This full research paper expands on ongoing work in undergraduate research mentoring focusing on the relationships and power dynamics of mentoring triads that include a faculty member, graduate student, and undergraduate researcher through narrative analysis of the literature. Background: Graduate students have an important role in undergraduate research. They act as the bridge mentor in a mentoring triad, working with their faculty member and the undergraduate researcher. This mentoring relationship is typically considered either an open triad, where the PI does not engage with the undergraduate researcher, or a closed triad, where the undergraduate researcher has a mentoring relationship with both the graduate student and the PI. There is little literature related to the particular needs of graduate students in such relationships; a recent systematic review found only ten journal articles that focus on graduate students and explicitly use the term “mentor* triad”. Broadening the search found additional literature related to graduate students in undergraduate research mentoring triads, though only 63 articles in total. In working with graduate students and faculty to facilitate professional development workshops on undergraduate research mentoring, there seems to be some aspects missing in existing mentoring relationship models that are not clearly in the mentoring literature. Defining the graduate student's role, relationships to the faculty mentor and undergraduate mentee, and recognizing or developing appropriate boundaries are often confusing for graduate students. These areas require further inquiry to determine ways to better support graduate students in mentoring triads. Purpose: This study explores existing literature to understand the state of the literature related to graduate students' roles and relationships in undergraduate research triads. Methodology/Approach: This study presents an integrative literature review analyzing the triadic mentoring literature, building upon a previous systematic literature review conducted on this topic. Findings/Conclusions: Through a narrative and thematic analysis of this literature we gained a deeper understanding of what mentoring triads are and how they are enacted in research mentoring context. We explored the history and development of current triadic mentoring models and identified some potential areas for expansion of these existing models. Findings from this narrative analysis of the mentoring triad literature will be used to inform phase two of the study, an in-depth thematic analysis of interviews of research mentoring triads. Implications: This study explores the relationships that graduate students engage in when acting as mentors for undergraduate researchers. In our current work, interactions with faculty and graduate students suggest that the existing models do not fully encompass the relationships they experience. The findings from this study will inform recommendations for navigating triad mentoring relationships that include graduate students, faculty, and undergraduate students.

Rubrics are a useful tool for translating performance criteria to an overall rating of quality. In areas where there is not one correct solution but a range of acceptable and difficult-to-express responses, rubrics can be difficult to develop and use. This method uses personas, a technique found in human-centered design, to develop a holistic rubric that is particularly useful in areas where the performance rating is highly subjective. Examples include scholarship applications (e.g. NSF S-STEM grant programs), competitive positions (e.g. REU programs), and classroom performances (e.g. design presentations), among others.

Undergraduate research experiences increase persistence rates in undergraduate STEM programs, particularly with women and underrepresented minorities. Furthermore, participation in these experiences facilitate STEM student development by providing an opportunity for them to apply skills learned in their courses while developing new skills that can be applied to further course work and their career. A productive mentor-mentee relationship is key to maximizing the benefits of these experiences. This must include not only the direct knowledge necessary to complete the tasks required in the lab, but also supplementary training so that undergraduates can understand the research process as a whole as well as professional development training to support student growth. Socioemotional support is also a component of many strong mentoring relationships. Faculty are rarely trained to interact with and mentor undergraduate students. To maximize the benefits of undergraduate research experiences for both students and faculty this research aims to better understand the characteristics and strategies of successful undergraduate research mentors. Research is inherently entrepreneurial; in engaging in research, we seek to discover, create connections, and create value through our discoveries. In understanding their research through an entrepreneurial lens, faculty may be better able to describe their research to non-expert audiences and therefore more easily engage with, educate, and motivate the undergraduate students they work with in their laboratories. The goal of this project is to develop a framework of competencies for mentoring engineering undergraduate researchers grounded in entrepreneurial mindset. The framework uses the KEEN EM Framework of Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value as the foundation for understanding research and mentoring in undergraduate research experiences. The CIMER Entering Mentoring outcomes will be added to a literature review focusing on key competencies and best practices in research mentoring for engineering undergraduates to build the competencies for mentoring undergraduate researchers within the KEEN EM Framework. Connecting aspects of high-quality, evidence-based mentoring to the EM framework will support faculty engagement with these practices, allowing more undergraduate students the opportunity to engage in high-quality, high-impact research experiences. Based on this framework, a series of mentor training workshops will be designed to guide mentors in providing research mentoring designed to cultivate curiosity, connections, and creating value.

This work-in-progress paper presents initial work in technical content assessment practices embedded into and integrated throughout the curriculum of a new engineering program. These practices range from program-level evaluation to combatting persistent misconceptions in foundational courses. Specific cases are presented from current practices and future work is described. The methods and considerations presented in this paper can be used as a model for other institutions looking to understand students' technical content knowledge beyond course-specific homework, exams, and other assessments.

This work-in-progress paper describes the initial stages of the development of a framework to understand learning outcomes related to technical content, professional skills, tools, and values across an entire engineering undergraduate curriculum. This iterative process of development has been undertaken by the mechanical engineering faculty of a new engineering program in order to map and plan for an overall integrated curriculum. The current status of the framework and intended future work are detailed.

This work-in-progress paper provides initial details in an early and ongoing process to embed affective assessment of student development throughout a new engineering program. Assessment of student knowledge, skills, attitudes & values, and behaviors is an important part of course and program assessment. Affective assessment covers the attitudes, values, and behaviors that students develop throughout their undergraduate engineering career. The overarching framework that guides the affective development, and therefore the affective assessment, of undergraduate engineers in this program is the Community of Practice framework. Current status of the affective development and assessment program is shared, including results from an engineering beliefs and identity survey and methods for incorporating the Community of Practice framework into the undergraduate engineering curriculum.