Conference Session

Embedded Computing

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rathika Rajaravivarma, Central CT State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

2006-1382: PEER ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES FOR ALABORATORY-BASED COURSERathika Rajaravivarma, Central CT State University Page 11.987.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006Peer Assessment Methodologies for a Laboratory-Based CourseAbstractAdvances in technology and the explosive growth of the Internet have called fornew ways of learning environment. The content delivery is no longer the passiveapproach of lecture emanating from the teacher to the student. It is imperativethat computer networking courses taught at the undergraduate level containadequate hands-on implementation based projects and experiments in order tobetter train students. The computing curricula 2001 (CC2001

Conference Session

Faculty Development Toolkit

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jerry Samples, University of Pittsburgh-Johnstown

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

Good Teaching: As Identified by Your PeersAbstract:The literature on teaching is replete with definitions and examples of good teaching. Theyinclude the traits and characteristics of the best instructor/teacher/professor. They have examplesof methods and results of surveys that quantify teaching: bad or good. In recent years, theliterature included the impact of teaching on the student learner; thus, coming full circle, fromteacher to learner. The literature provides good information, but it is the analysis of the currentclassroom experience of one’s peers that provides reliable information on the teaching of today’sstudents.Since 1998, over 1000 faculty have pondered over 5 questions concerning good teaching. Theyhave pair-shared the results

Conference Session

Trend in Construction Engineering Education I

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Amitabha Bandyopadhyay, SUNY

Tagged Divisions

Construction

assignments must be persuasive or informative • All final submission must be reviewed by at least one peer • All final submissions must be accompanied by the draft (with corrections/comments made by the peer)Critical Thinking and WritingWilliam Zinsser states, “Writing is thinking on paper.”5 And we can not agree more. Oneof the primary objectives of the writing-intensive course in construction course was toenhance critical thinking among the students. It is the instructor’s obligation to make thestudent think. We found in our earlier experiment with writing across curriculum thatduring writing laboratory report most students had problem writing the conclusion. Manystudents amusingly wrote “I enjoyed the lab very much” or “This is a very

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ricardo Jacquez, New Mexico State University; Veera Gnaneswar Gude, New Mexico State University; Michele Auzenne, New Mexico State University; Chris Burnham, New Mexico State University; Adrian Hanson; Jeanne Garland, New Mexico State University

instructors to the seminar attendees who in turn transfer thesemethods to their students in the class environment.The fundamental importance of this training is exemplified in the benefit to the students. Theassignments that are used in CE 356 are based on individual and collaborative learning throughindividual and team-based activities. The assignments include brainstorming exercises,explaining concepts to other students, group writing assignments, case study analysis, writing toa realistic audience, solving (open-ended) what-if problems, and peer review of their work. Thebenefit of these WAC activities is reflected in the effort to guide the students to more activelyparticipate and be engaged in a full spectrum of Bloom’s levels of learning. A

Conference Session

FPD3 -- Professional Issues for First-Year Courses

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John-David Yoder, Ohio Northern University; David Sawyers, Ohio Northern University; John K. Estell, Ohio Northern University; Laurie Laird, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

paper in thatstudents edit the papers written by their peers. In Olds the emphasis is more on trueediting (comments on structure, whether the paper is correct for the audience, etc.) ratherthan simply on identifying errors.Proofreading AssignmentsMultiple assignments throughout the term were used in order to evaluate and improve thestudents’ ability to proofread. Students were regularly provided with a set of readingquestions for each section of the technical writing course. These assignments, and somerelated questions on the mid-term exam, asked them to find the errors in a sentence.These typically related to specific topics in technical communication, such asconciseness, punctuation, capitalization, etc. Since these were typically done with

Conference Session

ERM Potpourri

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Turns, University of Washington; Jessica Yellin, University of Washington; Yi-Min Huang, University of Washington; Kathleen Gygi, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

activity coding shows that participants were getting adviceon their writing (e.g., grammar and style issues), an opportunity to judge the effectiveness oftheir writing through clarification requests from the colleagues, information necessary toimprove the documents through the genre negotiations and audience discussions, and evensupport for gaining confidence in their writing through the affective interactions. Theclarification codes indicate that participants were encouraged to articulate and explain theirportfolio elements—their peers challenged their conceptions of teaching, wished for evidence toback up the claims in their statements, or were unclear about the terminology used in theirstatements. By doing so, participants would have the

Conference Session

Writing and Communication II

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Luke Niiler; David Beams, University of Texas-Tyler

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education

pronounced awareness of how writing works within a given discipline—not only as amethod of transmission, but a means of learning. There is some evidence, in effect, that thesophomores see in their writing a greater purpose than simply completing an assignment for agrade. The words “perceive,” “understand,” and “comprehend” crop up repeatedly: thesestudents are writing to learn, writing their way into the discipline of Engineering. The authorssuggest that this point marks the beginning of what may be “normal discourse” for these Page 11.694.8students, that is, “a conversation within a community of knowledgeable peers.” 18 Of course,there are those

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kevin Dahm, Rowan University; Roberta Harvey, Rowan University; Brian Lefebvre, Rowan University; Heidi Newell, Rowan University; James Newell, Rowan University

2006-876: DEVELOPING METACOGNITIVE ENGINEERING TEAMS THROUGHTARGETED WRITING EXERCISES AND STUDYING LEARNINGPREFERENCESKevin Dahm, Rowan University Kevin Dahm is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. He received his Ph.D. from MIT and his B.S. from WPI. Among his areas of interest are computing and process simulation in the curriculum, and integrating economics and design throughout the curriculum. He has received the 2005 Ray Fahien Award, 2003 Joseph J. Martin Award and the 2002 PIC-III Award from ASEE.Roberta Harvey, Rowan University Roberta Harvey is an Assistant Professor in the Writing Arts Department at Rowan University. She holds a Ph.D. from the

Conference Session

ERM Potpourri

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Katie Sullivan, University of Utah; April Kedrowicz, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

instruction in this course was similar to thespeaking instruction, although the averages were slightly lower (see table 6).Item Mean ModeThe writing instructor’s lecture and peer review facilitation effectively 3.00 3.00assisted me in understanding how to organize a proposal.The writing instructor’s lecture and peer review facilitation effectively 2.89 3.00assisted me in understanding how to write a proposal.The writing instructor’s feedback on my review draft was helpful. 2.97 3.00I applied feedback to subsequent writing assignments. 3.40 3.00The writing instructor encouraged me to develop my writing

Conference Session

Effective & Efficient Teaching Skills

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Scott Hamilton, U.S. Military Academy

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

indicated the process was meeting with more successthan the previous semester. Some students clearly continued to like the idea and appreciated theincentive to check their work for accuracy. The author also observed much more documentationof help received during the review process, but he noted that not everyone had yet bought intothe approach. The author observed a few cases of students who would take the 5% cut for nothaving peer review done at all. He also noted that there were cases of students writing notes tothe effect, “My work did not match my reviewer’s work, but I could not find the error.” Closerinspection of these comments usually found that peer review was almost always done within the15 minutes prior to the turn-in deadline, thus

Conference Session

Meeting ABET Requirements

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Craig Gunn, Michigan State University

Tagged Divisions

Mechanical Engineering

. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company,Inc., 1985.Davis, B.G., Tools for Teaching, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.Elliot, N. et al. "The Assessment of Technical Writing: A Case Study," Journal of Technical Writing andCommunication, Vol.24, No.1, Winter 1994, p.9.Foster, D. A Primer for Writing Teachers. Upper Monclair,New Jersey: Boynton/Cook, 1983.Houp, K.W., and T.E.Pearsall. Reporting Technical Information. New York: Macmillan, 1988.Lefferts, R. How to Prepare Charts and Graphs For Effective Reports. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1981.Miller, R. L. and B. Olds, "A Model Curriculum for A Capstone Course in Multidisciplinary Engineering Design,"Journal of Engineering Education, Vol.83,No.4 October 1993, pp. 311-323.Peer commentary on

Conference Session

ECE Curriculum Innovations

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cynthia Furse, University of Utah; Behrouz Farhang-Boroujeny, University of Utah; Stephanie Richardson, University of Utah; Rohit Verma, University of Utah; April Kedrowicz, University of Utah; Bryan Stenquist, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

. Plans are assessed by peer student teams, by the Page 11.777.7professors involved, and by the TCO. Students are graded on the quality of their assessment, notthe identified business potential of the product they are assessing. Some of the plans recommendentrepreneurship, others licensing, and still others indicate that there is not a good business casefor the product. Use of peer evaluation of the business plans means that all students will havehad opportunity to see details of products in all of these categories.Writing and Speaking Initiative8,9The writing and speaking initiative in this project is administered through the Center forEngineering

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Valentin Razmov, University of Washington; Richard Anderson, University of Washington

meetings 1.23 1.43 1.75 Post-milestone in-class retrospectives n/a n/a 1.00 Post-milestone anonymous peer reviews 1.15 1.31 1.38 Iterative format of reflective writing assignments 0.63 1.13 1.38Note that the averages were not uniformly as high among all questions we asked the students, butthese central aspects of agile teaching were generally rated much higher.Additional free-form feedback on the reflective writing assignments came from a student in anearlier course who found the virtual “conversation” (of responding to the instructor’s responses)stimulating and wrote, “The

Conference Session

Issues in Computer Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jun Luo, Ohio Northern University; Robert Hovis, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

4.00 course? 2. Does writing a paper help you understand programming language concepts? 3.29 3. Does presentation help you understand programming language concepts? 3.71 4. Does the peer evaluation help you improve the quality of your paper? 4.43 5. Are the scores from the peer evaluations for your paper objective and fair? 4.57 6. Does the peer evaluation help you understand programming language 3.29 concepts?The responses to the questions 1, 4, and 5 confirm our observations 1, 2, and 3, respectively.The responses to the questions 2 and 6 indicate that students need more guidelines and help forwriting

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sandra Courter, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Joan Kwako, University of Wisconsin-Madison; John Wright, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Deanna Byrnes, Lawrence University; Thatcher Root, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Clif Conrad, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Series5 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Criteria: 1-Peer Reviews, 2-Philosophy, 3-Micro-teaching, 4-Presentation, 5-Assessment, 6- ReflectionComments from students on the SALG give context to the data that appear in the linegraph. More comments for fall, 2003 and summer, 2004 are in Appendix D.Fall, 2003 I love the micro-teaching idea. I don’t feel that I gained as much from writing the teaching and learning philosophy as I could have. I think it would be better if I

Conference Session

Faculty Development Toolkit

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William Jordan, Baylor University; Bill Elmore, Mississippi State University; Walter Bradley, Baylor University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

technologies will become our masters ratherthan our tools. The first two authors presented a paper in 2005 that dealt with that issue4.The authors of this paper are certainly not the only ones who have reflected on the issue ofmentoring. The next section describes some recent work done by others.Previous work done by othersPeer mentoring is the first kind of mentoring we would like to discuss. Peer mentoring occurswhen tenure track professors provide advise and support for each other. There are two ways thiscan be done. Younger faculty can write papers and make presentations describing theirexperiences to try to help other young faculty who may be facing the same situations. Thisenables the faculty member to benefit by presenting/publishing his work

Conference Session

The Senior Experience: Capstone and Beyond

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Large Seagrave

Tagged Divisions

Civil Engineering

: Responding to Needs of Industry in a Capstone CourseAbstractResearch has shown that consulting engineering firms need newly graduated junior engineers tobe skilled in communication, especially writing. In response to this plea from the civilengineering industry in Salt Lake Valley, University of Utah has designed a capstone course inits Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering that focuses on written, oral and teamcommunication besides technical and design elements. The course incorporates communicationinstructors from the CLEAR program who collaborate with faculty, lecture in the class, consultwith students and assess assignments in an effort to ensure a higher level of communicationcompetency in graduates.IntroductionUndergraduate

Conference Session

Effective & Efficient Teaching Skills

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Eric Larson, Seattle University; Agnieszka Miguel, Seattle University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

of the professor is to motivate the students to learn. The grading andfeedback process can significantly affect the learning process of the student. For some students,the feedback they receive on exams and assignments may be the only individualizedcommunication they obtain from the professor. At a minimum, the instructor needs tocommunicate why the students deserve the grade they received. The amount of feedback canvary. For problems done incorrectly, some instructors may point out where the error was so thestudent can avoid the same mistake in the future. Others may allow the student another chance atthe problem with the hope that the student is able to detect her/his own mistake, improving theirlearning. Writing detailed feedback can be

Conference Session

BME Curriculum Development

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ann Saterbak, Rice University; Michele Follen, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center; Rebecca Richards-Kortum, Rice University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical

. The students spend four days learning physicalexamination procedure through lectures and clinical sessions. During the second eight-weekperiod of the internship, students attend morning rotations in internal medicine, pediatrics,obstetrics and gynecology, surgery, intensive care, and the emergency room. Students areassigned to a clinical mentor, and observe their mentor interacting with patients, performingclinical procedures, analyzing test results, and developing treatment plans. Students keep aweekly journal in which they describe their experiences in the clinical rotations. Afternoons inthe latter eight weeks of the internship are spent working on independent research supervised bya faculty mentor. Students write a short proposal at the

Conference Session

ChE: Curriculum Reform & Assessment

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey Froyd; Jean Layne, Texas A&M University; Lale Yurttas, Texas A&M University; David Ford, Texas A&M University

Tagged Divisions

Chemical Engineering

semiconductor fabrication semiconductor fabrication b.4 Analyze and evaluate - Written and oral applications of conceptual framework chemical engineering systems - Opportunities to write and receive peer review on critical elements to be using an entire systems approach integrated (for example - use of Calibrated Peer Review™ software) b.5 Use framework and systems - Assign problems over a range of scales in which students demonstrate approach to encompass length and application of the conceptual framework. Use peer critique and correction time scales with consistent - Assign complex and highly varied systems “cases” and grade approach comparative analyses. Desired Outcome c

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Haws, Boise State University

crucible of faculty tenure selection, are ableto perform as well as they do? The cursory reference to teaching in our faculty advertisementswould seem to indicate that such ability is a hygiene factor—something given little value until itis obviously missing. Alternately, a faculty search committee may feel that their students arebright enough to require only the most rudimentary skill on the part of an instructor.If, on the other hand, outliers are selected for their grantsmanship rather than teaching, why don’twe just leave them all on soft money and let them write their own salaries? Or for that matter,why don’t they just go to a research park and negotiate a reduced rate of institutional overhead?Salaries for research faculty would probably

Conference Session

FPD4 -- Real-World Case Studies & Projects

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jason Yao, East Carolina University; Gene Dixon, East Carolina University; William Howard, East Carolina University; Ric Williams; Keith Williamson, East Carolina University; Geoffrey Dieck, East Carolina University; Steve McLawhorn, East Carolina University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

is an Assistant Professor and Director of ECU Engineering, Inc. at East Carolina University. His research interests include engineering management themes including leadership, followership, team work, organizational culture and trust. Before coming to ECU, he worked in various positions in industry for Chicago Bridge and Iron, E. I. DuPont, Westinghouse Electric, CBS, Viacom and the Washington Group. Dr. Dixon received a BS in Material Engineering from Auburn University, an MBA from Nova Southeastern University and PhD in Industrial and System Engineering and Engineering Management from The University of Alabama Huntsville. He is currently writing a book on the logistical flow of worship

Conference Session

Tricks of the Trade for Teaching I

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jessica Yellin, University of Washington; Yi-Min Huang, University of Washington; Jennifer Turns, University of Washington; Charity Tsuruda, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

students interacted with their peers asthey went through the process of developing their teaching portfolios. At some institutions ofhigher education, this process of creating personal teaching portfolios has also become acommunity building opportunity as campuses develop networks of people who are interested intalking about teaching, and documenting and improving their teaching through self-reflection. Aprogram for faculty at Texas A&M includes peer interactions in the support activities and offersterm-long workshops with time for writing portfolio elements and discussing them with theirpeers and faculty developers built into the curriculum. The University of Florida also offersworkshops for faculty that include a strong peer component

Conference Session

Assessment of Information Literacy Programs for Engineers

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alysia Starkey, Kansas State University-Salina; Jung Oh, Kansas State University-Salina; Judith Collins, Kansas State University-Salina; Beverlee Kissick, Kansas State University-Salina

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Libraries

2006-677: FACULTY LIBRARIAN PARTNERSHIPS FOR INFORMATIONFLUENCY INSTRUCTION: PLANNING AND PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENTAlysia Starkey, Kansas State University-SalinaBeverlee Kissick, Kansas State University-Salina Head of LibrariesJudith Collins, Kansas State University-SalinaJung Oh, Kansas State University-Salina Page 11.633.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006Faculty librarian partnerships for information fluency instruction: planning and preliminary assessmentThis paper provides guidelines for writing effective information fluency assignments, derivedfrom face-to-face collaboration with faculty/librarians from two regional universities

Conference Session

On Pedagogy of Lab Courses and Their Design

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Pape, Central Michigan University

Tagged Divisions

Division Experimentation & Lab-Oriented Studies

Page 11.100.10 one. It is also generally more difficult to write. Reports are not graded by the pound. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright  2006, American Society for Engineering EducationAppendix B: Technical Memo Evaluation RubricAuthor: Lab Partner: Professor: Each Evaluator Should Score Each Parameter From 0 to 5Evaluation Parameter Evaluator Self Peer Prof1. Form: Is the report in memo form? Does the memo use language and vocabulary appropriate for technical writing

Conference Session

Innovations in Biological and Agricultural Engineering

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Adel Shirmohammadi, University of Maryland-College Park; Arthur Johnson, University of Maryland-College Park

Tagged Divisions

Biological & Agricultural

which was in the group that submitted the report. There is a form (a copy of whichis attached) that solicits specific comments about technical and communication attributes of thereport. Evaluators are instructed not to write simple “yes” or “no” entries, but to givemeaningful comments. These evaluations are submitted anonymously, except to the instructor,and are graded by the instructor and returned to the group that originally submitted the report.The advantages of this procedure are these: 1. it assists the instructor in reading and evaluating the reports, because he has the peer evaluations when grading the reports 2. it gives the submitting group feedback from more than just the instructor 3

Conference Session

Using Teams, Seminars & Research Opportunities for Retention

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christine Hailey, Utah State University

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

, including external guest speakers,introductions to the female faculty members, and presentations by Career Services.In addition to borrowing many of the ideas from a number of existing seminars, the USUseminar was shaped by data from the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Page 11.994.2freshman survey.6 The 2004 CIRP survey was completed by 79% of the main campus freshmanclass. USU freshman students differ from those of their peers at comparable institutions in anumber of areas. ‚ 86% of the USU freshman class viewed raising a family as essential or very important compared with 78% of the freshman at peer schools. ‚ 35% of

Conference Session

FPD6 -- Early Intervention & Retention Programs

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Light, University of Washington; Laura Girardeau, Washington State University; Jennifer Beller, Washington State University; Greg Crouch, Washington State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

, organizationalcontexts, and design limitations.Literature Review A variety of methods for evaluating learning communities have been proposed by Moore2Tinto, Love, & Russo,3 and Wilkie.4 Moore used Perry’s5 theory of intellectual development as a basis for measuring theeffects of learning communities. A survey instrument, the Measure of Intellectual Development(MID) which is a survey instrument and an essay-writing test derived from Perry’s work, wasused to determine impacts from the learning community. The MID was given to learningcommunity participants and also to peers who were scored on a 1 to 5 point scale. LLCparticipants showed more developmental gains than their non-participating counterparts. Love, Tinto, & Russo3 approached

Conference Session

Engineering in High School

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Tammy VanDeGrift, University of Portland; Sheryl Burgstahler, University of Washington; Richard Ladner, University of Washington; Annemarie Poginy, University of Portland

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering

about15 hours using a computer per week. Her career interests before attending the Game of Lifeworkshop included publishing and editing, since writing came naturally to her. She knewtechnology would be a part of her life in terms of email, word processing, correspondence, butshe had no desire “to work in front of a computer all day long”. She rated herself as average to abit higher than average when assessing her confidence in using technology before attending theworkshop as compared to her peers. She was also sure that college would be part of her future.She says, “Overall, my experiences with DO-IT were good, but I found many of the classes andactivities were not as useful to me as they could have been. The experiences of livingindependently in

Conference Session

Research in Minority Issues

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Turns, University of Washington; Angela Linse, Temple University; Tammy VanDeGrift, University of Portland; Matt Eliot, University of Washington; Jana Jones, Microsoft Corp.; Steve Lappenbusch, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Minorities in Engineering

. Theprogram content and products are designed to meet the needs of graduates entering the academy.Second, our goal is to develop a scalable model for working the pipeline issue nationally. Thepeer facilitated structure is cost-effective because it does not require institutional commitment offiscal or human resources. Third, engineering graduate students are more likely to participate ina program that has “face-validity.” Our program is product-oriented and designed to help prepareparticipants for the academic job search. Finally, the program reflects our commitment andenthusiasm for individual writing and peer review as an effective process for balancingindividual reflection and social learning.Our work has not been without challenges. For example