the sciences.Dr. Jean S Larson, Arizona State University Jean Larson, Ph.D., is the Educational Director for the NSF-funded Engineering Research Center for Bio- mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics (CBBG), and Assistant Research Professor in both the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment and the Division of Educational Leadership and Innovation at Arizona State University. She has a Ph.D. in Educational Technology, postgraduate training in Computer Systems Engineering, and many years of experience teaching and developing curriculum in various learning environments. She has taught technology integration and teacher training to undergrad- uate and graduate students at Arizona State University
they face academic challenges?RQ2 What is the relationship between their mindset/grit and reason for leaving the program?And what reasons do students provide for leaving the program?RQ3 What are the internal and external challenges that students face throughout the program?Intervention & ParticipantsParticipantsThe PWS program selected 10 students in fall 2021 as the first cohort and another 9 students infall 2022 as the second cohort among the academically talented high school candidates withfinancial needs pursuing engineering or computing-related degrees. The first cohort (N=10) ofparticipants included 8 females, 3 first generation, 2 Pell-eligible, 2 underrepresented minorities,and 1 neurodiverse. The second cohort (N=9) of
to engineering. In recent years, some scholars have proposed ways toovercome this disengagement, for example Jon Leydens and Juan Lucena’s (2018) “Engineeringfor Social Justice Criteria.” However, little research has been conducted to trace how engineeringstudents are taking up these programs.This paper builds on an NSF-funded ethnographic study of cultural practices in a Science,Technology, and Society (STS) program that serves 1st and 2nd year engineering students [6, 22-23]. That research study sought to answer: How does this program cultivate engineering students'macro-ethical reasoning about science and technology? Radoff and colleagues [6] identified foursalient ways that students described the cultural practices of the STS program: 1
address this issue. There also seem to be stark differences between industry and academia in work andlearning cultures. Teamwork and cooperation are not often highly valued and rewarded inacademia in the ways that they are in industry. "The culture of academia for students is characterized by competition. Students are placed in large classrooms with curved grading systems that discourage collaboration and information sharing…This contrast in cultures, from academia where students are viewed as receivers of information from faculty and collaboration is discouraged by the competitive culture and few opportunities for formal interaction exist, to corporations, where employees utilize each others' knowledge
biosensorrequire the cooperation of professors and graduate students in biology, chemistry, computerscience, electrical and computer engineering, and mathematics.To mirror the practice of this interdisciplinary research students participating in this study werechallenged to design and test “sensing” related problems of their choice. For example, teams made up of math, anatomy/physiology, and engineering and technology students designed bicycle helmets fitted with sensors to test impact absorption and collect data related to helmet materials and design
provides less detailed data andthus is not suitable for exploration of complex issues. Since most all of the research studies reviewed in thispaper have applied this method to measure various characteristics of engineering students, examples will not belisted here.2.3.2. Data analysis methods 7This section provides an overview of the data analysis methods used in current literature studying themeasurement of the characteristics of engineering students.Logistic regression. This method is often used in research studying prediction of college enrollment, retentionand graduation (Besterfielf-Sacre, et. al., 1997; 1998; Wong-Moller &
University. She obtained a B.S. in mathematics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Primary research projects explore the preparation of engineering doctoral students for careers in academia and industry and the development of engineering education assessment tools. She is a NSF Faculty Early Career (CAREER) award winner and is a recipient of a Presidential Early Career
activities and discussions students will build an understanding of the ties between multiple disciplines. To identify these ties, students will engage in activities that build participation and questioning strategies for workshops and lectures, problem finding, analogical and metaphorical thinking, and collaboration in multiple formats. The collaboration of students, faculty, and visiting artists will encourage students to explore their own interests as they are situated within the boundaries of disciplines and provide strategies to create and innovate within and among disciplines.As a central element of the course, students engage in Lerman’s Critical Response Processfeedback with peers to promote
Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. She received a B.S. in Chemistry from Utah State University and an M.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Utah. Her current research is focused on the development and improvement of electro- chemical sensors for disease diagnosis by breath. Her interest in support for diversity and special interest groups inspired her collaboration on this project.Mr. Michael Scott Sheppard Jr., Arizona State University Michael Scott Sheppard is a graduate research associate pursuing a Master of Science degree in Engineer- ing and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education Systems and Design at Arizona State University. He received a Bachelor of Science in Biomedical Science
Elisabeth Kames is a graduate student pursuing her M.S. in Mechanical Engineering with a concentration in Dynamic Systems- Robotics and Controls. She graduated with her B.S. in Mechanical Engineering in May 2015. Her research is focused in the field of Automotive Engineering under the advisement of Dr. Beshoy Morkos.Dr. Beshoy Morkos, Florida Institute of Technology Beshoy Morkos is an assistant professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the Florida Institute of Technology where he directs the STRIDE Lab (SysTems Research on Intelligent Design and Engineering). His engineering design research focuses on developing computational represen- tation and reasoning support for managing complex system
beach.Ms. Connie Syharat, University of Connecticut Constance M. Syharat is a Ph.D. student and Research Assistant at the University of Connecticut as a part of two neurodiversity-centered NSF-funded projects, Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (NSF:RED) ”Beyond Accommodation: Leveraging Neurodiversity for Engineering Innovation” and In- novations in Graduate Education (NSF:IGE) Encouraging the Participation of Neurodiverse Students in STEM Graduate Programs to Radically Enhance the Creativity of the Professional Workforce”. In her time at the University of Connecticut she has also has served as Program Assistant for an summer pro- gram in engineering for middle school students with ADHD. Previously, she spent
and professional devel- opment for stakeholders in K-12 education, higher education, and Corporate America. Her research is focused upon the use of mixed methodologies to explore significant research questions in undergraduate, graduate, and professional engineering education, to integrate concepts from higher education and learn- ing science into engineering education, and to develop and disseminate reliable and valid assessment tools for use across the engineering education continuum.Dr. Benjamin Ahn, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Benjamin Ahn is a Postdoctoral Associate with the MIT-SUTD Collaboration Office at MIT. His research interests include identifying effective mentoring skills in higher
graduation) is double among transfer studentscompared to students who entered as freshman. Consequently, transfer studentsdisproportionately lack the family knowledge resource necessary to form realisticexpectations. Researchers have shown that students successfully navigate through transfershock when they are more transfer ready. Transfer readiness is impacted by counseling,advice from students and faculty, and an understanding of the academic requirements of thenew institution [11]. Another prominent factor impacting students’ success in four year completion aftertransfer is integration into the social aspects of the new institution. This social integrationincludes participation in clubs, organizations, and events of different cultures
explaining to other students about their choice and rationale. 4. Carry out the necessary research and analysis and generate possible solutions. Students are reminded by the instructor “not to aim too high” at this stage. It is essential to make the core of the project working before adding on optional packages. Time limit of the laboratory usually prevents students from creating a very comprehensive system. They need to learn to generate reasonably good solutions within a deadlineWe also encourage and promote cooperative learning15,16,17 by involving students working inteams to accomplish a common goal. Specifically, student groups are formed to conduct labs.Each group has a leader and two or three team members. Early on
DiegoMinju Kim, University of California, San DiegoZongnan Wang, University of California, San DiegoDr. Nathan Delson, eGrove Education ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Implementing Oral Exams in Engineering Classes to Positively Impact Students’ Learning 1. IntroductionAssessment is key to students’ learning and effective educational improvement [1]. This isparticularly critical in engineering, as a key objective of engineering education is teachingstudents how to apply scientific principles, how to reason about problems and how to thinkcritically. Unfortunately, prior research has shown that many students often resort to memorizingprocedures or processes, i.e., “plug and
support one or more strategies throughout the academic program Figure 3. The strategy for teaching and learning creativity/innovation could be embedded in undergraduate and graduate curricula.As suggested by Figure 3, the strategy includes explaining the need forcreativity/innovation to first-year students, providing them with some neurosciencebasics, and introducing them to a subset of tools and basic, mostly hypotheticalapplications. This introduction to creativity/innovation could occur primarily within andas a small part of an exploring engineering, introduction to engineering, or similarpreferably first-semester course. Of course, the Need, Neuroscience, and Tools elementsof the strategy could be mentioned in other
and Power Systems, Industrial Automation and Control system. As part of HBCU-ECP project he teaches EE and non-EE students how to utilize the board for in class experiments and other design projects. He is also currently doing a collaborative research with a local industry in smart grid. Dr. Osareh can be reached at osareh@ncat.eduDr. Lisa D. Hobson, Prairie View A&M University c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Paper ID #19862Dr. Lisa Hobson is Associate Professor of Educational Leadership at Prairie View A&M University andhas served in the professorate since 1999. She holds a Ph. D. in
projectdesigned to understand the barriers that inhibit students from pursuing engineering careers in theAppalachian region of the United States and, ultimately, to develop a theoretical framework thatexplains the factors that limit Appalachian students’ pursuit of engineering careers. Theframework would serve as a foundation for research-based interventions designed to broadenparticipation among this demographic.In the first phase of the research project, we are exploring salient influencers of students’ careerchoice process. To do this, we are exploring career paths from the perspective of high schoolstudents, college students, and engineering working professionals. The three differentperspectives afford a quasi-longitudinal1, 2 look at planned (high
Education 95 (4):257-258.Steering Committee of the National Engineering Education Research Colloquies. 2006b. TheResearch Agenda for the New Discipline of Engineering Education. Journal of EngineeringEducation 95 (4): 259-261.Terenzini, P., A. Cabrera, C. Colbeck, J. Parente and S. Bjorklund. 2001. Collaborative Learningvs. Lecture/Discussion: Students’ Reported Learning Gains. Journal of Engineering Education,90 (1): 123-130.Terrell, M., R. Terrell, and L. Schneider. 2010. Assessing Engineering Students’ Ability to Usethe Mathematics They Have Learned. Proceedings of the American Society for EngineeringEducation Annual Conference & Exposition, June 2010 (forthcoming
AC 2010-1414: USING AN ADAPTIVE TINTO FRAMEWORK TO INTERPRETSUCCESSES OF TWO-YEAR INSTITUTIONS IN RETAINING ENGINEERINGSTUDENTSHeather Evans, University of Washington Heather Evans is a Research Assistant at the Center for Workforce Development at the University of Washington. She is a graduate student in the Department of Sociology and a Fellow in the Comparative Law and Society Studies program at UW. Her research employs mixed methodologies, including ethnographic fieldwork and statistical analysis. Broadly, she is interested in ways in which institutions reproduce social inequality, how new social spaces are created, and perceptions of citizenship among marginalized people.Priti Mody-Pan
. She explores how the integration of school safety strategies with disciplinary practices, often under zero-tolerance policies, blurs the lines between them, suggesting that both are byproducts of the school-to-prison pipeline.Dr. Roberta Rincon, Society of Women Engineers Roberta Rincon, Ph.D., is the Director of Research and Impact for the Society of Women Engineers. She is responsible for overseeing the research activities for the organization, including collaborative research projects with external researchers and dissemination of SWE research through academic conferences, the SWE Research website, and the annual SWE State of Women in Engineering magazine issue. She is the Principal Investigator for the NSF
in general and only a small number of students routinely answer questions.When I spoke with the architecture professor about this, he responded that this is how things arein Thailand. The causes of the Thai students‟ lack of participation is authentic and naturalclassroom settings have been explored. Among several reasons for this occurrence, one that hasgained attention is the important role of the teacher in the Thai education system. According toReeve, Bolt & Cai25, a significant role is played by teachers in inspiring and motivating studentsto learn, and for creating opportunities that enhance the motivation of the learners. It is importantfor teachers to discover “what motivates their students.”The Thai students presented two
auniversity-school partnership and its related professional development activities fostered a senseof collaborative learning among elementary school teachers. By immersing fifth and sixth gradeteachers in authentic, ill-structured design problems, STEM faculty helped teachers to learnfirsthand how to utilize design thinking and reasoning as a way of developing their ownunderstanding of and emerging practice for engineering design-based science instruction.Simultaneously we leveraged the role of experienced SLED teachers as master teachers tofacilitate engineering design-based science instruction during the summer professionaldevelopment and within SLED schools.As the teachers integrated various curricular activities grounded in the engineering
students in engineering programs is around 25%. According to the Ministry of Education, one of the reasons is related to students failing Pre-calculus courses more than once, caused probably by math competences low level upon university admission, low motivation for this subject and disconnection with real context problems. OCDE 2015 report explains this fact since it states that high school students in Colombia score 390 points in mathematics below the OECD, Chile (423 points) and Mexico (408 points) average in the PISA1 test. To design and implement a possible solution to this challenge, a team of researchers from 'Corporación Universitaria Minuto de Dios- UNIMINUTO, created a robotics curriculum adapted to the pre
environment to enhance their play skills and social interactions.Dr. Anat Caspi P.E., University of Washington Dr. Anat Caspi is director of the Taskar Center for Accessible Technology housed by the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Washington. Caspi received her PhD from the Joint Program in BioEngineering at University of California, Berkeley & UCSF. Her research interests are in the areas of ubiquitous computing and data science. Caspi is interested in ways by which collaborative commons and cooperation can challenge and transform computing disciplines.Dr. Katherine M. Steele, University of Washington Dr. Steele is an assistant professor in mechanical engineering at the
engineering major in the firsttwo years.1 Forty-five percent cite the heavy workload and fast pace as their reason for leaving;forty-one percent say that ineffective teaching turned them off. And although nearly 25% of thestudents who left gave inadequate academic preparation as the main reason, all of the students inthe Seymour and Hewitt study were bright, well-qualified students.At the University of South Carolina, as at most research universities, the first two years of theengineering student's university experience involves taking a number of required science andmathematics courses. The students, eager to begin “real” engineering courses, have difficultymaking connections between these foundational courses and their careers as engineers. To
is an associate professor in the Purdue Polytechnic College jointly and College of Education. Strategically hired for the P12 STEM initiative, Dr. Mentzer prepares Technology and Engineering candidates for teacher licensure, conducts research and mentors graduate students. Nathan has taken an active role in guiding the evolution of the undergraduate teacher education program, an Integrated STEM education concentration and a minor in design and innovation at Purdue informed by his National Science Foundation funded research on Design Thinking. Nathan is strategic in connecting theory, practice and research. He engages P16 educators in research efforts to develop innovative pedagogical strategies situated in STEM
in addition to the financial assistance totruly support students during their transitions. The high-impact practices designed forEMPOWER to influence each of Schlossberg’s transition factors include: ● A month-long summer preparatory program to prepare students in both technical and professional skills for internship applications. EMPOWER Scholars at the two community college partners are encouraged to enroll. The summer program implemented was highlighted by Truong et al. in [20]. ● A multi-year research and mentoring program that introduces students to research experience with faculty in Engineering departments at UCSD. The students are encouraged to explore graduate studies in the BS/MS, MS, or PhD program
Paper ID #32564WIP: Engaging Software Engineering Students in Synchronous andAsynchronous On-line CourseDr. Bruce R. Maxim, University of Michigan - Dearborn Bruce R. Maxim has worked as a software engineer, project manager, professor, author, and consultant for more than forty years. His research interests include software engineering, human computer interaction, game design, social media, artificial intelligence, and computer science education. Dr. Maxim is Professor of Computer and Information Science at the University of Michigan—Dearborn and the Nattu Natarajan Professor of Engineering. He established the GAME Lab in
general similarities,praise and recognition for cooperation and collaboration—protects the leader’s interest. Peopleare not so influenced by receiving advice from the people they like but by the knowledge thatthis person likes them42. The leader’s job, however, is not to invent or manufacture similarities orcooperative mutual goals, it’s to identify where the similarities naturally exist in all relationships.Everyone benefits. We relax at work when we are liked.Best practice during next research steps would be conducted to replicate the gender-compositionof the group component in the team finding (see above section C) and modify the questions andadditional research manipulations to uncover the meaning of gender in terms of emotionalresponses to