Near-Peer Mentors’ Discussions with a Student Avatar Experiencing Logistical Issues on a First-Year Design Team

Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue; Haritha Malladi; Marcia Gail Headley

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: First-Year Programs Division: Best of FPD
Tagged Division: First-Year Programs Division (FYP)
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/47801

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue Towson University orcid.org/0000-0003-2989-7969

visit author page

Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is Professor of Science and Engineering Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy & Geosciences at Towson University. She has integrated engineering into courses for PreK-8 teacher candidates, developed and directed a graduate STEM program for PreK-6 teachers, and partnered with teachers to implement PreK-8 science-integrated engineering learning experiences. She has authored numerous engineering-focused teacher practitioner articles, chapters, and research articles, and presents her research regularly through the ASEE Pre-College Engineering Education Division, a division she has chaired. Her current research includes investigating how children plan, fail, and productively persist; how mixed-reality simulated classroom environments can be used to help pre-service and in-service teachers practice facilitating challenging discussions in science and engineering; and how undergraduate engineering design teaching assistants address (and may be able to practice addressing) team conflict within similar simulated environments.

visit author page

biography

Haritha Malladi University of Delaware orcid.org/0000-0002-8723-8964

visit author page

Haritha Malladi is an Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and the Director of First-Year Engineering at the University of Delaware. She received her Bachelor of Technology degree in Civil Engineering from National Institute of Technology, Warangal, India, and her MS and PhD in Civil Engineering from North Carolina State University. She is a teacher-scholar working in the intersection of undergraduate engineering education, sustainable infrastructure, and community engagement. She teaches the introductory engineering course for all first-year undergraduate students in the College of Engineering at UD. Her undergraduate teaching experience includes foundational engineering mechanics courses like statics and strength of materials as well as courses related to sustainability and infrastructure. Her research interests are in foundational engineering education, sustainability in engineering curriculum, and green technologies in infrastructure.

visit author page

biography

Marcia Gail Headley University of Delaware orcid.org/0000-0003-3017-2834

visit author page

Dr. Headley is a Data Scientist at the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy (CRESP) at the University of Delaware. She specializes in the development of mixed methods research designs for educational research.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

In this Complete Research paper, we share results from our larger study of how experienced near-peer mentors (NPMs) who manage design teams facilitate one-on-one discussions with students on design teams in conflict. These design teams are part of a large (ca. 650-student) first-year undergraduate engineering design course at our university; 28 NPMs each mentor approximately five five-person teams in the course. The one-on-one discussions aimed to gather student perspectives on the reason(s) for the conflict and their ideas about how to resolve it. The conflict of focus is what others in the literature have termed “social loafing,” i.e., when a student on a team does not contribute their fair share to the team. We refer to this as engagement-related conflict. However, those who are perceived to be disengaged from a team might be experiencing logistical issues, marginalization, or disinterest in the major. Inquiry by NPMs is needed to discern the cause of this perceived social loafing. One unique aspect of this study is that it employs a mixed-reality simulation for the NPMs to engage in discussions with student avatars. Twelve undergraduate engineering majors with experience as NPMs in one or more design-based courses participated in the study. We used the Mursion® mixed-reality simulated environment to create interactive student avatars from the same design team with whom each of the study participants would interact via one-on-one discussions. One of those, Ciara, is the focus of the present study. The student avatars’ voice and movement were controlled in real time by highly trained simulation specialist or “sim” using computer-connected hardware and Mursion® software. The sim in this study is the first author and a member of the engineering education community. We provided materials to all study participants prior to engaging in the simulation session. The materials describe a fictional team of five students enrolled in the course whose Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) peer evaluations suggest that Ciara and two other student avatars may not be contributing fully to the team. The materials also include the goal of the discussions—to understand the student avatars’ “side of the story” along with the three reasons why students may be perceived as disengaged from the team. What participants may find in their discussion with Ciara is that she is facing logistical issues, with the team not being considerate of her position as a student who commutes. Each participant signed up for a video-recorded session during which they facilitated a discussion with Ciara and two other avatars, in varying order. Discussions with each avatar were between 6 and 15 minutes. We used iterative qualitative analysis of discussion transcripts to determine 1) whether the NPMs inquired about logistics, marginalization, or interest during their discussion with Ciara; and 1) what statements of support they provided to Ciara during the discussion. We used subcodes to further describe logistics questions and supportive statements. We used qualitative content analysis to characterize the range of each code and subcode across participants. All the participants asked at least two questions regarding whether Ciara was experiencing logistical challenges on her team. Three participants (25%) inquired about her interest in being an engineering major or in course, and four participants (33%) asked if she was feeling marginalized on her team. One of the participants, Dallas (a pseudonym), elicited or probed about all three of these possible reasons; Dallas asked 11 questions related to logistics. Contrastingly, four participants asked two questions about logistics but no questions about interest or marginalization. All but one participant (92%) offered supportive statements to Ciara, with Dallas offering the most such statements. This work has significance in that it introduces the simulated environment coupled with transcript analysis as a tool for studying NPMs’ discussions with students who are experiencing conflict in design teams. It suggests that while experienced NPMs use a variety of strategies to explore, more work is needed to help NPMs learn to ask a wide range of questions and approach discussions in a supportive and exploratory manner. Further, this study supports our ongoing work to develop professional learning opportunities to help NPMs to practice facilitating discussions with students to resolve conflict and do so in a way that is equitable and inclusive.

Citation
Format

Lottero-Perdue, P. S., & Malladi, H., & Headley, M. G. (2024, June), Near-Peer Mentors’ Discussions with a Student Avatar Experiencing Logistical Issues on a First-Year Design Team Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. https://peer.asee.org/47801

TY - CPAPER
AB - In this Complete Research paper, we share results from our larger study of how experienced near-peer mentors (NPMs) who manage design teams facilitate one-on-one discussions with students on design teams in conflict. These design teams are part of a large (ca. 650-student) first-year undergraduate engineering design course at our university; 28 NPMs each mentor approximately five five-person teams in the course. The one-on-one discussions aimed to gather student perspectives on the reason(s) for the conflict and their ideas about how to resolve it. The conflict of focus is what others in the literature have termed “social loafing,” i.e., when a student on a team does not contribute their fair share to the team. We refer to this as engagement-related conflict. However, those who are perceived to be disengaged from a team might be experiencing logistical issues, marginalization, or disinterest in the major. Inquiry by NPMs is needed to discern the cause of this perceived social loafing. One unique aspect of this study is that it employs a mixed-reality simulation for the NPMs to engage in discussions with student avatars.
Twelve undergraduate engineering majors with experience as NPMs in one or more design-based courses participated in the study. We used the Mursion® mixed-reality simulated environment to create interactive student avatars from the same design team with whom each of the study participants would interact via one-on-one discussions. One of those, Ciara, is the focus of the present study. The student avatars’ voice and movement were controlled in real time by highly trained simulation specialist or “sim” using computer-connected hardware and Mursion® software. The sim in this study is the first author and a member of the engineering education community.
We provided materials to all study participants prior to engaging in the simulation session. The materials describe a fictional team of five students enrolled in the course whose Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) peer evaluations suggest that Ciara and two other student avatars may not be contributing fully to the team. The materials also include the goal of the discussions—to understand the student avatars’ “side of the story” along with the three reasons why students may be perceived as disengaged from the team. What participants may find in their discussion with Ciara is that she is facing logistical issues, with the team not being considerate of her position as a student who commutes.
Each participant signed up for a video-recorded session during which they facilitated a discussion with Ciara and two other avatars, in varying order. Discussions with each avatar were between 6 and 15 minutes. We used iterative qualitative analysis of discussion transcripts to determine 1) whether the NPMs inquired about logistics, marginalization, or interest during their discussion with Ciara; and 1) what statements of support they provided to Ciara during the discussion. We used subcodes to further describe logistics questions and supportive statements. We used qualitative content analysis to characterize the range of each code and subcode across participants.
All the participants asked at least two questions regarding whether Ciara was experiencing logistical challenges on her team. Three participants (25%) inquired about her interest in being an engineering major or in course, and four participants (33%) asked if she was feeling marginalized on her team. One of the participants, Dallas (a pseudonym), elicited or probed about all three of these possible reasons; Dallas asked 11 questions related to logistics. Contrastingly, four participants asked two questions about logistics but no questions about interest or marginalization. All but one participant (92%) offered supportive statements to Ciara, with Dallas offering the most such statements.
This work has significance in that it introduces the simulated environment coupled with transcript analysis as a tool for studying NPMs’ discussions with students who are experiencing conflict in design teams. It suggests that while experienced NPMs use a variety of strategies to explore, more work is needed to help NPMs learn to ask a wide range of questions and approach discussions in a supportive and exploratory manner. Further, this study supports our ongoing work to develop professional learning opportunities to help NPMs to practice facilitating discussions with students to resolve conflict and do so in a way that is equitable and inclusive.
AU - Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue
AU - Haritha Malladi
AU - Marcia Gail Headley
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Near-Peer Mentors’ Discussions with a Student Avatar Experiencing Logistical Issues on a First-Year Design Team
UR - https://peer.asee.org/47801
ER -