an ASCE ExCEEd Teaching Workshop mentor for five years as well as the founding coordinator for the Oregon Tech Excellence in Teaching Workshop.Dr. Jesse M. Kinder, Oregon Institute of Technology I am a professor of physics at the Oregon Institute of Technology. I earned my bachelor’s degree in Physics and Astronomy from DePauw University and my Master’s and Ph.D. in Physics and Astronomy from the University of Pennsylvania. My research interests include carbon nanotubes, quantum chemistry, and biological physics. I love teaching physics and introducing undergraduate students to physics research.Dr. Ben S. Bunting Jr, Oregon Institute of Technology American c
Paper ID #33122Engineers as Effective Team Players: Evaluating Teamwork Skills in aFlipped Project Management for Civil Engineers CourseNathan Miner, Iowa State University of Science and TechnologyDr. Aliye Karabulut Ilgu, Iowa State University of Science and Technology Dr. Aliye Karabulut-Ilgu is an assistant teaching professor in the Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering at Iowa State University. Her background is in Curriculum and Instruction, and her research interests include online learning, hybrid learning, and technology integration in higher education.Jennifer S. Shane, Iowa State University
Paper ID #33792Engineering Faculty’s Beliefs About Teaching and Solving Ill-structuredProblemsSecil Akinci-Ceylan, Iowa State University of Science and Technology Secil Akinci-Ceylan is a PhD student in Educational Technology in the School of Education, co-majoring in Human-Computer Interaction at Iowa State University.Yiqi Liang, Iowa State University of Science and Technology Yiqi Liang is a PhD student in Aerospace Engineering in the College of Engineering at Iowa State Uni- versity.Dr. Kristen Sara Cetin P.E., Michigan State University Dr. Kristen S Cetin is an Assistant Professor at Michigan State University in the
the research study.A total of 119 practicing engineers volunteered to take the SOMCI, which included 108completed responses. Participants were asked to provide demographic information, includinggender, years of engineering experience, the highest level of education, and engineering area(s)of expertise shown in Table 1. Practicing engineers' years of industry experience varied from 1year to 39 years, and the sample consisted of 26% female, 72% male, and 2% identified as other.As an incentive to take the concept inventory, the engineers were invited to participate in a $250raffle. A total of 153 engineering undergraduates elected to take the concept inventory, with 129complete responses. The students who took the concept inventory came from 8
provided instructors with critical information about theirstudents’ behaviors in courses. For example, learning analytics supply insight into the numberand time of student interactions [12]–[14] and the frequency of viewing content pages [15] andtools [10], [16]. Student behavior analytics is often compared to student performance and provento correlate significantly. Joksimovic et al. (2015) found that the count of student-studentinteractions in an entirely online course significantly correlated with the students’ grades. Also,the time spent interacting with the instructor had positive effects on the final learning outcomes[13]. Agudo-Peregrinal et al. (2014) looked at Moore (1989) and Hillman et al.’s (1994)interaction types and their correlation
outcomes from a curriculum-wideapproach.References[1] A. Hain and S. Motaref, “Implementing Interactive 3-D Models in an Entry Level Engineering Course to Enhance Students’ Visualization,” presented at the 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, June 2020, Virtual Online. 10.18260/1-2--34782.[2] J. L. Segil, B. A. Myers, J. F. S. Ph.D, and D. T. Reamon, “Efficacy of Various Spatial Visualization Implementation Approaches in a First-year Engineering Projects Course,” presented at the 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2015, pp. 26.590.1– 26.590.8.[3] S. A. Sorby, B. Casey, N. Veurink, and A. Dulaney, “The role of spatial training in improving spatial and calculus performance in engineering students
judgement, the instructors decided to allow studentswith appropriate prior experience/practice in land surveying also enroll in this course withoutmeeting the course prerequisite.Student Learning Outcomes: The objective of this course is to expose students to the fundamentalsof T-LiDAR and engage them in specialized activities involving this modern technique tosuccessfully complete 3D point-cloud models of real, service-learning projects. The course wasdesigned to attain the following four Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs): 1. Know the operation of laser-based scanner(s) to acquire spatial, color, and light intensity data. 2. Attain intermediate-level proficiency on the use of computer software to generate virtual 3D point-cloud models
practitioners might. When requested by thestudents, faculty would provide suggestions based on student ideas and/or concerns. Self-selecting software remains the course standard as long as the software was within the resourcesavailable to the AE program. Over the years and amongst teams, selected software varied in typeand number of platforms relative to how teams wanted to customize their experience.Considerations for software were based on perceived benefits that the software could aid theteam towards meeting the capstone goal of designing integrated engineered system(s) solutions.Faculty observations found that software could be grouped into two overarching categories: Design documentation software that students use to convey solutions to a
U e I : Mag ifica i Selec ed del D -d elec i Objec P ii i g F ce a d ag ifica i S a , Re e S a /S /Re e M de Se O Figure 4. User Interface design3.1. Model Setup:This step allows the user to define the
- components proposed in the fulfilled (40 points) missing 1-2 items. proposal successfully. Total: 90 points* Creativity track project should accompany a brief written report with student(s) name(s), and 1) thelearning objectives it includes, 2) description of the project, 3) justification of difficulty, 4) explanation offinal deliverable (artwork, videos, etc.), and 5) references (optional).Out of 122 students in Section 1, 69 students submitted the letter of intent, and 51
Paper ID #32884Does a Review Course Increase FE Exam Preparedness?Dr. Matthew K. Swenty, Virginia Military Institute Matthew (Matt) Swenty obtained his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Civil Engineering from Missouri S&T and then worked as a bridge designer at the Missouri Department of Transportation. After obtaining his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech, he worked at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center. He is currently a professor of Civil Engineering at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI). He teaches engineering mechanics and structural engineering courses and enjoys working with his students
Fellowship.References[1] R. J. Wilson, Introduction to Graph Theory. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1986.[2] S. A. Ambrose, M. W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, M. C. Lovett, and M. K. Norman, How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA, US: Jossey-Bass, 2010.[3] M. W. Moyer, “The Dos and Don’ts of ‘Quarantine Pods,’” New York Times, 2020.[4] J. R. Young, “With No Study Buddies, More College Students Turn to Cheating,” EdSurge, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.edsurge.com/news/2020-10-06-with-no- study-buddies-more-college-students-turn-to-cheating.[5] J. Rosenthal, “Shocked!,” New York Times, 1997.Appendix A: Prompt for “Graph Theory and Disease Transmission”On our course webpage, I
writing center for writing assistance throughout thesemester, future work should also focus on the collaboration between engineering departmentsand the writing center to improve the alignment of writing center practices with the needs ofengineering students.References[1] P. Fu, S. Viswanathan, R. Uhlig, and H. Evans. “Improving technical writing amongengineering and technology students,” Proc. of the 2010 ASEE Annu. Conf. and Expo, pp15.702.1-15.702.15, 2010.[2] I. Gravé. “Improving technical writing skills through lab reports,” Proc. 126th ASEE Annu.Conf. and Expo, 2019[3] N. S. Han, H. K. Li, L. C. Sin, and K. P. Sin. “The evaluation of students’ written reflectionon the learning of general chemistry lab experiment,” Malaysian Online Journal of
question is, are we ready forthe future? The answer is not clear given that there are multiple contributing factors. However, tobetter prepare for the future, we need to precisely document and evaluate our collectiveexperience during the pandemic and share the lessons learned. The present study attempted totake a step in this direction. More studies are required to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 onevery sector and stakeholder of higher education.6. References[1]. World Health Organization (WHO). Available at:https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 Accessed 3/5/21.[2]. COVID-19: Higher Education Resource Center. Available at:https
run into online.References1. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) situation reports.Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novelcoronavirus-2019/situation-reports/ Accessed November 21, 2020.2. Holshue ML, DeBolt C, Lindquist S, et al. First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in theUnited States. N Engl J Med,382:929–36. 20203. Miliszewska, M. Is it fully ‘on’ or partly ‘off’? The case of fully-online provision oftransnational education. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 500-514. 20074. Barnett-Braddock F, Adult ADHD: Effect of student performance within the onlineclassroom. Dissertation, Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA, 20165. Gottfried, M. “Evaluating the Relationship Between Student
= orange, > 1.05 = green), making it easy to find low and high performers. The ‘Delta’column highlights when individuals have a mismatch between self and peer assessment, greaterthan 0.05. This threshold of 0.05 can be adjusted by the user to prioritize instructor feedback torealign self-perception with peer evaluation. Table 6: Student Y, First Team Leader Rotation Student Y Name L E A D E R S w/ self w/o self Delta Cmt Y 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 0.955 0.872 -0.083 Rated self high G 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 0.996 0.986 -0.010 H 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 0.933 0.942 0.009
," International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 711-727, 2017.[6] W. Robinson, E. McGee, L. Bentley, S. Houston II and P. Botchway, "Addressing Negative Racial and Gendered Experiences That Discourage Academic Careers in Engineering," Computing in Science and Engineering, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 29-39, 2016.[7] RWU, "Roger Williams University: Diversity, Equity & Inclusion," [Online]. Available: https://www.rwu.edu/who-we-are/diversity-equity-inclusion. [Accessed 21 12 2020].[8] S. Clark, F. Palis, G. Trompf, T. Terway and R. Wallace, "Interdisciplinary problem framing for sustainability: Challenges, a framework, case studies," Journal of Sustainable Forestry, vol. 36, no. 5, p
geomechanics, for applications in geological storage and energy geotechnics. Prior to joining the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Rowan, he worked in the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin. At Rowan, he teaches courses in geotechnical engineering and ge- omechanics. He is a recipient of James S. Lai Outstanding Graduate Award from the geosystems group at Georgia Tech.Dr. Gilson R. Lomboy, Rowan UniversityProf. Mohammad Jalayer American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Development of Innovative, Adaptable Video Learning Modules for the Civil Engineering ClassroomAbstractAs engineering and
supports only some KPIs in aparticular SO, the program did not adopt these assignments. Instead, the program favoredassignments that could be used to score all KPIs of a SO to help make the process morestraightforward.Implementation of Assessment PlanOnce the courses and individual assignments supporting each SO were identified using the SOMap Results provided by the faculty, the assessment plan could officially begin. The following listroughly outlines how faculty were asked to deliver the assessment to the students in their coursesand then subsequently score the results: • Instructor for course must decide which assignment(s) will be used to measure the required SO o Instructors were allowed to change assignments to best meet
still be used to record classes forassessment and improve teaching. Additionally, recorded lectures can be easily edited to createshort instructional videos for supplemental instruction, additional problem solving, flippedclassroom, or even to give a lab orientation before the actual lab. Fully recorded sessions canalso be made available to select students who missed classes due to job interviews, athletics, orillness. As campuses increased their technical capacity and capability, the talent and equipmentcan and should still be used so all are proficient before we must react to another tumultuousevent.References[1] A. C. Estes, R. W. Welch, and S. J. Ressler, “The ExCEEd Teaching Model: Teaching Lessons Learned,” Journal of
(i.e., in line with the center of gravity)ConclusionThe area centroid calculation taught in statics can be clearly presented as an extension ofequivalent force and moment systems. The use of a 3D printed prismatic composite body allowsstudents to connect abstract mathematical models through an active mental model to a physicalmodel clearly demonstrated in the classroom.References[1] R. C. Hibbeler, Engineering Mechanics: Statics, 14 edition. Hoboken: Pearson, 2015.[2] F. Beer, E. R. Johnston, D. Mazurek, P. Cornwell, and B. Self, Vector Mechanics for Engineers: Statics and Dynamics, 11 edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education, 2015.[3] S. C. MacNamara and J. V. Dannenhoffer, “First Encounters: Statics as a Gateway to Engineering
, this interest might be indicative of the value these instructors are seeing inthe materials created by CIT-E and of their desire for similar modules in these other areas.When asked about the reason for their interest in the CIT-E community developing these newmaterials, there was a fairly even split in participants’ responses: 19% mentioned they would liketo integrate the suggested topic(s) into their classes, but did not have time to develop thematerials themselves, 17% wanted to integrate the proposed content, but did not feel qualified todevelop the materials themselves, and 17% claimed that they have expertise in the areassuggested and would like to collaborate with others to create course materials. Some of the
. Future workcould examine how students respond to this remote transition based on individual learning styles,since this could greatly impact the success of remote learning.AcknowledgmentsThis research was supported by NSF Grant CMMI-1749200.References1. Elvira Q, Beausaert S, Segers M, Imants J, Dankbaar B (2016) Development and validation ofa Supportive Learning Environment for Expertise Development Questionnaire (SLEED-Q).Learning Environments Research, 19(1):17–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9197-y2. Reck RM (2020) Advances in Engineering Education Quick Flip: A Model of a VirtualCourse in Dynamic Systems and Controls During COVID-19. Advances in EngineeringEducation, 8(4)3. Wojtowicz A (2020) Preliminary Assessment of Distance
, surveying was very clearly viewed as a majorcomponent of a standard Civil Engineering curriculum. In the late 1920’s, the University ofWashington required 27 credits of surveying courses, which comprised 14% of the credits for theCivil Engineering program [3].Surveying was clearly having its heyday during this time, but by the mid-20th century, theimportance of surveying relative to other areas of Civil Engineering slowly started to diminish.As Civil Engineering broadened its purview, it began to include subdisciplines such as structuralengineering, geotechnical engineering, environmental engineering, construction science andmanagement, transportation and traffic engineering, and hydraulic engineering. In addition, CivilEngineering became a much
3-5 2 6-10 3 More than 10 2The survey asked participants to rate the seminars (Figure 4) and other aspects of the workshop(Figure 5). While all seminars were rated highly on average, the first five seminars, which focuson teaching and learning principles and class planning were rated most highly. Questioning,Assessment, and Non-Verbal Communication were rated lowest, although comments did notprovide any specific reasons for the low ratings. Participants were asked “which seminar(s) madethe greatest impact and why.” Their responses included “Learning to teach, effective teaching, learning styles, and learning objectives had the greatest
) hours of instructionover a two- week period was reduced to four (4) scheduled hours for the same period. The project-based hybrid experience allowed students to participate synchronously during any of the (3) hourstraditionally scheduled for the course, but students were only able to attend face-to-face on oneday each week. Enhancements to the course structure resulted in the opportunity for students toengage with formal course content in (5) hours during a typical week, more than the standard (3)hours offered in traditional, fully face-to-face formats offered in the past.TABLE 2: Anticipated Time Effort Towards Structured Learning Communication Project- s Based
, T.A. Lenox, K.J. Fridley, and R.O Anderson, “Accreditation Insights and the Next Body of Knowledge,” Proceedings of the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference, ASEE, 2016.[10] ABET, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2020-2021,” https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2020- 2021/ [Accessed February 21, 2021].[11] S. J. Ressler and D. Lynch, “The Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge and Accreditation Criteria: A Plan for Long-Term Management of Change,” Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference, 2011.[12] Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge 3 Task Committee, Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge: Preparing the Future Civil Engineer, 3rd Edition. Reston, VA
] National Academy of Engineering, The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2004.[2] National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2005.[3] E. F. Redish and K. A. Smith, “Looking Beyond Content: Skill Development for Engineers,” J. Eng. Educ., no. July, pp. 295–307, 2008, doi: 10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2008.tb00980.x.[4] I. B. Mena, S. E. Zappe, and T. A. Litzinger, “Preparing the Engineer of 2020: Analysis of Alumni Data,” in ASEE Annual Conference, 2012, [Online]. Available: https://cms.jee.org/21819%0A%0A.[5] S. R. Daly, E. A. Mosyjowski, and C. M. Seifert, “Teaching creativity in