working with Strategy Execution and Duke Corporate Education where he provides training for fortune 500 companies throughout the world.Mrs. Marie S. Call, Brigham Young University Marie Call graduated from Brigham Young University in 2013 with a BS in Chemical Engineering. She worked as a Transdermal Development Process Engineer with Actavis Pharmaceuticals from 2012-2013. Since then she has enjoyed balancing her primary occupation–raising her two (almost three) children– with research writing and collaboration with the Weidman Center for Global Leadership at Brigham Young University, focusing on Engineering and Technology student perceptions toward study abroad experiences. She currently resides in Houston, TX.Dr
timeline. Lastly, participants started to receive job offers inearly March and continued until positions were filled.Job Search ResourcesThe most commonly used resource across all of our participants was their advisor, which rangedfrom PhD advisors to faculty mentors and undergraduate advisors depending on the individual.Advisors often encouraged the participants to enter the job market, provided access to importantnetworks, and reviewed documents. Other peers, currently on or just off the job market, werealso a highly used resource for participants as they drafted documents, prepared for job talks, andnegotiated their needs and wants. Two of the participants also participated in a faculty trainingprogram which gave them insight to the job search
difficult task than building a multirotor drone, but this approach willenable longer flight durations. This approach also satisfied our ABET design and build criteria.As of the writing of this paper, the flying wing (shown in Figure 2) is the concept that is furthestin development. To extend the range of the aircraft, students also have designed and built theirown batteries based on Li-ion technology. Initial estimates show that these batteries willapproximately double the range available from the conventional Li-poly batteries typically usedin radio control aircraft. Flight Operations: Flying drones posed a new level of difficulty for both the instructorsand the students. The days of flying whenever and wherever one wants have long passed
Engineering course forfirst semester freshman at George Washington University. Herein is described the planning andimplementation of the course, the student feedback, and the lessons learned.II. Curriculum DesignIn planning for the course, a review of what peer universities were attempting was conducted. Alist published by INCOSE in July 2013 of the Systems Engineering programs was used to deriveprograms for undergraduate students. Several universities were contacted from the INCOSE list,Table 1 represents the information obtained from these universities on methodologies. Inaddition to the responses below, 6 universities reported that they did not have an introduction toSystems Engineering course. The list is by no means comprehensive but gives a
feelcomfortable volunteering for tasks. These freshmen often serve as meeting leaders during theend of the project term with very positive response from their peers. Examples of projectstatements from the last two years are given in the appendix.During the project period, each team is required to hold five one-hour meetings with either anindustrial or faculty mentor who provides feedback on the team’s progress and teamworkdynamics. The mentor may impart some technical advice but their role is primarily as anobserver of effective interaction and judge of how well team members are participating duringthe meeting. The mentor’s job is to help the team function in a highly effective manner. At thebeginning of the project, the teams that are likely to have
outlined in thispaper that involve everyone in promoting diversity will help promote visibility of your minoritystudents. In addition, encourage these students to run for leadership positions and to apply forawards and scholarships. Offer to write letters of recommendation and give feedback onresumes, personal statements, etc.Seminars to help students learn to market themselves are extremely valuable. Consider invitingin a career counselor from the career center to talk to your minority student organizationseparately from their interactions with the student body. As mentioned before, backgrounds andcircumstances can be different for minority students. Within a large room, some students willnot want to speak up with questions, thinking that others
are compared against the whole datasetto ensure that each theme works as it should.Phase 5. Refining, Defining, and Naming Themes: In Phase 5, themes are tested to ensure thatthey center meaning-making [12]. Themes must be sufficiently rich and informative to fullycapture the concepts they represent. Writing an abstract or definition for each theme can assist intheir elimination or retention [12]. After testing, themes are named using short phrases that evoketheir “meaning and analytic direction” [12].4. Results and Discussion4.1 Scoping ReviewAfter searching the two databases, 733 articles were found on Scopus and 397 articles were foundon Web of Science, for a total of 1,130 articles. After duplicate removal, 1,078 articles remained.The
exploratory, to elicit interesting and important patterns and build the foundation for futureinterviews. Key questions included: ● Why did you choose to enroll in an interdisciplinary graduate program? ● What were your expectations for interdisciplinary studies? ● How do you perceive working with peers from different disciplines? ● Can you discuss any courses that combine multiple disciplines, and how do they do so? ● In what ways do you think learning from other disciplines will influence your future career? ● How do you collaborate with other teammates on projects? ● What have you learned from this program so far, and what challenges have you encountered?The dataset for the current study consists of interviews with seven
, online asynchronous, and hybrid in-person and online [11]. Through theseprofessional development opportunities, each stakeholder can gain expertise in internationalrelations, educational development, and educational technologies [11]. Students who participatein virtual programs are active learners who perform meaningful activities and reflect on them [11].Through the COIL virtual framework, students can collaborate with peers from various culturalbackgrounds, connecting them to intercultural competencies and global awareness.One of the primary valuable pedagogies in COIL programming is the incorporation of contactsessions with students abroad [12]. Depending on the course, the content of these meetings canvary significantly. As Doscher explained
coaching for and by language teachers (e.g., peer coaching, critical friending in educational contexts). Ari has planned and facilitated language and literacy workshops and lectures, as well as curriculum development, in Ghana, Israel, Italy, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, and the USA. As a private person, Ari travels to the Israeli occupied West Bank of the Jordan river where he documents Israeli settlers who engage in violence, agricultural theft, intimidation, and threats. Ari’s videos, notes, and presence support a coalition of non-government organizations working in solidarity with Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley to prevent the destruction of Palestinian villages and to prevent the
Manitoba, Winnipeg Canada, R3T 5V6; telephone:(1) 204.474.9698; e-mail: Sandra Ingram@umanitoba.ca.Anita H Ens, University of Manitoba Anita Ens is a Ph.D. candidate in Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning in the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. She has over 15 years of experience working with adults in adult education and postsecondary settings, with particular focus on learning strategies and writing pedagogy. Influenced by the social, cultural, and relational aspects of learning, her research interests include collaborative writing, sustainability in education, and diversity in learning groups.Marcia R. Friesen, University of Manitoba
annual raises are earmarked for teaching improvement. Moreover, faculty are expected to write reflective memos that map specific plans for improving teaching, learning, and 3 assessment in their courses. Presentations, demonstrations, and short courses are available, both in the department and through MIT's Teaching Learning Lab. The number of faculty presenting at conferences on education topics has increased in the past two years. 11. CDIO Skills Assessment Within courses, faculty use traditional and newly designed tools to assess student achievement of course learning outcomes, including oral exams, concept questions, peer 3 assessment of projects and presentations, and reflective portfolios. There is a department
considerations for future courses of this sortin European higher education: • Adaptation to semester dynamics. Project-based courses typically build in intensity, peaking in a flurry of effort shortly before the final deliverable; this intensity requires even more effort in a large interdisciplinary team. Placing the final deliverable at the end of the term (its logical place) interferes with the unique dynamics of European higher education, where the last weeks are increasingly devoted to studying for all-important final exams. Design courses must be planned and scaled accordingly, by moving up the final deliverable, and planning lower intensity (e.g. reflection, report writing) activities in the final
straight-forward book, movingto in-class discussion and guided learning exercises, through solving more complex homeworkproblems on their own or in groups.Active Learning and Peer Instruction: Each class period is conducted using a modifiedSCALE-UP2 approach. That is, classroom instruction is focused on in-class learning exercisessupplemented by critical reading by each student prior to class, mini-lectures at one or moretimes during class, physical demonstrations, and short reading/attention quizzes using“i>clickers”12. With this approach, attention span become less problematic and students quicklylearn that to perform in class, they must both be alert during class and prepare by reading the textbefore class. We are fortunate to have a
dealt with this issue. In thePrairie View A&M University (PVAMU) Chemical Engineering Department (CHEG), studentswere provided with videos of the instructors describing and displaying lab equipment andperforming the lab experiments for the course. Representative data for the experiments wereprovided to the students for their analysis and they were asked to combine what they learned fromthe video and their analysis of data to write lab reports. While an effective approach under thecircumstances, it lacked the first-person, immersive experience that is crucial to developing deeperknowledge and understanding (Bonasio, 2019). This deficit was an instructional limitation as wasfaculty lack of videography expertise which made the remote
. She has worked extensively with K-12 educators around the Great Lakes area and had led inquiry-based teacher workshops on Beaver Island at CMU’s Biological Station. She is the co-author of two books, one that explores the intersection of science and writing, the other interdisciplinary teaching approaches. She has received prestigious grants and fellowships, such as the American Association of University Women International Fellowship, for her doctoral work carried out in Kenya on spotted hyena behavior.Itzel Marquez, Central Michigan University ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Lowering barriers for marginalized students through equitable multidisciplinary
retrieved for full-text review. Upon assessing the full textfor eligibility, 17 articles were found to not fully meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria (e.g.literature review papers, articles outside of STEM fields, articles not focused on SLWD).Thirteen articles remained for consideration in this review. Table 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria. Inclusion Criteria • Publications focused on AI-driven and new technologies that are specifically designed to support SLWD in STEM education. • Publications in the form of a peer-reviewed journal or conference article
ofSTS from a range of faculty perspectives. (2) To explore key STS texts by writing argumentativeessays and completing project-based assignments that engage in basic ways with secondarycriticism, theory, and/or history, etc. (3) To practice course discussion skills in the classroomthrough a seminar-style format. (4) To address contemporary and emerging societal challengespresented by a range of developments in various forms and fields of technology and science,while also probing the historical, philosophical, material, and theoretical backgrounds andtrajectories of such global challenges. (5) To give a formal presentation on and write/create afinal paper/project at the end of the term that explores objectives 1, 2, and/or 4 above. Studentsare
conflicts of interest affectingacademic researchers. First, there continues to be a significant push to get more graduate studentsinvolved in technology commercialization through university-based initiatives or nationalprograms such as the NSF’s I-Corps. Second, in a class we teach on technology entrepreneurshipand research translation (see Duval-Couetil, Ladisch, et al., 2021), we observed that graduatestudents had limited awareness of potential conflicts that can occur when engaging inentrepreneurial activity.Each year, students in this course attend a lecture on COIs relevant to academicentrepreneurship, presented by an administrator from our university’s Office of Research. Afterthe last lecture, we asked students to reply in writing to the
is a practical underpinning forconsidering curricular revisions across curricular levels (e.g., course, multiple courses, or project).Figure 1. Elements from Lattuca and Stark’s [23] Academic Plan Model were used as a theoreticalunderpinning for our study.Biomedical Engineering Program ContextOur program context is the undergraduate BME program at an R1 institution in the southeasternUnited States. Our ABET-accredited BME program was newly established in 2018, with the firstcohort of undergraduates graduating in May 2022. At the time of writing, our BME programcurrently enrolls ~250 undergraduate students seeking a B.S. in BME, with an additional ~80students pursuing a minor in BME. For over two years, faculty across the tenure and
. ● Use concept mapping to help identify open questions in your research project and collect information needed to understand your research opportunity. ● Identify key stakeholders for your research project and describe the interests of those stakeholders. 2. Thriving in a ● Describe the importance of using SMART goals to be able to answer your Research Environment research question and make connections between your research and the interests of stakeholders. ● Practice writing SMART goals for next steps in your research. ● Prepare a goal-setting plan that
Paper ID #28865Outcome-Based (Engineering) Education (OBE): International AccreditationPracticesProf. Junaid Qadir, Information Technology University, Lahore, Pakistan Junaid Qadir is an Associate Professor at the Information Technology University (ITU)—Punjab, Lahore since December 2015, where he directs the ICTD; Human Development; Systems; Big Data Analytics; Networks (IHSAN) Research Lab. His primary research interests are in the areas of computer systems and networking, applied machine learning, using ICT for development (ICT4D); and engineering education. He is the author of more than 100 peer-reviewed research papers
apprenticeship technology, a bachelor’s in technol- ogy and engineering education with a minor in CAD, and a master’s degree in education technology. I am currently working toward my Doctorate in curriculum and instruction. My dissertation research focuses on motivational theories and inspirational instruction. My wife Kathy also works at Rose-Hulman in Academic Affairs, while my son Curtiss attends Rose- Hulman majoring in computer science and software engineering and my daughter Kirsten lives in Hawaii and is working toward her Master’s in English and writing. I am very honored to be a part of this great organization. Thank youDaniel Tetteh-RichterDr. Kay C. Dee, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Kay C Dee
Fast-Forward Engineering Program is a summer bridge and scholarship programat Louisiana Tech University funded by the National Science Foundation that allows risingsophomore engineering students to continue their curriculum ahead of schedule [1]. Eligibility isbased on unmet financial need and on-track degree progression to achieve a 4-year graduation.The program allows students to get more interaction with the faculty as well as increasedinteraction with their peers. The program also allows students to take part in local industry visitsso that students may see first-hand various engineering workplace settings. Due to COVID-19,the industry visits were virtual for the Summers of 2020 and 2021. Students participated in Zoomlectures from industry
institutions the opportunity toinquire about the Black experience from Black students without the stigma of asking suchquestions in large groups with people unfamiliar with that experience. With respect to graduatestudents, the lack of palpable sources for professional development influenced therecommendation for graduate community spaces to prioritize writing retreats, peer mentoringand other activities critical to advancing students in their doctoral studies [11]. Participants at PWIs gave recommendations about inclusion which they believed wouldimprove if there were more Black faculty hired in engineering programs. The overall reasoningto increase Black faculty was for mentorship and guidance as they navigated spaces that weren’tinclusive
interactive studentenvironment to discuss case studies and test student understanding of concepts using polls. In eachmodule, students were assigned readings and individual and team assignments. Further, weeklytechnical discussion forums on the blackboard were used to create, develop, and engage in SEconcepts-related dialogue. Each required deliverable was designed to facilitate access to otherstudents' points of view and requires the student to assess other peers' points of view, providingautonomy to select a system of interest and a scenario to how a student relates a specific concept.A core component of the course was the hands-on project. Students were divided into three teamsand assigned the Can-Sat competition 2021-22 guide. This intention was
-oneinstruction. The student would present weekly findings to his/her mentor, read scientific paperstogether, and plan future experiments. In addition to conducting research with mentors, menteesare required to attend three lunch meetings throughout the summer experience. These lunchmeetings focus on professional development and mentoring; providing an opportunity forstudents to discuss research progress with peers [12].The 2021-2022 SURE participants included 32 undergraduate students from various disciplinesacross campus. The participants were from the Civil and Construction Engineering Department,Mechanical Engineering Department, Electrical Engineering Department, MathematicsDepartment, Chemistry Department, Biology Department, Physics Department
teaches courses and conducts research related to Thermodynamics, engineering and public policy, engineering education, and gender in engineering and science. She is the co-author on an engineering textbook, Fundamentals of Engineering Thermodynamics, which is used worldwide in over 250 institutions and she is an author on over 95 peer- reviewed publications.Caroline SolomonDr. Elizabeth Litzler, University of Washington Elizabeth Litzler, Ph.D., is the director of the University of Washington Center for Evaluation and Re- search for STEM Equity (UW CERSE) and an affiliate assistant professor of sociology. She has been at UW working on STEM Equity issues for more than 17 years. Dr. Litzler is a member of ASEE, 2020-2021
between what they learn infoundational math and science courses and other multidisciplinary coursework (e.g., core coursesin writing, humanities, social sciences, etc.), and how to transfer and apply that knowledge toengineering courses, projects, and professional experiences [3].Despite accreditation criteria elevating contextual competence and other professional practiceoutcomes (e.g., effective communication, teamwork, ethics and leadership), as well as a plethoraof national studies calling for a different approach to engineering education, institutional andstructural issues continue to complicate curricular change [10], [2], [5]. One issue stems from alack of incentive for faculty collaboration across departments to develop consensus around
) 0.007 Traditional 33.71 (5.82) 33.36 (5.68) 0.301 Self-efficacy Mastery experience (prior success) Mastery 4.10 (0.56) 4.25 (0.66) 0.005 Traditional 4.19 (0.52) 4.12 (0.53) 0.248 Vicarious experience (peer success) Mastery 4.63 (0.71) 4.78 (0.76) 0.012 Traditional 4.46 (0.53) 4.52 (0.63) 0.289 Social Persuasions (support for success) Mastery 4.38 (1.05) 4.54 (0.91) 0.018 Traditional 4.41 (0.92) 4.45 (0.87) 0.388 Physiological State (anxiety) Mastery 2.21 (0.96