campusculture [9], [10]. In these studies, campus culture considered (1) classroom experiences, (2)faculty-staff relationship, (3) institutional support services, (4) peer interactions, (5) studenteffort to learn, (6) goal development and management, and (7) institutional commitment. As aresult, we integrated these components of campus culture into our understanding of institutionalclimate to ground our data collection approach and provide a helpful framework for uncoveringways in which institutional climate can impact how a Black HBCU undergraduate engineering orcomputing student navigates their post-graduate planning and decision-making.Identity and SuccessUnderstanding how an institution’s culture and climate support students’ personal identities is
State University. He teaches in the areas of introductory materials engineering, polymers and composites, and capstone design. His research interests include evaluating conceptual knowledge, mis- conceptions and technologies to promote conceptual change. He has co-developed a Materials Concept Inventory and a Chemistry Concept Inventory for assessing conceptual knowledge and change for intro- ductory materials science and chemistry classes. He is currently conducting research on NSF projects in two areas. One is studying how strategies of engagement and feedback with support from internet tools and resources affect conceptual change and associated impact on students’ attitude, achievement, and per- sistence. The
on graduatestudents who hold marginalized identities -- highlight the ongoing need to research the mentalhealth of STEM graduate students and how mental health influences various aspects of their livesand academic trajectories, aligning with the conclusion in the review conducted by Bork andMondisa focused on graduate student mental health in engineering (2021).Our findings reveal a significant shift in the focus on mental health publications during and afterthe COVID-19 pandemic. The observed shift in focus towards mental health publications duringand after the COVID-19 pandemic is indicative of an increased acknowledgment of the mentalhealth challenges that arose and the necessity for supportive measures and interventions toeffectively
one pre-collegiate engineering experience,such as science and engineering fairs or robotics competitions is correlated with an increase inengineering identity and retention. As expected, we found that these students are more likely toparticipate in engineering organizations, and plan to stay in engineering.Limitations and Future Work One limitation of this study is that it was given at only one university as a pilot. Some ofthe programs that we are investigating are highly selective, serving as few as eight students in ayear. In order to get sample sizes large enough for decisive results about individual programs,this study needs to be performed in aerospace engineering departments at multiple universities.In future studies, additional
alumni who graduated from programs that blend professional training withbroad studies in the liberal arts, we seldom hear students evaluate such integration-orientedprograms in their own terms: What do they expect from a more holistic model of engineeringeducation? In what ways do they find a more comprehensive learning experience empowering orconstraining? What do they appreciate the most about their programs? What changes do theywish to see? This paper looks into the “user experience” of educational initiatives that seek tobring together engineering and liberal learning.The analysis presented here draws partly upon my dissertation research, a cross-institutionalinvestigation of integrating engineering and liberal education. The dissertation
student, and then 1 studentin each of the following categories: SE Asian, E Asian, S Asian, and Middle Eastern orNorth African student. Pilot Results 33Furthermore, the sample was a little over half first generation college students (51%). Gender 34First we will walk through some of the scenario results by gender. Your first round of tests did not go well and your usual studying habits are not working Women’s top two choices: Men’s top two choices: 1. Spend more
] Johnson, C. M., “A survey of current research on online communities of practice,” InternetHigh Educ, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 45-60, March, 2001.[4] Wenger. E, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 318.[5] Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. S., Sutton, M. M., Mantel, S. J. Jr., Project Management in Practice (4th ed.). New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 2010. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2021 2021 ASEE Midwest Section ConferenceDr. Ann M Gansemer-Topf, Iowa State UniversityAnn Gansemer-Topf is an Associate Professor in Higher Education and Student Affairs, andFaculty Fellow in the Center for Excellence in Learning
paper also provides follow-up to a previousconference paper that was used to provide construction educators insight into andragogicalmethods used to reinforce IPD collaboration principles. The conclusions presented in theconference paper indicated that CM students at CWU tended to be non-cooperative in conflictscenarios.19In the original pilot study, it was established that as a group, the CM students at CWU variedfrom the general population, as well as several other industries, regarding conflict managementstyles.19 Although informative, it was not conclusive as each graduating class had its own set ofnorms and its own personality that develops over time. It was possible that these results differedfrom one year to the next. In addition, it was
quite often a stumbling block for many students intheir learning. Many students are not prepared for college level classes, particularly inmathematics [1, 2, 3, 4]. Point in case, one study evaluated true college-level freshmen andsophomore students entering into STEM disciplines on their knowledge of high school mathbecause it was noticed that they struggle with basic mathematical concepts that are covered atthe high school level. Two major conclusions stemmed from the research: one, studentsspecifically struggle with seven particular high school topics [5], and two, students who takemore mathematics classes, whether at the high school or collegiate level, are apt to performbetter in math and engineering classes [2, 5]. Expounding upon the
Session 2793 Electronic Mentoring: Supporting Women Engineering and Science Students in the Crucial Early Years of College Peg Boyle Single, Carol B. Muller, William S. Carlsen, Christine M. Cunningham MentorNet/MentorNet/Pennsylvania State University/Cornell UniversityMentorNet is using electronic communications to address a persistent problem in engineeringeducation: the underrepresentation of women. This paper in particular will focus onMentorNet’s efforts to support women engineering, science, math, and technology studentsduring the crucial first year of undergraduate education.In this paper, we review the
activities had yet to be designed and implemented at the technicalcolleges. Student participants were still recruited and selected from the target population: transferstudents in Engineering and Computer Science from two of the technical colleges in differentregions of the state. The intention then was that cohort experiences at the technical collegeswould begin August 2020.Fall 2019, six students began the program in the pilot cohort. They had not been together as agroup prior to August 2019 and engaged in the S-STEM program activities without the benefit ofcohort-based learning experiences during their last year at their technical colleges. Given thisdifference, we treated them as a pilot group for testing certain survey and interview questions
hospital, Lenoir Memorial Hospital(LHM) 8. Due to financial constraints and staffing shortages, LHM used a group-mentoring team to support a larger group of nurses than they could have with one-on-onementoring. Benefits noted by the new graduate nurses included: an easier transition, anintroduction to the first year experience, knowing there were people who were willing tohelp and cared, emotional support, awareness of common experiences, and a place to gowith questions. We assert that group-mentoring can similarly benefit engineeringstudents, particularly in situations where students outnumber the available mentors andresources are limited.The Virginia Tech College of Engineering (VT COE) similarly developed a group-mentoring program, Help Me
, 2006.[13] Ricardo, J., Guide, V. G., Hanson, A., Auzenne, M., & Williamson, S., “Enhancing criticalthinking skills of civil engineering students through Supplemental Instruction”, ConferenceProceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Honolulu,Hawaii, 2007.[14] Malm, J. Bryngfors, L., Fredriksson, J., “Impact of Supplemental Instruction on dropout andgraduation rates: an example from 5-year engineering programs”, Journal of Peer Learning, 11,2018, 76-88.[15] Malm, J., Bryngfors, L., & Morner, L.-L., “Benefits of guiding Supplemental Instructionsessions for SI leaders: A case study for engineering education at a Swedish University”, Journalof Peer Learning, 5(1), 2012.[16] Wilson, C., Steele, A
lower diagonalshows p-values.* p < 0.05 VI. DiscussionThis study relies on previous work about the first-year engineering program at TexasA&M University. However, the findings of this study are expected to advance the state ofknowledge and understanding of (a) diverse pathways to and through engineering, and(b) the development of engineering-specific theories of how engineers are formed.A pilot study conducted in 2014-2015 showed that RATS and CFU scores on activitiesrelated to algorithmic thinking (AT) were significantly correlated with moderate to largeeffect sizes, ranged from 0.31 to 0.7315. This implies that students who already had beenexposed to algorithmic thinking seemed to perform better
the years that engineering graduates do notrefer to the ethics codes [9, 10]. Further, the faculty/administration and student perceptions ofengineering ethics education delivery are not aligned. In a study conducted over 18 campuses,110 faculty members and 123 students were interviewed in 90-minute focus groups; twoadministrators from each campus were also individually interviewed. While the faculty andadministrators believed that the engineering ethics curriculum provided a “nuanced treatment ofcomplex issues, their students reported “hearing simplistic, black-and-white messages aboutethics” [11]. Due to observations of faculty approving or participating in unethical behavior,students also did not perceive the faculty as ethical role models
include develop- mental psychology; sociocultural theories of communication, learning, and identity; qualitative methods; and discourse analysis.Dr. Beth A. Myers, University of Colorado Boulder Beth A. Myers is the Director of Analytics, Assessment and Accreditation at the University of Colorado Boulder. She holds a BA in biochemistry, ME in engineering management and PhD in civil engineering. Her interests are in quantitative and qualitative research and data analysis as related to equity in education. She has been involved in the new pilot Engineering Math course at CU-Boulder since the start.Dr. Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, University of Colorado, Boulder Jacquelyn Sullivan is founding co-director of the Engineering Plus
concerned with sci- ence, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning and participation among historically marginalized students of color. Her research focuses on the role of racialized experiences and biases in STEM educational and career attainment, problematizing traditional notions of academic achievement and what is mean to be successful yet marginalized, and STEM identity and identity development in high-achieving students of color. She is currently the PI on two studies funded by NSF, the first of which investigates the causes behind why African Americans remain one of the most underrepresented racial groups in engineering faculty positions. The second study is working toward the design of a holistic
scorings facilitated by Author 1. Each facultymember brought a different disciplinary perspective to the scoring: one faculty member is basedin Civil and Environmental Engineering, another in Business Information Technology, and thethird in Urban Affairs and Planning. Given the pilot, exploratory nature of this study, thissecondary scoring helped validate the initial scoring categories and illuminate potentialdifferences in both assessment of student learning and understanding of DRRM acrossdisciplinary boundaries. Note, however, that because both the sample size (9 participants) andthe scorers (1 from each discipline) are small, the analysis cannot support conclusions bydiscipline; instead, it highlights potential differences that merit further
Paper ID #24617Understanding Undergraduate Engineering Student Information Access andNeeds: Results from a Scoping ReviewMs. Kate Mercer, University of Waterloo Kate Mercer is the liaison librarian for Systems Design Engineering, Electrical & Computer Engineering and Earth & Environmental Sciences at the University of Waterloo. Kate’s main duties include providing instruction and research services to students, faculty and staff. Kate graduated with a MI from the Univer- sity of Toronto in 2011, and in addition to her job as a liaison librarian is a PhD Candidate at the University of Waterloo’s School of
futureAPPLES deployments and analyses.Introduction/BackgroundThe Academic Pathways Study (APS) of the NSF-funded Center for the Advancement ofEngineering Education (CAEE) is a cross-university study that systematically examines howengineering students navigate their education, and how engineering skills and identity developduring their undergraduate careers1,2. APS research falls under the umbrella of the Center for theAdvancement of Engineering Education (CAEE) whose goals are to: 1. Identify ways to boost the numbers of students who complete engineering degrees (including increasing the numbers of women and traditionally underrepresented groups) 2. Better support those enrolled in engineering programs 3. Encourage greater numbers of
Paper ID #29045Impact of mentor-mentee fit in preparing undergraduate STEM students toteach engineering technology for elementary studentsDr. Lei Xie, TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY Dr. Lei Xie is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Organization, Workforce, and Leadership Studies at Texas State University.Dr. Malini Natarajarathinam, Texas A&M University Dr. Malini Natarajarathinam joined the faculty of Industrial Distribution Program at Texas A&M Univer- sity in 2007. Natarajarathinam received her Ph.D. in Supply Chain Management from The University of Alabama. She received her Bachelor of Engineering (Major
projects, reflect on their social identities, and consider the broader societal contexts of their engineering work. The goals of his research are 1) to develop tools and pedagogies that support engineers in achieving the positive societal changes that they envision and 2) to address systems of oppression that exist within and are reproduced by engineering education and work environments. He earned his B.S. in Engineering Sciences from Yale University, with a double major in East Asian Studies, and earned his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Michigan. He also holds a Graduate Certificate in Chinese and American Studies, jointly awarded by Johns Hopkins University and Nanjing University in China.Prof
clarifications as warranted. Mostly she took notes so that she could serveas a co-analyst of the transcripts and check the validity of the coding.We conducted one pilot study in March 2015 to refine the interview guide (see Appendix A) andthree focus groups during April 2015, after students had finished their senior projects.Participants in the pilot study shared majors and interests with those selected for the study, withone exception: pilot study participants were in their third year or first semester of their fourthyear of the engineering program and as such hadn’t experienced the same milestones as thosestudents participating in the study (fourth and fifth year engineering students). Pilot studyparticipants, for example, had yet to undertake their
shows that putting too much weight on high stakes standardized tests is resulting in a misrepresentation of actual student potential for academic success and may disadvantage students from historically underrepresented groups. This is especially true with undergraduate engineering programs where a minimum standardized test score is frequently required for admission. This dynamic is relevant in Nebraska where the demographics of the high school graduates, and in particular the growth of the Hispanic/Latino/a population, is changing quickly. In response to this, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln College of Engineering (UNL-COE) admits students who would not ordinarily be admitted under the
recruiting participants for this study. Undergraduate students were recruitedfrom an engineering living learning community (LLC), with invitations to participate in the studydistributed via email by LLC leadership. Graduate students were recruited by graduate programdirectors, who also sent email invitations to all students enrolled in their graduate engineeringprograms. A total of 182 students completed the survey via Qualtrics, an online survey platform.Participant demographics are shown in Tables 2-5. Importantly, our sample is not representativeof the institutional population, particularly as it relates to academic status (i.e., we havepredominantly first year and graduate students). Our intention is not to generalize across allstudents. All
in the context of problem solving, and researcher identity.Dr. Rachel Louis Kajfez, Ohio State University Dr. Rachel Louis Kajfez is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. She earned her B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Engineering from Ohio State and earned her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech. Her research interests focus on the intersection between motivation and identity of undergraduate and graduate students, first-year engineering programs, mixed methods research, and innovative approaches to teaching.Dr. Marian S. Kennedy, Clemson University Marian Kennedy is an Associate Professor within the Department of Materials Science &
discussion leaders; and 4) assessed learning outcomes associated with self-authorship for students enrolled in the course as compared to students outside the course.In the following sections, we describe the results of a pilot study to assess learning outcomesassociated with integrative learning, self-authorship and confidence in choosing a major.2.0 Course TransformationThe overall goal of this course transformation is to increase students’ level of self-authorshipthrough exposure to a safe and welcoming learning environment in which to discuss topics suchas their identities, values and goals, and the broad educational opportunities available at our theUniversity of Michigan. Prior to this transformation, the course was delivered as a 2-day per
industries and their social and environmentaleffects pose special ethical challenges for engineers seeking to work at the intersection ofcorporate interests, the welfare of communities, environmental sustainability, and professionalautonomy. Yet in interviews, practicing engineers routinely state that the most influentialtraining and mentorship in managing these competing demands takes place primarily on the job,after a student has graduated with an engineering degree. Our NSF-funded research project seeksto push back that training and mentorship to the undergraduate experience by introducingeducational innovations, informed by ethnographic research with practicing engineers. Thispaper reports on the preliminary results from a pilot project in a
, Faculty Understanding, Belongingness, Thriving,Mindfulness, and Motivation. T-tests and ANOVA models are employed to analyze variations inresponses among students based on a host of demographic identifiers. Pilot results from the firstadministration of the survey include, for example, statistically significant lower reported levelsof thriving and mindfulness for students who identify as LGBTQIA+ than those who do not, aswell as far lower levels of ecosystem health overall for students who do not have access to stablehousing. Additional statistically significant results are identified on the bases of students’ gender,race/ethnicity, disability status, veteran status, undergraduate versus graduate student status,college of study, employment
General education 49.1 (2000).4. Oblinger, D., Barone, C., Hawkins, B. (2001). Distributed education and its challenges: an overview.American Council on Education Center for Policy Analysis. www.acenet.edu/bookstore.5. Willcoxson,L, The impact of academic’ learning and teaching practices: A pilot Study, Studies in higher Education v23 n1, March 1998, pp. 59-70.6. Ridley, D., Sammour, H. ( Sept.1996). Viable alternative means of instructional delivery: online courses as an alternative teaching methods, College students Journal v.30.7. Lahidji, B. (2001). Lecturing versus self-study in a first year Engineering Technology course; America Society for Engineering Education Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico.8. Schulman, A., Sims, L. (June