paper
practice of engineering requires the application of science, mathematics, and engineeringMathematics Knowledge (SEM) knowledge and engineering education at the K-12 level should emphasize this interdisciplinary nature. Students should be independent and reflective thinkers capable of seeking out new knowledge andEngineering Thinking (EThink) learning from failure when problems arise. Conceptions of Engineers and K-12 students not only need to participate in an engineering process, but understand what an engineer Engineering (CEE) does.Engineering Tools, Techniques, Students studying engineering need to become familiar and proficient in the processes, techniques
, and data analysis of those focusgroups—and mixing results with the quantitative data—are ongoing. Thus far, early findingshave been disseminated at multiple conferences. 10,11,12,13,14AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1428502. 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.References1 Laanan, F. S., Starobin, S. S., & Eggleston, L. E. (2010). Adjustment of community college students at a four-year university: Role and relevance of transfer student capital for student retention. Journal of College Student Retention
, from merely understanding, to reflection, creation, and evaluation. Boardgames and role-playing games are formats that create community; students interact with oneanother over intellectual, enjoyable, and memorable shared experiences. When the co-authorsplay board games in their classrooms, they note 100% of students in class that day engage ingame play – anecdotally, this activity seems to engage more students than other types of activelearning strategies. And finally, board games and role-playing games are an ideal format becauseany faculty or student can easily modify them. This poster presents our project results to date andprovides recommendations and resources to adopt game design in civil engineering andconstruction courses
represents either adeep-rooted misconception or misunderstanding, or an unwillingness to use the coin distributionmethod as a reflection of one's uncertainty in knowing the answer. In either case, these studentresponses do not provide much more information than the traditional, deterministic approach foranswering multiple-choice questions. There is, however, a small population of students thatprovide some reasonable likelihood (>25 coins) that the correct answer could be correct, eventhough it was not the final selection. A threshold of 25 coins is used because that numberrepresents random selection of an answer. In other words, a student with no knowledge wouldtheoretically assign 25 coins to each one of four answer choices.Coin Distribution
3.60 1.00engineering design processHave students communicate solutions to a problem 2.60 3.60 1.00in oral formatHave students communicate solutions to a problem 1.80 2.80 1.00by formal presentationHave students reflect in a notebook or journal 1.80 3.00 1.20Have students develop a design portfolio 1.20 2.40 1.20Have students critique their own work 2.20 3.40 1.20Have students critique other students' work 1.80 3.00 1.20Have students rework solutions based on self or 1.40 3.40 2.00peer
formats for use with a variety of computer More Axes platforms. 9) Reflection and Symmetry Video how-to instructions. Additional videos 10) Cross-Sections of Solids provide step-by-step instruction for difficult concepts for several exercises, including the first isometric sketch, which can be daunting for students with weak spatial skills. Engagement tracking. Instructors can login and determine how much time students spend on each activity. This data will inform optimal design of the materials available to students. iPad sketching exercises. iPad touch-screen capability enables the development of sketching exercises that can be completed with
). Counseling and social support: Perspectives and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Philip, K., & Hendry, L. B. (2000). Making sense of mentoring or mentoring making sense? Reflections on the mentoring process by adult mentors with young people. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 10(3), 211-223.Pounds, A. W. (1987). Black students' needs on predominantly white campuses. New Directions for Student Services, 1987(38), 23-38.Sedlacek, W. E. (1983). Teaching minority students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 16, 39-50.Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences (Vol. 12). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Steele, C. M., &
encouraging. To expandour forensics modules, we plan to develop Internet forensics and cloud forensics in the near future.The main improvement suggestion we received from students was developing more advanced andchallenging game modules to inspire creativity. We will continue to disseminate our gameframework to communities. In the near future, we plan to develop a repository to collect variousmodules developed by the community and share them with the academic and professionalcommunity.7. AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work partly supported by the National Science Foundation underAward DUE-1400567. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
background (e.g., university, major, QPA), travel abroad/ international experiences(e.g., level of interest in international issues, foreign language proficiency), and characteristics ofthe international experiences (e.g., programmatic elements of experiences such as duration,amount of reflection, and comfort zone). The combined set of instruments (EGPI, GPI, andbackground survey were administered to two samples of seniors at each of the four partnerinstitutions – those who had at least one international experience and those with no internationalexperiences. In addition, a third sample of incoming freshmen served as both a comparison groupand an institutional baseline. This dataset was then used for the quantitative studyThe 25% of seniors with the
) engineering and en- trepreneurship education; 2) the pedagogy of ePortfolios and reflective practice in higher education; and 3) redesigning the traditional academic transcript.Dr. Angela Harris, Stanford University Angela is currently a Fellow with the Thinking Matters program at Stanford University. Angela received her PhD in Stanford’s Environmental Engineering and Science Program (Spring 2015). Angela completed her B.S. in Chemical Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology prior to coming to Stanford for her M.S. in Civil and Environmental Engineering. Angela conducts research related to water, sanitation, and child health in developing countries. Angela has extensive experience in developing survey
#P120A140064. Opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of thefunding agency.ReferencesAbel, J. & Deitz, R. (2014). Do the Benefits of College Still Outweigh the Costs? Current Issues in Economics and Finance, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 20(3), 2014.American Psychological Association, (2012). Ethnic and Racial Disparities in Education: Psychology’s Contributions to Understanding and Reducing Disparities, American Psychological Association, 2012.Auerbach, S. (2004). Engaging Latino parents in supporting college pathways: Lessons from a college access program. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3(2), 125–145.Baum, S
critical to outreach in the large surrounding school districts whoseminority populations averages 72.5%, and 64.8% of students are considered to be economicallydisadvantaged. Our scholarship program will strengthen its role in increasing the number of well-educated and skilled engineers from diverse and underserved backgrounds.AcknowledgmentThe project is sponsored by the National Science Foundation grant #1457880. Their support isgreatly appreciated.References 1. Packard, B.: Mentoring and Retention in College Science: Reflections on the Sophomore Year. Journal College Student Retention 6(3), 289-300 (2004) 2. Wilson, Z., Holmes, L., de Gravelles, K., Sylvain, M., Batiste, L., Johnson, M., McGuire, S., Pang, S., Warner, I
that may improve the students’ performanceand help them graduate on time. One possible future work is to identify the bottleneck coursesand investigate the paths that lead to failing or passing them.AcknowledgementsThis work was supported in part by NSF Grant# 1447489. We would like to thank ourinformants for participating in the field studies reported here. 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.References[1] Pandey, U. K. and Pal, S. (2011), “A Data Mining View on Class Room Teaching Language”, (IJCSI)International Journal of Computer Science Issue, Vol. 8, Issue 2, 277-282, ISSN:1694-0814[2
strategies for developing designs that emphasize how users interact with the final product. The course has been determined to achieve the outcomes of the Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice (DISJ) requirement for the University core curriculum. To our knowledge, this is the only required engineering class that is also approved for satisfying a campus-wide, core curriculum diversity requirement. The new outcomes include that by the end of the course, the students will: o Have critically reflected on, compared, contrasted, and articulated their own unearned advantage (privilege) and disadvantage in relation to their immersion experience with users. o Be able to use
-1217285 and is supported in part by funds given to the National ScienceFoundation by the Intel Foundation and the GE Foundation. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References1. ASEE (2012). “Going the distance: Best practices and strategies for retaining engineering, engineering technology and computing students”. American Society of Engineering Education.2. Barnett, E. A., Bork, R.H., Mayer, A.K., Pretlow, J., Wathington, H.D., and Weiss, M.J. (2012). “Bridging the gap: An impact study of eight developmental summer bridge programs in Texas”. New York; National Center for
or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] The White House. (2014). One Decade, One Million more STEM Graduates. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/12/18/one-decade-one-million-more-stem- graduates[2] L. L. Bucciarelli, "Designing Engineers," ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.[3] National Research Council, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. The National Academies Press, 2005.[4] National Academy of Engineering, "Educating Engineers: Preparing 21st Century Leaders in the Context of New Modes of Learning: Summary of a Forum," Washington