1

Improving Faculty Student Interaction:Research-based, time-effective tips

to engage students

Dr. Becky Packard hosts a discussion with Faculty

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0833076. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Research-Based Strategies

#1 Improve spatial visualization skills of students with weak skills

#2 Use everyday examples in engineering to teach technical concepts

#3 Improve and increase interaction between faculty and students

2

• Becky Wai-Ling Packard, Ph.D.Associate Dean of Faculty and Director of the Weissman CenterMt. Holyoke College

• Krishna Pakala, Ph.D.Clinical Assistant Professor, Mechanical and Biomedical EngineeringBoise State University

3

Featured Presenters

4

Faculty-Student Interactions Make a

Big Difference in Student Engagement and Success

5

“Two of the most significant factors…

…affecting engineering student engagement, retention, and

academic performance are the quality and extent of students’ interaction with engineering faculty. Positive student learning outcomes are correlated with faculty discussion with students about the nature of engineering work and affirmation of student’s abilities to successfully perform such work.”

Dr. Norman Fortenberry, Executive DirectorAmerican Society for Engineering Education

6

Research Findings:Faculty-Student InteractionsInfluence Progress and Persistence

- American Society for Engineering Education. (2009). Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering.

- MentorNet. (2008). Students’ Perceptions of the Value and Need for Mentors as They Progress Through Academic Studies in Engineering and Science. A report to the National Science Foundation.

- Pfund, C., Pribbenow, C.M., Branchaw, J., Lauffer, S.M., Handelsman, J. (2006) .The Merits of Training Mentors. Science. (311), 473‐474.

7

Focus Today: Major Barrier of Time

• Not as much high-quality interaction• Lack of time, larger classes

8

Even Small, Casual Interactions Make a Difference!

“I was just about to change my major. I was getting overwhelmed. My professor talked to me and reminded me of the opportunities available to me in the field. I stuck with it, and I’m glad I did.”

Amelink, C. and Creamer, E. (2010). Gender Differences in Elements of the Undergraduate Experience that Influence Satisfaction with the Engineering Major and the Intent to Pursue Engineering as a Career. Journal of Engineering Education,(99)1, 81‐92.

9

Faculty benefit too!

• Students perceive greater accessibility• Better learning outcomes from students• Saves faculty time in office hours• Empower TAs to plan, organize and implement• Stronger course evaluations!

Gall, K., Knight, D. W., Carlson, L. E., & Sullivan, J. F. (2003, Oct). Making the grade with students: The case for accessibility. Journal of Engineering Education, 92, 337-343.Dee, K. C. (2007, Jan). Student Perceptions of High Course Workloads are Not Associated with Poor Student Evaluations of Instructor Performance. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 69-78.

10

Research Finding 1: Faculty Approachability Matters

Lundberg, C. A., & Schreiner, L. A. (2004). Quality and frequency of faculty-student interaction as predictors of learning: An analysis by student race/ethnicity. Journal of College Student Development, 45(5), 549-565.

Kim, Y. K., & Sax, L. J. (2009). Student–faculty interaction in research universities: Differences by student gender, race, social class, and first-generation status. Research in Higher Education, 50(5), 437-459.

Somebody told you that there are no stupid questions?

11

Tip for Approachability: Use Students’ Names

• Print a Sheet with Student Photos and Names• Use a Seat Assignment• Table Tents with Names

• Example– Before: “Remember last time we talked about

building a bridge.” – After: “Remember last time when Jennifer described

the bridge she built...”

12

Tip to Improve Approachability: Use Small Group Office Hours

• Organize students into small groups

• Rotate small groups through Office Hours

13

Research Finding 2:

- Pappas, E. C., & Hendricks, R. W. (2000). Holistic grading in science and engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(2), 403-408. - Rae, A. M., Cochrane, D. K. (2008). Listening to students: How to make written assessment feedback useful. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 217-230. - Roselli, R. J., & Brophy, S. P. (2006, October). Experiences with formative assessment in engineering classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 325-333.

Giving Effective Feedback Improves Student Work

14

Tip: Use a Grading Rubric

• Why?– Reduce questions; improve

perception of fairness; save time!

– Grading is more specific, transparent and consistent

– Students learn more effectively

15

Sample Rubric

Grade: 12/20

Component A: Computation 2 errors (- 6) Component B: Evidence missing/complete Component C: Examples 3 of 4 included (- 2)

Watch those computation errors. I am confident you can do higher quality work next time.

16

Another idea: Invite Questions in Writing

• Idea: Students Submit Questions at End of Class

• Start of class:“Please write down a few questions you have right now. As I go through my lecture, I hope some of these questions will get crossed off.”

• End of class: “Please add any questions that came to mind, and cross off those that got answered. Please turn them in, with no names.”

17

Research Finding 3: Faculty Expectations Influence Student Performance

Encouraging students to succeed• Students feel more capable and motivated to work

harder• Gives students a target to aim for

- Cohen, G. L., Steele, C. M., & Ross, L. D. (1999). The mentor’s dilemma: Giving critical feedback across the racial divide. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1302-1318.

- Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House: New York.

18

Alternatives to Counseling Students to Switch Majors

“If you can’t do well with this really simple concept, you are in trouble.”

Instead: “This is a foundational concept that you need to understand. Here are some ways you can work on it.”

“Listen, I’m trying to do you a favor. Get out now before investing any further.”

Instead: “I applaud your commitment to becoming an engineer—that’s what it takes to be successful. I’m concerned that (calculus, physics, spatial skills) is tripping you up. Students who sign up for tutoring really benefit.

19

A constructive message

“I noticed from grading the assignments that many people skipped one critical step. I’m posting a link to a website that might be helpful, so take a look before Wednesday. This is a step that trips up a lot people...keep working at it!”

20

Research Finding 4: Linking Academics to Future Careers Motivates Students

- Lotkowski, V.A., Robbins, S.B., and Noeth, R.J. (2004). The Role of Academic and Non‐Academic Factors in Improving College Retention. ACT, Inc.

- MentorNet. (2008). Students’ Perceptions of the Value and Need for Mentors as They Progress Through Academic Studies in Engineering and Science. A report to the National Science Foundation.

21

Tip for Academic-Career Link:Start Class With a 1-Minute Message

• Reach all students with one message• Students feel encouraged, invited, informed

– “Volunteering just a couple of hours a week on research can be a great thing to do. Professor Brown is looking for help, so stop by office hours to learn more.”

– “Jessica, one of my former students who now works for the EPA, says that she uses what she learned in this class on a regular basis in her work.”

– “I recently learned [at a conference/in the paper/in my research] that…”

– My son/daughter came home from school and asked…– While I was skiing, I thought about…

Connections Classes

Cookies in the Classroom(Cookies Connections Classes)

The University of Texas at AustinCockrell School of Engineering

22

Connections Classes- Impact

• I learned something new from my instructor.– 97% strongly agree or agree; 2% neutral

• There is a value in having a Connections class–94% strongly agree or agree; 5% neutral

23

Connections Classes- Impact

• I think it makes the professor more approachable. Honestly, it might make going into office hours a lot less intimidating!

• Freaking awesome!

24

Connections Classes- Faculty

• Value of Connections Class–50% - Increased sense of accessibility to

students–38% - Improved relationship with students

25

It helped students to see me as a person they could relate to. I think that doing this early in the semester helps with breaking the barrier early on, so that students can then feel more comfortable to ask questions.

Questions?

26

27

Thank You for Attending!

We will E-mail links to recorded webinar and PowerPoint

Please share with colleagues!

References and suggestions for further reading on following slides

28

29

1. Amelink, C. and Creamer, E. (2010). Gender Differences in Elements of the Undergraduate Experience that Influence Satisfaction with the Engineering Major and the Intent to Pursue Engineering as a Career. Journal of Engineering Education. (99)1: 81‐92.

2. American Society for Engineering Education. (2009). Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering.

3. Lotkowski, V.A., Robbins, S.B., and Noeth, R.J.(2004). The Role of Academic and Non‐Academic Factors in Improving College Retention. ACT, Inc. www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/college_retention.pdf

4. MentorNet. (2008). Students’ Perceptions of the Value and Need for Mentors as They Progress Through Academic Studies in Engineering and Science. A report to the National Science Foundation. www.mentornet.net/documents/about/results/evaluation/.../index.aspx

5. Pfund, C., Pribbenow, C.M., Branchaw, J., Lauffer, S.M., Handelsman, J. (2006) The Merits of Training Mentors. Science. (311), 473‐474.

6. Cohen, G. L., Steele, C. M., & Ross, L. D. (1999). The mentor’s dilemma: Giving critical feedback across the racial divide. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(10), 1302-1318.

References

30

References

7. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House: New York.

8. Kim, Y. K., & Sax, L. J. (2009). Student–faculty interaction in research universities: Differences by student gender, race, social class, and first-generation status. Research in Higher Education, 50(5), 437-459.

9. Lundberg, C. A., & Schreiner, L. A. (2004). Quality and frequency of faculty-student interaction as predictors of learning: An analysis by student race/ethnicity. Journal of College Student Development, 45(5), 549-565.

10. Pappas, E. C., & Hendricks, R. W. (2000). Holistic grading in science and engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 89, 403-408.

11. Rae, A. M., Cochrane, D. K. (2008). Listening to students: How to make written assessment feedback useful. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 217-230.

12. Roselli, R. J., & Brophy, S. P. (2006, October). Experiences with formative assessment in engineering classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 325-333.

31

Further Reading

1. Amelink, C. (2009). Overview: Mentoring and Women in Engineering. SWE‐AWE Applying Research to Practice Series, CASEE Overviews.

2. Chen, H., Lattuca, L. & Hamilton, E. (2008). Conceptualizing Engagement: Contributions of Faculty to Student Engagement in Engineering. Journal of Engineering Education. (97)3.

3. Chesler, N. & Chesler, M. (2002). Gender‐Informed Mentoring Strategies for Women Engineering Scholars: On Establishing a Caring Community. Journal of Engineering Education. (91)1.

4. Goodman, I.F. & Cunningham, M.L. (2002). Final Report of the Women’s Experiences In College Engineering (WECE) Project.

5. Metz, S.S., Brainard, S.G., and Litzler, E. (2010). Extending Research Into Practice: Results From The Project To Assess Climate In Engineering (PACE). Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2010 Annual Conference, Session AC 2010‐ 723.

6. Micomonaco, J. and Stricklen, J. (2010). Toward a Better Understanding of Academic and Social Integration: A Qualitative Study of Factors Related to Persistence in Engineering. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2010 Annual Conference, Session AC 2010‐1467.

32

Further Reading

7. National Academy of Engineering. (2009). New Directions in Engineering Excellence: Keeping Students Engaged

8. Vogt, C.M. (2008). Faculty as a critical juncture in student retention and performance in engineering programs. Journal of Engineering Education. (97)1: 27‐36.

9. Winters, K. Matusovich, H. and Streveler, R. (2010). How Student‐Faculty Interactions Influence Student Motivations: A Longitudinal Study Using Self‐Determination Theory. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education 2010 Annual Conference, Session AC 2010‐1107

10. Ohland, M. W., Sheppard, S., Lichtenstein, G., Eris, O., Chachra, D., & Layton, R. A. (2008). Persistence, engagement and migration in engineering programs. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 259-278.

11. Packard, B. W. (2004-2005). Mentoring and retention in college science: Reflections on the sophomore year. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice, 6, 289-300.

12. Packard, B. W., & Hudgings, J. H. (2002). Expanding college women’s perceptions of physicists’ lives and work through interactions with a physics careers web site. Journal of College Science Teaching, 32(3), 164-170.

33

Further Reading

13. Rugutt, J., & Chemosit, C. C. (2009). What motivates students to learn? Contribution of student-to-student relations, student-faculty interaction, and critical thinking skills. Educational Research Quarterly, 32(3), 16-28.