the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe National Science Foundation.Bibliography[1] Avouris, P. (2004). Supertubes. IEEE Spectrum , 41-45.[2] Buzatu, D. A., Biris, A. S., Biris, A. R., Lupu, D. M., Darsey, J. A., & Mazumder, M. K. (2004). Electronic Properties of Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes and Their Dependence on Sythetic Methods. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications , 1215-1219.[3] Meletov, K. P., Krestinin, A. V., Arvanitidis, J., Christofilos, D., & Kourouklis, G. A. (2010). Thermally Induced Softening of the Radial Breathing Modes of Bundled Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes. Fullerenes, Nanotubes, and Carbon Nanostructures , 538-544.[4] Saito, R., Dresselhaus, G., & Dresselhaus, M. S
school, 27 middle school, and 16 high school teachers as well as 3 university and 6college faculty members, 5 “other,” and 2 school district administrators from 2 counties. The fullday session included FLATE-guided brainstorming sessions, presentations, and a panelshowcasing exemplary women in STEM careers. Major themes of collaboration, encouragement,and leadership by example emerged from the qualitative data collected in an online survey fromteachers. Fifty one percent of participants responded; this paper reflects a collection of theirideas.Collaborate Participants were encouraged during collaboration sessions to learn new ways to collectdata to determine if female enrollment increases at their schools. The majority reported accessonly
of Engineering Education and Centers undergrant number EEC-0343214 (Department-Level Reform Program), by the NSF Division ofUndergraduate Education under grant numbers DUE-0618571 (CCLI Phase 2), DUE-0622466(STEP Type 1) and DUE-0817332 (CCLI Phase 3), and by a Teaching Enhancement Fund grantat Wright State University. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation or Wright State University.Bibliography1. McKenna, A., McMartin, F. and Agogino, A., 2000, "What Students Say About Learning Physics, Math and Engineering," Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, Vol. 1, T1F-9.2. Sathianathan, D
for Traffic Signal Engineering. 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Conference Compendium.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.DUE-1235896. 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. Page 24.1270.9References1. Antonucci, N.D., K.K. Hardy, K.L. Slack, R. Pfefer and T.R. Neuman, "Nchrp Report 500 Volume 12: A Guide for Addressing Collisions at Signalized Intersections." Transportation Research Board
conclusions we have drawn are of particular interest, sincethese affect persistence studies in all disciplines.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) underGrant 1129383 in the Research on Engineering Education (REE) program. The opinionsexpressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.References1 M. W. Ohland, C. E. Brawner, M. M. Camacho, R. A. Layton, R. A. Long, S. M. Lord, and M. H. Wasburn, (2011). “Race, Gender, and Measures of Success in Engineering Education,” Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 225-252. Won Wickenden Award as Best Paper in the Journal for 20112 S. M. Lord, R. A. Layton, and M. W. Ohland, (2011
large base,providing a large cross-sectional area to overcome material draw down and shrinkage in order tocreate extrudate that results in more straight walled structures. The films were extruded at 220°Cin a custom-built cast-film line consisting of a 25-mm single screw extruder to the micro-textured dies. The films were produced at a constant throughput of 0.8 cc/min by using a gear-pump and a take-up speed of 100 mm/min.Microstructural CharacterizationTo obtain sharp cross-section samples, the films were mildly cooled in liquid N2 and cut withspecial scissors (Kevlar® cutter grade). The resulting profile was analyzed by reflective opticalmicroscopy (Olympus BX 60) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM, Hitachi S-4800 FieldEmission Scanning
Page 23.1160.10the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography 1. Pearson G., and A. T. Young, Technically Speaking: Why All Americans Need to Know More about Technology. National Academies Press (2002). 2. Pearson G., and E. Garmire, Tech Tally: Approaches to Assessing Technological Literacy. National Academies Press, (2006). 3. Bransford, J.D., A.L. Brown, and R.R. Cocking, (Editors). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, (1999). Page 279. 4. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
completion rate is less than half5,6. Oneof the primary reasons undergraduates choose to leave science and engineering majors is the lossof interest in the field5 prompted by inadequate motivation and background knowledge fromschool level. Among our sophomore engineering students, only about 50% are passing with therequired C or better. Many of the unsuccessful students could become successful if teachingmethods would better fit their different learning styles7,8.Students have different preferred learning styles7-9. These styles relate to the type of informationaccessed, the manner in which information is accessed (e.g., visual, verbal), the processesinvolved in accessing information (e.g. active, passive, reflective), and the sequence in
) adversity in the course is common andnormal and b) these struggles tend to be temporary and surmountable with time and effort. It doesso with five parts, delivered in the following order: 1) The instructor verbalizes the normalcy and surmountability of adversity in college and in the course more specifically. 2) Students are asked to complete a writing exercise in which they reflect on the challenges they have already experienced in college and how those challenges might change with time. 3) Students are then presented with stories written in the first-person and attributed to more senior students. These stories are tailored to the classroom environment following focus group input from prior students in the course. The
fivedistinct sections: an introduction to the module, followed by a prior knowledge review, the corecontent, a knowledge check, an application task, and then a reflection activity. For moreinformation about the structure of the learning block modules see [16], [25].Each interview consisted of two engineering scenarios such that participants engaged with a totalof four distinct scenarios. Within each interview the scenarios were presented sequentially.Participants were first shown a problem statement that included information on the background,goal, and requirements for the problem. After reviewing the problem statement, they were askeda series of questions broadly centered around gauging participants initial impressions of theproblem, how they would
of:performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social or verbal persuasion, and emotionalarousal [4, 11]. Performance accomplishments or “mastery of experiences” are believed to be amajor source of self-efficacy beliefs. They are past direct experiences that demonstrate to aperson that they are able to successfully perform a future task (i.e., if you have done it before andperformed well, you can do it again). High self-efficacy evolves from success in pastexperiences and low self-efficacy from failures at activities within the given domain. Vicariousexperiences are observations of others successfully completing a task (i.e., if they can do it, socan I). However, since observing is not a direct reflection on one’s one skill it is believed tohave a
our third funding cycle. The crucial information for our SURGE program is providedin Table 1 below, where the figures reflect the status quo [2] as of February 2020. We supported123 students; 2 of whom quit without getting a bachelor’s degree, 101 have obtained theirbachelor’s degrees, and 20 making timely progress toward their bachelor’s degrees. About 32%of the supported students have been URMs. 123 scholars supported 101 degree recipients 20 continuing 45% women 43% women 55% women 55% men 57% men 45% men 32% URMs 30% URMs 45% URMs Table 1. The supported student
) demonstrated – 1 point; or not – 0 points 3 options (levels) fully – 2 points; partially – 1 point; or not demonstrated – 0 points 4 options (levels) fully – 3 points; some – 2 points; less – 1 point; or not demonstrated – 0 pointsIn the development of this rubric, reflection on the previous implementation of a similar problemwere considered – findings discussed by Rodgers et al. [28]. The two biggest changes were: (1)rubric items related to the shareability dimension were incorporated in and (2) some rubric itemshad more levels rather than having as many dichotomous rubric items. The first change was toadd another dimension of analysis in the study. The second change was primarily based on thedifferent context of the problem aligned better with
forlongitudinal studies, or for educators who want to enact timely interventions to support currentstudents.In addition to studying engagement because it provides a window into the present academicsituation for students, this study also chooses engagement metrics which are all motivational innature, as opposed to engagement variables commonly used in other studies such as time on taskand time spent in specific learning activities [30]. Motivational measures are important becausethey reflect not only how engaged a student is in the present, but also how likely they are toremain engaged and persist with their studies in the future. Research has shown that beingintrinsically or self-motivated predicts a student’s desire to learn and achieve better than
Environmentalengineering by Fall in spite of her FoK in mechanics. She was extremely frustrated with the step-by-step formulaic process that her teacher taught in statics as it removed all creativity and desirefor understanding of the physical phenomena. Realizing that most of her 18-yr old classmates areaccustomed to this process and “just listen and do it” [her tone of voice actually hints that theydo this uncritically], in contrast, she says: “I actually stop and wonder if this is the right thingthat I should be doing [amazing sense of ethical responsibility towards her knowledge] or if thisprocess is actually going to teach me what the professor wants to teach me [amazing sense ofmeta-cognition].” Realizing that her critical reflection takes more time and
experiences.MethodDesignThe quasi-experimental study design was developed to compare students from inverted sectionswith those in control sections (i.e., traditional course model). Treatment and control students Page 26.1253.2completed the same measures (e.g., content assessments and student attitude surveys) and facultymembers, who taught in both conditions, also completed reflection papers related to theirexperiences. The guiding research questions for the study and an overview of the assessmentmeasures are shown in Table 1 below (more details on assessment measures are included in asubsequent section of this paper). Table 1. Evaluation Questions and Outcome
. Page 23.224.7 4 Figure 1. Kolb Learning CycleLearning StylesEach FE ALM developed in this work is designed to span a spectrum of different characteristicsin which students learn. The Felder-Soloman Index of Learning Styles25 is composed of fourdimensions: active/reflective, sensing/intuitive, visual/verbal, and sequential/global [Table 1].Active learning tools are designed to meet the needs of students with a range of learning styles.Particular approaches to teaching often favor a certain learning preference. Therefore it isimportant to incorporate a variety of teaching approaches This index can assist instructors increating active learning modules
professor and chairperson of the Childhood Education Department at SSU,works to ensure that the students from Dr. Bade’s course are later placed in practicumexperiences with teachers who have been trained in engineering and technology content andproblem-based pedagogy. There are many players involved in an elementary teacher’s preservicepreparation, but when there is fluid communication and collaboration between them all, newteachers enter the classroom confident that they can teach engineering and technology to theirstudents, and committed to the importance of doing so.How do we measure success?Measurement of the BEST project’s success has centered on two main areas that reflect theoverarching goals of the grant: • How helpful does the faculty
shouldexplore the outcomes of women graduate students who benefit from bonding and bridgingcapital provided through S-STEM programs beyond their time in graduate school. While thisstudy investigated women students currently enrolled in a graduate program, a longitudinal studycould help to understand the long-term impact of these programs after degree completion. 7Acknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the National ScienceFoundation S-STEM Program under Grant No. 1930451. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the
what modifications are required, through end-of-course/workshop surveysand evaluations. For each of these surveys and evaluations, a standard rubric was prepared andprovided to the participants with consultation with the EAC members to properly reflect theproject activity objectives. These formative and summative measures are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Evaluation plan including formative (F) and summative (S) measures. Activity Description Evaluation Measure Continuous consultation and feedback from (i) New course and laboratory External Advisory Committee (F & S); Early and end-of-term
engineering education research to assess socio-emotional and cognitiveoutcomes. Additional work includes the investigation of epistemic insights gained by participants regardingimplanting AI in the K-12 environment.VI. Acknowledgment and DisclaimerThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 2147625.Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.VII. References[1] C. Grant, B.J. MacFadden, P. Antonenko, and V. Perez, “3D Fossils for K-12 Education: A Case Example Using the Giant Extinct Shark Carcharocles Megalodon,” Paleontological Society Papers
understandand interrogate the programmatic barriers to student success in engineering across the nation willalso expand – leading to a cornucopia of previously unexplored questions at scale. AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.BPE- 2152441. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. References[1] F. Curry and J. DeBoer, “A Systematized Literature Review of the Factors that Predict the Retention of Racially Minoritized Students in STEM Graduate
, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68(1), pp. 73-84, 2006.22. J.C. Dunlap, Using guided reflective journaling activities to capture students’ changing perceptions, TechTrends, 50(6), pp. 20-26, 2006.23. H. Rimm and M. Jerusalem, Adaptation and validation of an estonian version of the general self-efficacy scale (ESES), Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 12(3), pp. 329-345, 1999.24. R. Likert, S. Roslow, and G. Murphy, A Simple and Reliable Method of Scoring the Thurstone Attitude Scales, Journal of Social Psychology, 5, pp. 228-238-238, 1934.25. R. DeHaan, R. Hanford, K. Kinlaw, D. Philler, and J. Snarey, Promoting ethical reasoning, affect and behaviour among high school students: An evaluation of three teaching
the transferrable skills course in their resume andprovided examples of how they had demonstrated skill attainment: “I'm looking for a job rightnow, and I was able to list that as I was trained. It’s been extremely helpful.” Another Cohort 1student commented that the transferable skills and the interdisciplinary aspect of the NRT hadprompted a conversation in which a potential employer emphasized the need for such skills:“He's just like ‘that's really major right now that you already understand trying to connect withother people from different backgrounds and different perspectives to work together to try to getsomething done’.” When Cohort 1 students were prompted to reflect on what additional supportsto promote development in inter
). We expect thatour work will inform future efforts to moderate behaviors and team dynamics throughinterventions such as conflict management and self-advocacy.AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported by the National Science Foundation’s Research Initiation inEngineering Formation (RIEF) program under Grant No. 2106322. Any opinions, findings,conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of NSF. We also acknowledge the work of Ana Biviano, a graduateresearcher on this project. We thank anonymous reviewers to an earlier draft of this manuscript.References 5Aragon O., Pietri E. and Powell B. (2023) Gender bias in teaching
Endeavour staff was experiencing in and out of the classroom. Also, the researchers felt thatthe high frequency of the survey delivery (five times over the two-year period of the program)was leading the students to not reflect on the survey questions as deeply as was desired sincethey had seen the questions so many times before. Therefore, modifications were continuouslybeing made to the original study design with the first three cohorts (e.g., a shift to focus groupsas opposed to Liker-scale surveys). Although the initial survey data would still prove useful forachieving specific aim 3 (an engagement dashboard), engagement measures have since moved tomore qualitative methods of data collection [8]. Work is still being done by the staff to pull in
(grant number2034800). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. The authors thank our project evaluator Dr. Elizabeth Litzler and advisory boardmember Diana Gonzalez for their support and guidance on this project. The authors also thankthe Year 2 participants for supporting this work by sharing their experiences in our survey.References[1] T. M. Evans, L. Bira, J. Beltran-Gastelum, L. T. Weiss, and N. L. Vanderford, “Evidence for a mental health crisis in graduate education,” The FASEB Journal, vol. 36, pp. 282- 284, 2018.[2] A. K. Flatt, “A Suffering Generation: Six factors
in the Journals: Publication Patterns in Political Science,” PS: Political Science & Politics, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 433–447, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.1017/S1049096516002985.[22] P. Chakravartty, R. Kuo, V. Grubbs, and C. McIlwain, “#CommunicationSoWhite,” Journal of Communication, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 254–266, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1093/joc/jqy003.[23] L. Urrieta, L. Méndez, and E. Rodríguez, “‘A moving target’: a critical race analysis of Latina/o faculty experiences, perspectives, and reflections on the tenure and promotion process,” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 1149–1168, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1080/09518398.2014.974715.[24] A. A. Berhe et al., “Scientists from
this paper are those of the authors and do not, necessarily, reflect those of the National ScienceFoundation (NSF).References[1] J. Njock Libii, “Building an Infrastructure to Enhance and Sustain the Success of STEM Majors Who are Commuting Students,” presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, June 2018. 10.18260/1-2. Paper# 30128.[2] Indiana Commission for Higher Education College Completion Reports, 2022. [online] https://www.in.gov/che/files/2022_College_Completion_Report_10_03_2022.pdf.[3] National Center for Education Statistics, “Undergraduate Retention and Graduation Rates,” Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences
EPRA evaluates theirattitudes to social responsibility. But our analysis has a current gap in that we have not yetassessed differences in student work displaying their ethical reasoning on the problems of thecourse. The use of the PM evaluations will address this gap and evaluate ethical achievement onthe specific projects the courses were designed to prepare them for.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation, specifically theDivision of Undergraduate Engineering in the Directorate for STEM Education, under Grant No.2020560. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National