also adapted Ashford and Blacks [7] scales measuring proactive behaviors across six dimensions: (a) feedback seeking, (b) positive framing, (c) general socializing, (d) relationship building, (e) networking, and (f) information seeking [7]. Though these scales were developed to understand workplace socialization, we adapted them to reflect the context of engineering education. Then, to assess normative contexts, we developed a new five-question scale to explore students’ involvement in extra- and co-curricular activities. First, we ask students to list engineering-related organizations in which they participated. Second, and germane to the concept of socialization, we ask how students
’, where the students are expected to develop anunderstanding of parallel and divergent canons and traditions of architecture, landscape andurban design.Since 2008, we have addressed this criterion with our Fall semester second-year graduatearchitectural design studio class. Our students are required to research, program, and design anIslamic Community Center, which includes amongst other things, a Mosque. This projectprovides a unique educational opportunity. Students must understand and appreciate howarchitecture reflects not only its place, program, and client, but also the politically andemotionally sensitive issues it can evoke. This class also engages the accreditation needs forethics and diversity.Our Graduate StudentsThe Architecture
Using misgendering as a tactic for harassment and bullying by those Can risk outing who have discriminatory beliefs. 21Trans ExperiencesClimate for Trans IndividualsTrans-supportive Policies and ProceduresClimate Climate is reflected in: Chilly Climate structures, policies, and An environment that practices; dampens individuals’ self
undergraduate science andengineering students for a total of 16 participants. For the first round, the focus groups wereaimed at identifying high-level issues with the survey (i.e., the applicability of the questions andstudents’ initial reactions to the instrument). Questions aimed at the participants in the focusgroup ranged from reflecting about the different experiences of student support, whether thoseexperiences were captured in the instrument and identifying any student support experiences thatwere not represented among available answers. Additionally, participants were asked to lookcarefully at how the questions are constructed and the wording used in the instrument. Thestudents described how they interpreted questions and gave suggestions to
exactly as it comes to mind. • Change any statements into questions.As they think about these rules, learners should reflect on what might be challenging aboutfollowing them as well as how it may differ from the way they typically formulate questions.Learners will hold themselves and others accountable for following these rules as they respond tothe QFocus for a set amount of time (usually about 4-7 minutes).As a part of the second element, learners begin to work with and improve their questions. Theylearn about two different types of questions—closed-ended questions which can be answeredwith “yes”, “no”, or with one word; and open-ended questions which cannot be answered in suchmanner, as they require more of an explanation. Learners then
Regulation IP Market like more of this AccessDiscussion: Results indicate that the expert office hours model was a scalable way to achieveeffective and efficient project-specific guidance in the domains of IP, regulation and marketaccess. The positive impact of personalized feedback from industry experts wasqualitatively reflected in the quality of domain strategy discussion during team check-ins.Intimate team meetings with domain experts also resulted in continued deeper relationships withexperts that were maintained after the course ended. The opt-in nature of this model allowedteams that were ready access to just-in-time guidance during office hours. Opt-in rates varied bydomain, with
signify the unification of cognitive elements of self-motivation, self-direction, self-reflection, self-regulation, and self-correction.and interactive virtual environments (VEs) [17],[33],[34]. Thereby multiple approaches may becombined to enhance the user experience and increase the learning success. For example, asituation-based gaming environment may allow learners to explore content on their own, thus,increasing their sense of autonomy and progress control, factors identified as important to learnerself-regulation and responsibility [11],[13],[24],[29],[35].Through VEs users can be immersed in specific environments in order to elicit tasks under whatis perceived as realistic circumstances. Thus, fidelity as “a measure of the degree to which
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) emphasized the critical nature ofempowered, autonomous individuals and work teams as success factors in global aviation safetyand process standardization [60], [61] applicable to all of the aviation industry [6], [61]. Self-responsibility and proactive problem-solving expectations are likewise modeled by the FAA inits relationship with industry in safety and quality management of daily processes [4]. Problem-based learning in engineering was consistently emphasized in preparing engineering graduates,and development of collaborative teamwork, self-directed, independent learning and problemsolving based upon critical self-reflection were considered “crucial competencies” in addition totechnical degree
if it was me and my group that had kind of said, "When are we going to get a civil one? [. . .] and [the instructor] said, "Weren't you excited about the popsicle bridge?" [. . .] After reflecting about what that person I asked me, I thought, "Wow, I didn't really go as far as I should have if I really would have been passionate about structural or civil engineering as some of these people are about what they're doing."For Natalie, ultimately hitting these barriers related to interest and technical content promptedher to navigate out of her civil engineering program.Theme 3: Navigating intersecting stereotypes and compounding marginalizationThird, participants’ decisions to leave were also linked to
, analogies, justifying steps, explaining, paraphrasing,comparing, predicting, reflecting, monitoring one's understanding, inducing hypothesis, posingquestions, adding visuals). Finally, in the Interactive mode, multiple constructive dialogues occurbetween learning partners with each contributing meaningfully (taking different positions,requiring justification regarding statements, raising questions and answering them, explainingand elaborating on each other's comments). Michaelson [5] notes that instruction on criticalreading emphasizes the feelings, intuitions, and creative responses that students experience asthey read.The Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) [6] is a 30-iteminstrument for assessing the perceived use of
, Tampa, Jun. 2019.[2] Rupnow, R., Davis, K., Johnson, R., Kirchner, E., Sharma, J., Talukdar, S.R. “Service experiences of undergraduate engineers,” International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, 6(1), Article 14, 2018.[3] J. Sonnenberg-Klein, Randal T. Abler, Edward J. Coyle, and Ha Hang Ai, “Multidisciplinary Vertically Integrated Teams: Social Network Analysis of Peer Evaluations for Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP) Program Teams,” 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Jun. 2017.[4] Lane Perry, Lee Stoner, Max Schleser, Krystina R. Stoner, Daniel Wadsworth, Rachel Page, and Michael A. Tarrant. “Digital media as a reflective tool: creating
participants’ability to recall detailed information about their interaction and resource usage after the fact. Inaddition, although survey questions asked participants to identify time spent interacting witheach peer in their network, few students gave such detailed descriptions. Lack of detailedresponses limited development of the peer interaction networks. For those participants whochose to provide only their names on surveys (presumably for the purposes of receiving extracredit), their responses were removed from data. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONSixty-six of 118 (56%) students enrolled in the course participated in all surveys. Participantdemographics are shown in Table 1. Participant demographics reflect the larger
shows that an engineering degree prepares students for a range of careers. However,engineering undergraduate training has often focused on equipping students with the knowledge,abilities, and attitudes that will make them successful as engineers in industry rather than the broadpossibilities that an engineering degree offers. Reflecting this focus, a common topic inengineering education literature discusses ways to bridge the gap between industry andundergraduate training [1]. However, the qualities students develop—such as critical thinking,problem solving, and teamwork—are also valued by employers in general. Additionally, researchstudies in engineering education on students’ post-graduation pathways often frame students whodo not enter
eightworkspaces.piloting the technologyPreliminary analysis of student feedback and teaching team (faculty instructor and graduatestudent teaching assistants) reflections in regard to teaching aseptic technique indicates anopportunity to improve instructional methods. General themes that emerged from the analysisinclude negative emotions and students reported feeling “frustrated by the sometimes slow paceof the class” and “wanting more immediate feedback.” The teaching team members reportedfeeling “underutilized” and would often facilitate when a student could not hear or see theinstructor (the student did not feel comfortable speaking up in order to point out instructordeficit).The gamified first-person perspective was achieved purchasing a GoPro Hero 8 Black
“multidisciplinary perspective” to systems thinking – one that equips students not only toaddress technical problems but to communicate the value of ethical, persuasive decision-makingin the workplace [1]. Yet, as the Boeing report suggests, “major opportunities for reform existbut have yet to be exploited” [1]. Among these curricular reforms yet to be exploited is the move“from the stage of dumping ‘expert-recommended’ communication strategies to the stage oftailoring communication strategies to achieve clarity of understanding with different audiences”[1]. This call for curricular reform is also reflected in the most recent update to the AccreditationBoard for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET) outcomes for engineering programs, whichrequires that
’ learning experience are detailed.Lastly, the course instructor and the research assistant discussed some of the improvements andunforeseen student behaviour. Note that the course instructor is a new engineering educator whowould like to share his course design, get feedback on the implemented course developments,and in general use this as an opportunity to self-reflect on the changes made to the course andhow they can be scaled for other offerings of the course in the future.IntroductionThis paper is about a numerical methods course in an engineering faculty at a Canadianuniversity. This is a common-core engineering course taken by primarily civil, mechanical, andgeomatics engineering students in either their second or third year. The topics in
-informeddecision.BackgroundThere exists a number of ethical decision-making models that borrow from multiple fields andtheoretical perspectives and seek to equip engineering students with a methodology foraddressing even very complex ethical dilemmas [1]–[3]. These models are important additions tothe ethics curriculum as they allow for movement beyond deontological approaches andincorporate ideas drawn from consequentialist ethical approaches (consideration of theconsequences of various actions) and virtue ethics (focus on reflecting whether one’s actions areconsistent with the type of virtuous person one might wish to be). Most of the decision-makingmodels developed for the field of engineering education to date are logically sequenced stepsdesigned to reduce stress
to which I have no idea what I'm doing like 95% of the time.”—Amy (fifth year graduate student)Attitudes towards ExpectationsTo add insight to this data, we also characterized the interview excerpts that discussed expectationsunder one of four categories, deemed “expectation attitudes:” Correct and Positive, Correct andNegative, Incorrect and Positive, and Incorrect and Negative. From the interviews, we determinedwhether their expectations of graduate school were proven correct or incorrect. It is important tonote that these labels do not define what is “right” about the expectation (e.g., the expectation ofgraduate school being coursework heavy, for example, which is generally not reflective of doctoralengineering culture, was not
, we have tracked retention of ourprogram’s students prior to and throughout our project progression to examine whether ourinterventions have affected student persistence. This paper reflects some of the currentconclusions drawn from this retention analysis.Data Analysis MethodsData presented here are of students enrolled in the program before and after the project began.We have analyzed and compared historic student demographics, course grades, academicprogression, retention, and graduation rates. We obtained student demographics, transcripts, andcourse grade information through the university’s enrollment management office. We alsocollected student demographics information via student survey within department-specificcourses. Enrollment
Departmental Presentations Question and Answer Session with Students and/or Faculty from each Engineering Department Engineering Ethics Case Study Discussions in Small Groups Introduction to Design Small Group Project Work and Student Presentations Reflection and Going Forward Individual Semester ReflectionsThe intent of the COE course designers was that each section of the class contain students from amixture of disciplines. It was even hoped that students could be grouped by extra-curricularinterests, e.g., soccer, Anime. The DSS cohorted students into Learning Communities (LC)which meant scheduling the same 25 students in 3 classes together, with one of these LC classesbeing within
. Ifthe answer was no, I asked them to review the video.Let me explain a bit about my process of writing and grading exams. In general, after I write anexam, I take the exam myself to be sure that it can be worked in the allotted time with theallowed materials and to develop a preliminary solution to the exam. I frequently find that I needto edit one or more problems before printing and administering the exam. This preliminarysolution is almost never ready for distribution at this time.After the exam, I begin the grading process by giving a quick read to all students work on aparticular problem and putting them into piles that reflect common errors and then I begingrading. As I mark their papers, I also make notes of how many points I took off or
-paced. Myose et al.7 found evidence suggesting that many students who found freshman coursessuch as Calculus-based Physics to be fairly easy find Statics to be much more difficult, as reflected intheir Statics grades that often were one or more letter grades lower than their Calculus-based Physicsgrades. These factors motivated the first author to video tape his Statics course so that students couldgo over difficult concepts multiple times by pausing and rewinding the videos. Another motivator wasthat the hybrid-style course allowed more classroom time dedicated to examples and review. Thecreation of the online material also dovetailed with the habits of the current generation of students, whoincreasingly desire study material to be accessible
1 2% 1 3% Total 43 38DiscussionThe research question for this study was concerned with the breadth of students’ interest in theBME field as expressed through their proposed topics for a term paper. These interests are asnapshot in time that likely reflect not only actual interest but other mediating factors such astime in the semester, design of the assignment (e.g., references to devices in the wording ofassignment), guidance provided by the instructor on topic selection, ease of access to literatureon potential topics, current events, and personal experience. A few of these mediating factorswill be touched on in this discussion of the results.As can be seen
community. ACDI/VOCA works with the partnercommunity (Palos Blancos, Bolivia) on development projects and will serve as theintermediary between American and Bolivian university students and the communityprior to the team’s arrival in Bolivia. The Mosetenes Indians are the most importantpopulation in the area, besides the Aymara and Quechua colonizers. The exact nature ofthe project will be defined by the team and community members. Table 1 illustrates howdevelopment projects motivated previous research projects (designed and executed bystudents in other programs at our university) and reflects some of the types of researchprojects that could emerge in this program. Using the community interests communicatedby the NGO, the student teams will begin
anticipate that by asking educators about their teaching decisions, wemay trigger reflection, which in and of itself may lead to improvements in teaching practice.By exploring the processes through which engineering educators make teaching decisions andthe factors they consider, we can use decision making as a lens to understand their teachingpractices and gain a better understanding of how to help engineering educators make moreeffective decisions about their teaching. We believe that this approach is particularly appropriatebecause it is a framework used extensively in the field of engineering (i.e., design decision-making) and thus may be a more familiar framework to discuss their teaching practices.We chose to emphasize teaching decision-making
presentations and Building Engineering Communication Skills 7requiring students to privately view their presentation. This type of self-reflection canquickly highlight the good and bad presentation habits of individual students.Group WorkAs in motivation one, professional engineers will often write documents as a team. Anyof the above communication ideas may be assigned to a group of students. In fact, manyof the final communications used as examples above, were assigned to groups. Groupwriting brings special challenges related to teamwork which we will not expand uponhere. One helpful guideline, however, is to assign responsibility for various sections toprevent one person from assuming the role of
departments in the College of Engineering.13This program requires students to take four courses in nanoscale engineering, two of which arelaboratory courses. They are also expected to attend a seminar series. This program iscomprehensive, hands-on, and reflects the interdisciplinary nature of nanoscale engineering. Page 12.517.3However, this program does have its limitations. It does not offer a single ChE course so thespecific background ChEs can contribute to high volume manufacturing on the nanoscale isabsent. Most courses are graduate level, only available to advanced undergraduates.Additionally, the content focuses heavily on semiconductor
have performed better than others in monitoringwork examples. Also the SI group earned better grades than the non-SI group in the class.Introduction “Fundamentals of Environmental Engineering” is a junior course taught in the CivilEngineering department at New Mexico State University. General course objectives areto learn and apply the engineering design process and develop and apply skills used bysuccessful practicing professional engineers, including critical (reflective) thinking,communication, and documentation. This course teaches the fundamental civil-environmental engineering principles for design of conventional domestic watertreatment and wastewater treatment systems. One of the primary learning objectives ofthe course is for students
systematic set of procedures to develop an inductivelyderived grounded theory about a phenomenon" [25, p.24]. The five processes of modifiedanalytic induction (mentioned above) reflect the systematic set of procedures within thegrounded theory paradigm.Collecting and coding the material constituted step one of the constant comparative analysis.Codes are abbreviations or symbols applied to a segment of words to facilitate sorting andclustering word segments relating to a particular topic or question [23]. Using the guidingquestions, the first author developed categories of information (open coding). In the open codingphase, the first author examined the textual and visual information (transcripts and drawings) forsalient categories of information
-person/on-line hybrid 2+2 B.S. Program in Information Technology program. After only two years the program produced its first two graduates in Spring 2007. The program has an impressive retention rate of over 90%. • Students in the California State University, Fresno Industrial Technology online/hybrid program continue to progress. Over 50% of the initial 2005 cohort have graduated with their B.S. degrees. • A feasibility study was conducted to access the need for a new four-year engineering technology program in the region.Objective 3: Implement regional programs in Information Technology, Engineering Technology and Manufacturing Technology that reflects existing and emerging industry needs. • CREATE has developed and