An official website of the United States government
To broaden efforts for improving diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in biomedical engineering (BME) education—a key area of emphasis is the integration of inclusive teaching practices. While BME faculty generally support these efforts, translating support into action remains challenging. This project aimed to address this need through a 3-phase inclusive teaching training, consisting of graduate students, faculty, and engineering education consultants. In Phase I, graduate students and faculty participated in a 6-week learning community on inclusive teaching (Foundational Learning). In Phase II, graduate students were paired with faculty to modify or develop new inclusive teaching materials to be integrated into a BME course (Experiential Learning). Phase III was the implementation of these materials. To assess Phases I & II, graduate student participants reflected on their experiences on the project. To assess Phase III, surveys were administered to students in IT-BME-affiliated courses as well as those taking other BME-related courses. Phases I & II: graduate students responded positively to the opportunity to engage in this inclusive teaching experiential learning opportunity. Phase III: survey results indicated that the incorporation of inclusive teaching practices in BME courses enhanced the student learning experience. The IT-BME project supported graduate students and faculty in learning about, creating, and implementing inclusive teaching practices in a collaborative and supportive environment. This project will serve to both train the next class of instructors and use their study of inclusive teaching concepts to facilitate the creation of ideas and materials that will benefit the BME curriculum and students.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on February 12, 2026
Supporting Inclusive Computing: A Graduate Course to Prepare Future Faculty
Creating inclusive learning environments is important for retaining students, particularly those from historically marginalized groups in computing. However, both faculty and graduate students -- who are responsible for teaching and mentoring activities - often receive little, if any, training on creating inclusive learning environments. Using a higher education approach, I developed and taught a semester-long course to prepare future faculty members to create inclusive computing learning environments. This experience report describes the process for creating the course including topics, readings, assignments, and approaches for facilitation and learning. I also provide analysis, reflection, and insights from students' surveys and their written reflections throughout the course. The primary contribution of this experience report is to document the learning gains in graduate students' self-efficacy, awareness, and preparation for faculty roles, and to share insights on the implementation of the course to serve as a guide for other departments in the development and execution of similar training approaches.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2137647
- PAR ID:
- 10644320
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 374 to 380
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- broadening participation in computing graduate education faculty development
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design using problem-based learningAbstract Background Traditionally, doctoral student education in the biomedical sciences relies on didactic coursework to build a foundation of scientific knowledge and an apprenticeship model of training in the laboratory of an established investigator. Recent recommendations for revision of graduate training include the utilization of graduate student competencies to assess progress and the introduction of novel curricula focused on development of skills, rather than accumulation of facts. Evidence demonstrates that active learning approaches are effective. Several facets of active learning are components of problem-based learning (PBL), which is a teaching modality where student learning is self-directed toward solving problems in a relevant context. These concepts were combined and incorporated in creating a new introductory graduate course designed to develop scientific skills (student competencies) in matriculating doctoral students using a PBL format. Methods Evaluation of course effectiveness was measured using the principals of the Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluation. At the end of each course offering, students completed evaluation surveys on the course and instructors to assess their perceptions of training effectiveness. Pre- and post-tests assessing students’ proficiency in experimental design were used to measure student learning. Results The analysis of the outcomes of the course suggests the training is effective in improving experimental design. The course was well received by the students as measured by student evaluations (Kirkpatrick Model Level 1). Improved scores on post-tests indicate that the students learned from the experience (Kirkpatrick Model Level 2). A template is provided for the implementation of similar courses at other institutions. Conclusions This problem-based learning course appears effective in training newly matriculated graduate students in the required skills for designing experiments to test specific hypotheses, enhancing student preparation prior to initiation of their dissertation research.more » « less
-
Creating computer science (CS) classrooms in which all students – especially those historically excluded in CS – feel a sense of belonging is critical to equitably expanding CS education. Providing professional learning that prepares teachers to cultivate inclusive and culturally responsive environments at the scale needed to address inequities in CS education is a major challenge. This paper explores our experience scaling inclusive CS teaching through the development of a professional learning course for teachers and accompanying facilitator training. We describe key design decisions made over several iterations of the teacher-facing course and facilitator training. Our approach has aimed to balance the need for building community and safe spaces to converse about sensitive topics with the capacity to reach teachers at scale. We discuss findings from recent facilitator trainings and discuss best practices we have learned for scaling equity-based professional learning in CS.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) graduate programs excel at developing students’ technical expertise and research skills. The interdisciplinary nature of many STEM research projects means that graduate students often find themselves paired with experts from other fields and asked to work together to solve complex problems. At Michigan State University, the College of Engineering has developed a graduate level course that helps students build professional skills (communications, teamwork, leadership) to enhance their participation in these types of interdisciplinary projects. This semester-long course also includes training on research mentoring, helping students work more effectively with their current faculty mentors and build skills to serve as mentors themselves. Discussions of research ethics are integrated throughout the course, which allows participants to partially fulfill graduate training requirements in the responsible conduct of research. This paper will discuss the development of this course, which is based in part on curriculum developed as part of an ongoing training grant from the National Science Foundation. 18 graduate students from Engineering and other STEM disciplines completed the course in Spring 2019, and we will present data gathered from these participants along with lessons learned and suggestions for institutions interested in adapting these open-source curriculum materials for their own use. Students completed pre- and post-course evaluations, which asked about their expectations and reasons for participating in the course at the outset and examined their experiences and learning at the end. Overall, students reported that the course content was highly relevant to their daily work and that they were highly satisfied with the content of all three major focus areas (communications, teamwork, leadership). Participants also reported that the structure and the pacing of the course were appropriate, and that the experience had met their expectations. The results related to changes in students’ knowledge indicate that the course was effective in increasing participants understanding of and ability to employ professional skills for communications, teamwork and leadership. Statistical analyses were conducted by creating latent constructs for each item as applicable and then running paired t-tests. The evaluation also demonstrated increases in students’ interest, knowledge and confidence of the professional skills offered in the course.more » « less
-
U.S. graduate engineering programs traditionally follow a “one-size-fits-all” approach that prioritizes research skills, is slow to adapt to industry trends, and defaults to training students for academic careers. Further, these programs implicitly assume that students start at the same knowledge level, disregarding differences in educational preparation and students’ backgrounds, including socioeconomic and sociocultural factors, prior work experience, and professional development. Through a National Science Foundation Innovations in Graduate Education award, the University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering is creating and validating a five-component personalized learning model (PLM) for graduate education within the Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering. This model, designed around the students' self-identified goals, aims to modernize graduate STEM education through a student-centered approach, advancing existing knowledge on the relationship between personalized learning and student outcomes. The first three components provide an intentional approach to learning: Instructional Goals developed for each student based on a learner profile and individual development plans (IDP), a purposeful Task Environment that breaks the traditional three-credit coursework into modules and co-curricular professional development streams, and a persistent approach to Scaffolding Instruction that leads to students’ mastery. The last two components provide feedback and reflection: Assessment of Performance Learning and Reflection and Evaluation. This paper reports on the methodology, results, and application of work conducted on the second component of the model, the Task Environment. This component purposefully breaks the traditional three-credit coursework into single-credit classes, specifically one-credit fast-paced fundamentals review, one-credit graduate-level core content, and one-credit graduate-level specialized content. This change provides a flexible and personalized learning experience. It enables students to customize their education to fit program requirements and align with their interests, thus allowing students to have agency on the breadth and depth of their intellectual development. To create the modularized curriculum, we initiated a collaborative process that leveraged the collective expertise of our chemical engineering faculty and external subject matter experts (SMEs), including chemical engineers from industry, government, academia, and start-ups. Starting with our faculty's existing learning objectives from each core course, we employed GroupWisdom group concept mapping software to (1) brainstorm on additional graduate-level chemical engineering learning objectives, (2) group the learning objectives into one of three levels: fundamental, graduate core, and specialized topics for each course topic, and (3) rate the importance of each learning objective. The multi-session group concept mapping technique leveraged 25 SMEs. Two sets of learning objectives were produced. The first was a prioritized set of learning outcomes for each content area organized according to the three levels. The second set comprised learning outcomes necessary for graduate students to be successful post-graduation, including technical and non-technical learning objectives. For the first set, faculty have formed a learning community to interpret the results and collectively work on restructuring course content and pedagogy. For the second set, the same SMEs rated the importance of each learning objective, which informed the priority of incorporation into the revised curriculum.more » « less
