Conference Session

Liberal Education Division Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joanne Lax, Purdue University

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education

messaging, instant messaging, and email, people arecommunicating with more frequency, speed, and ease than ever before. However, some of thesame characteristics that make electronic communication so appealing to so many young peoplemay be leading to some nonstandard writing in educational and professional contexts.Interestingly enough, a review of the literature reveals few educational efforts to systematicallyteach the correct use of electronic communication. Thus, this paper discusses ways to teachengineering students how to communicate effectively and politely in their email interaction withprofessors, potential employers, peers, and others. An interactive class session has beendeveloped for the discussion and practice of some of the conventions

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Frederick Berry; Patricia Carlson

ABET ASSESSMENT USING CALIBRATED PEER REVIEWIntroductionMost engineering programs have some type of capstone design experience. At Rose-HulmanInstitute of Technology (Rose) the Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Department alsohas a similar set of courses. Therefore, the ECE Department decided to use senior design toassess EC3(g) (ABET Engineering Criterion 3-g): “ability to communicate effectively”.However, we needed/wanted a tool to help us develop our assessment process for EC3(g).The ECE Department was introduced to the Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) [1]. CPR is anonline-tool with four structured workspaces that perform in tandem to create a series of activitiesthat reflect modern pedagogical strategies for using writing

Conference Session

FPD5 -- Placement & Early Success

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Carol Gattis, University of Arkansas; Bryan Hill, University of Arkansas; Abraham Lachowsky, University of Arkansas

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

AC 2007-1460: A SUCCESSFUL ENGINEERING PEER MENTORING PROGRAMCarol Gattis, University of Arkansas Carol S. Gattis, Ph.D. is an associate professor of Industrial Engineering at the University of Arkansas. She also directs and develops new programs for the college-wide efforts of recruitment, retention and diversity.Bryan Hill, University of Arkansas Bryan Hill, an industrial engineer, is the associate director of recruitment, retention and diversity for the College of Engineering at the University of Arkansas. Bryan managed the 2005-2006 pilot engineering peer mentoring program.Abraham Lachowsky, University of Arkansas Abraham Lachowsky is a senior undergraduate student in the Industrial

Conference Session

Writing and Communication II: Practical Perspectives on Teaching and Assessment

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathleen Jernquist, U.S. Coast Guard Academy; David Godfrey, U.S. Coast Guard Academy; Todd Taylor, U.S. Coast Guard Academy

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education

) distill key terms that most professional writersuse to discuss and guide the processes and products of communication for student writers andthemselves. Practice in understanding and applying the terms in various contexts in first-yearcomposition – class discussion, instructor and peer response, consultations with the center’stutors and self-assessment – allows writers to develop a solid foundation with the terms.3 Aswriters progress into their major courses, they appreciate that all writing appeals to an audienceand has a purpose, and these concepts can be adapted to their engineering writing.The charts organize the terms based on the writing and learning processes:3 from larger conceptsof audience, purpose and topic; to formal and structural

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Frederick Berry, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

been a renewed emphasis on student teams and onstudent-provided formative feedback within an assessment process anchored in learningoutcomes.The authors report on the integration of Calibrated Peer Review™ (CPR™) – a web-deliveredstudent feedback tool – used in three courses at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Sinceacademic year 2002, the authors have developed course activities that highlight writing and peerevaluation as central components of • RH131 (Rhetoric and Composition): An introductory composition course required of all students at this college of engineering. • ECE 361 (Engineering Practice): A sophomore-level course covering project design specifications, team roles, effective conduct of team

Conference Session

New Trends in ECE Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan Lord, University of San Diego

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

” ofgathering data, conducting experiments etc. and the “rhetorical space” of writing to communicateto an audience of their peers, they create their own knowledge.Students are more likely to see the value of writing when it is tied to the technical content. As Page 12.582.3Pesante says “Learning is most effective when it takes place in context and when it is reinforcedthrough the students’ course of study.”13 In all of the examples in this paper, an engineeringprofessor rather than a writing professor grades the writing. Thus the quality of the writing andthe technical accuracy of the work are inseparable. This adds legitimacy to the claim that writingis

Conference Session

FPD3 -- Professional Issues for First-Year Courses

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Karen High, Oklahoma State University; Rebecca Damron, Oklahoma State University

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

fall 2007 students. Writing fellows areassigned to work in our University Writing Center with freshman composition sectionsand are undergraduate peer tutors who assist in developing writing skills through workwith students on course papers. The authors have also discussed asking the researchquestion a bit differently, to what extent do the student critically think and write asopposed to are they able to critically think and write.The interrater reliability information provided some interesting questions for futureresearch: 1) How effective are norming sessions on reliability? 2) How do Engineering faculty see writing and critical thinking differently than English faculty? 3) How reliable and valid are the

Conference Session

Computer Education Management Tools

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard House, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Anneliese Watt, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Julia Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

incorporating communication into technical coursesmay be mitigated by the use of peer review; by setting students up in peer review sessions, they canread and comment on the work of others as a means to improving their own communication skills.Many of us who have employed peer review have seen the benefits firsthand.1-5 The process of readingand reviewing the written documents of other students—submitting their own documents to beassessed by other students, reviewing documents that try to fulfill the same assignment they havewritten—has a measurable impact on the student’s own writing. Studies of peer reviewing strategiesconfirm what many of us have seen in our own classrooms. The process for peer review, with fewexceptions, remains the same. Students

Conference Session

Writing and Communication I: Innovative Models for Curriculum and Assessment

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Marie Paretti, Virginia Tech; Lisa McNair, Virginia Tech; Diana George, Virginia Tech; kelly belanger, Virginia Tech; Lisa Norris, Virginia Tech

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education

AC 2007-2247: OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT AS A SITE OF INTEGRATION: ABETMEETS THE COUNCIL OF WRITING PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORSMarie Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie Paretti is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC).Lisa McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa McNair is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC).Diana George, Virginia Tech Diana George is a Professor of English at Virginia Tech, where she directs the First-Year Writing Program.kelly belanger, Virginia Tech Kelly Belanger is an Associate

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Layton, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Matthew Ohland, Purdue Engineering Education; Hal R. Pomeranz, Deer Run Associates, Inc.

. Ohland is an Associate Professor in Purdue University’s Department of Engineering Education and is the Past President of Tau Beta Pi, the national engineering honor society. He received his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering with a minor in Education from the University of Florida in 1996. Previously, he served as Assistant Director of the NSF-sponsored SUCCEED Engineering Education Coalition. He studies peer evaluation and longitudinal student records in engineering education.Hal R. Pomeranz, Deer Run Associates, Inc. Hal R. Pomeranz is a computer network security and database programming consultant. He is a co-founder of Deer Run Associates, Inc., currently operating in Eugene, Oregon

Conference Session

Writing and Communication I: Innovative Models for Curriculum and Assessment

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

April Kedrowicz, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education

concepts. In addition,students’ formal reports are peer reviewed and student teams are required to meet with thewriting instructor to receive detailed feedback on the team formal report. Finally, students reviewtheir videotaped presentations from the Fall semester and are required to meet for a rehearsalsession with the oral communication instructor prior to delivering their oral proposal in class.In summary, chemical engineering students receive intensive communication instruction duringtheir two semester senior projects lab sequence. They write a variety of documents, bothindividually and as a team, and practice their informative and persuasive speaking bothindividually and as a team. It is hoped that this intensive instruction will prepare

Conference Session

Global Engineering in an Interconnected World

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alexis Powe, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

International

AC 2007-2210: PRACTICAL ENGLISH: TEACHING TECHNICALCOMMUNICATION ABROAD BASED ON A PREEXISTING TECHNICALWRITING COURSE IN MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY'S BAGLEY COLLEGEOF ENGINEERINGAlexis Powe, Mississippi State University Alexis D. Powe is a technical writing instructor for the Mississippi State University Bagley College of Engineering’s Shackouls Technical Communication Program. She received her B.A. in English from Mississippi State University in 2002, graduating summa cum laude with a minor in history, and her M.A. in English from Louisiana State University in 2004. She is a member of the American Society for Engineering Education and the Modern Language Association. Address: P.O. Box

Conference Session

ChE: Innovations in Student Learning

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Danial Hohne, University of Michigan; Leeann Fu, University of Michigan; Barry Barkel, University of Michigan; Peter Woolf, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Chemical Engineering

12.1485.6 Figure 1: Writing process for wiki articles.After the presentation, student reviewers would submit anonymous peer reviews of the article.These reviews were given in standard form asking the reviewer to provide key points, majordifficulties with the article and specific improvements needed. The reviews were then compiledand given to the authors for rebuttal. One week after the initial review of the article, the rebuttalswere given to the reviewers who then submitted final reviews based on the edits completed bythe initial authors. The authors are assigned grades from the reviewers based on their work andreviewers are also graded on the quality of their reviews. One benefit of the wiki format is thatall reviews

Conference Session

Communication and Professional Skills in BME

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joe Tranquillo; Daniel Cavanagh, Bucknell University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical

“writer” for every assignment. It should benoted that groups naturally lend themselves to peer assessment of writing as a mechanismfor revision. A slight twist on group assignments was used in BMEG 401 to highlight thechallenges of group communication. The entire class (13 students) was challenged tocreate a single graphic and present it in class, to the instructor, 48 hours later. The resultsof this exercise were used to motivate a discussion of large group dynamics andmanagement.The Importance of AudienceFor all assignments it is important that students consider their audience. Most of theirlives, students have been satisfying an instructor who will use their communications toassign a grade. It is the perpetuation of this format that leads to

Conference Session

Communication and Professional Skills in BME

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Willis Tompkins, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Naomi Chesler, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Walter Block, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Kristyn Masters, University of Wisconsin-Madison; William Murphy, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Mitchell Tyler, University of Wisconsin-Madison; John Webster, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical

. 6. Each team does an end-of-semester poster presentation. 7. Each student does peer review of other teams’ PowerPoint and poster presentations. 8. Each student does a self and peer performance evaluation.In addition to these deliverables that all represent aspects of professional communication skills,other experiences that students get with professional communication are: 1. Each junior-level student mentors a sophomore who is part of their team when the BME 200 and 300 students are combined in teams. 2. Each team meets with their faculty advisor every week for a design review. 3. Each student participates in at least one K-12 outreach activity. 4. Each team writes at least one technical paper as part of the final

Conference Session

Engineering Ethics and Global Issues

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dawn Bikowski, Ohio University; Melissa Broeckelman, Ohio University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Ethics

AC 2007-2114: AN EDUCATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR NURTURING ACULTURE OF ACADEMIC HONESTYDawn Bikowski, Ohio University Dawn Bikowski is the Director of the Graduate Writing Program at Ohio University. She teaches engineering graduate students about academic honesty within the context of developing a set of writing skills. She is also a doctoral student in Educational Studies. Her research interests include issues related to academic honesty and how technology can best be used in education.Melissa Broeckelman, Ohio University Melissa Broeckelman is a doctoral student in Communication Studies at Ohio University and is also the Academic Honesty Advisor for the Russ College of Engineering and Technology

Conference Session

Software Engineering Topics

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Valentin Razmov, University of Washington

Tagged Divisions

Software Engineering Constituent Committee

-longprojects in teams of 5-8 (typically), following the incremental delivery approach5 with a shortiteration cycle – we set intermediate project deliveries roughly once every 2.5 weeks. After eachdelivery, instructors facilitate in-class retrospectives. Instructors also meet separately with eachproject team to provide feedback, address questions, and “take the pulse” of the team. 2-3 timesduring the term, usually shortly after some of the project deliveries, students completeanonymous peer evaluations for their teammates, offering constructive feedback. Each studentalso completes 2-3 individual reflective writing assignments during the term, to which instructorsprovide extensive written feedback and follow-up questions, engaging students in

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Juan Velasquez, Purdue University; Matthew Verleger, Purdue University

‚ Develop your course homepage‚ Lesson on Objectives ‚ Final approved topic & goal ‚ First Draft of‚ Write your objectives for 1-hour online lesson Objectives (Incl. peer‚ Receive & implement peer feedback ‚ Reading on Objectives feedback) for objectives ‚ First Draft Course‚ Develop your course homepage homepage‚ Revise objectives as needed ‚ Review examples of 1-hour ‚ Revised objectives‚ Receive peer feedback on course online lessons ‚ Course homepage homepage

Conference Session

How to Effectively Teach Using Teams

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Steven Burian, University of Utah; Pedro Romero, University of Utah; Steven Bartlett, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Civil Engineering

rapid departmental growth. ‚ Enhance students’ data analysis abilities and reinforce technical concepts by reducing time spent learning course-specific laboratory formatting and procedural requirements. ‚ Improve the quality of technical writing and report organization by using team leader oversight, team participation and accountability, peer review, and direct instructor-to- student feedback. ‚ Develop interpersonal and leadership skills through team laboratory experience, resolving conflicts and barriers and exercising leadership.The approach developed for implementation in the 2005-06 academic year included (1) the useof a department-consistent laboratory report format, (2) the introduction of additional

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kevin Dahm, Rowan University; Roberta Harvey, Rowan University

AC 2007-1132: USING AWARENESS OF LEARNING PROCESSES TO HELPSTUDENTS DEVELOP EFFECTIVE LEARNING STRATEGIESKevin Dahm, Rowan University Kevin Dahm is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. He has received the 2002 ASEE PIC-III Award, 2003 Joseph J. Martin Award, 2004 Raymond W. Fahien Award and 2005 Corcoran Award for his contributions to engineering education.Roberta Harvey, Rowan University Roberta Harvey is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Writing Arts at Rowan University. She has been part of the faculty team that teaches Sophomore Clinic I since 1998 and played a key role in the development of the integrated design and communication pedagogy of the

Conference Session

Assessment and Evaluation in Engineering Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

rebecca devasher, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Patrick Ferro, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Sudipa Mitra-Kirtley; David Mutchler, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; shannon sexton, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Anneliese Watt, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Julia Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

review tools.Unfortunately, few students answered this question, but many provided a wide variety of othercomments concerning the peer review instead.Some students preferred the tablet PC to other tools for peer review while other students did notcare for the tablet for peer review. Those students who indicated in their comment a preferencefor the tablet PC did so because they found the comments to be easier to distribute, save, access,and track changes. “It was easier to have an electronic copy. The tablet was useful for writing by hand on the electronic copy. Because I had an easily accessible electronic copy I was more likely to use the peer review.” --RH 330 student “I could take notes on the document

Conference Session

Design in the ECE Curriculum

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christine Co, Oklahoma State University; Bear Turner, Oklahoma State University; Alan Cheville, Oklahoma State University

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

” both mimic engineering practice andfollow the cognitive apprentice model. Scaffolding is provided by the instructor through thestandardized report format and rubric with direct feedback on performance to students. Page 12.93.5As well as a team report, each student submits a one page statement outlining their experienceson the project and completes a peer evaluation of their teammates. Students rate each teammember’s contribution to the team through a series of qualitative and quantitative questions.While completing the peer evaluation the student is asked to consider the work done by

Conference Session

Non-Technical Skills in ET

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

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

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

AC 2007-1381: FOSTERING STUDENTS TO BE LIFELONG LEARNERS WITHSCIENCE LITERACY, INFORMATION FLUENCY, AND COMMUNICATIONSKILLSJung Oh, Kansas State University-Salina Jung Oh is an Associate Professor of Chemistry at Kansas State University at Salina. She earned her B.S. from Sogang University in Korea and a Ph.D. from UCLA. She was an ASEE postdoctoral fellow at Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division. She was 2004 Wakonse Teaching fellow and 2006 Peer Review of Teaching fellow at K-State. Her interests in scholarship of teaching include cross-curricular innovation.Alysia Starkey, Kansas State University-Salina Alysia Starkey is an Assistant Professor and the Technical Services/Automation

Conference Session

The Impact of Curriculum on the Retention of Women Students

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Patricia Backer, San Jose State University

Tagged Divisions

Women in Engineering

the students continualfeedback both on their writing and the content.Each research paper is completed in three parts (see Figure 4). First, the students submit theirreferences to the instructor. Next, the students bring a first draft of their papers to class where thestudents conduct a peer review. The instructor uses the peer review rubric designed by theWriting Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison6. Each student completes a peer reviewof at least two other student’s papers. The instructor also participates in the peer review and the Page 12.1377.5instructor gives feedback to all students in the class. Finally, the students

Conference Session

Women, Minorities and the New Engineering Educator

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Noel Schulz, Mississippi State University; Kirk Schulz, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

draft manuscripts and make suggestions andcomments. When paper reviews are received, we have found it helpful to share these reviewswith the students so that they can see the types of comments that are typical following the blind,peer-review process. By involvement of students throughout the process, when it comes time forthem to write their first journal paper, they are familiar with the process of submitting their workfor publication in a journal.Professional PresentationsGraduate students need to make technical presentations as often as possible. While it may not bepossible for all of your graduate students to make a presentation at a national meeting, there are asignificant number of regional, local, and statewide conferences that can also

Conference Session

Professional Development and Scholarship

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Warren Hill, Weber State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

eachof these areas and how this weighing is used to calculate an overall rating for the faculty memberundergoing evaluation.Information GatheringThere are several sources of information that are available and used for the purposes ofevaluation. The types and kinds of information sources vary depending upon the area beingevaluated, namely whether one is looking at teaching, scholarship, or service. One sourcenormally common to all three of these is a self-report from the faculty member describing his orher accomplishments in each of these areas over the period for which they are being evaluated.Another common source of information is peer review. In talking about peer review, it isimportant to have the right group of peers doing the evaluation

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jenny Lo, Virginia Tech; Lisa McNair, Virginia Tech; Whitney Edmister, Virginia Tech; Michael Alley, Pennsylvania State University

its curriculum and would not accept the three-credit option as a substitute forany course in its curriculum. This third student simply could not afford to spend the time to takethis additional course. The goals of the fall segment were as follows: (1) to give the students the opportunity todocument their summer research experience, (2) to teach the students how to make a professionalpresentation, and (3) to teach the students how to document a project in a poster and a formalarticle. As is common in technical communication courses, all of the class periods were devotedto lessons on technical communication. These class periods consisted of critically examiningexamples of writing and presentations and of performing peer critiques on

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators: Tricks of the Trade I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Adrienne Minerick, Mississippi State University; Jason Keith, Michigan Technological University; Donald Visco, Tennessee Technological University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

the peer-review process. For example, prior to any work being submitted by the group forpublication, students in the group not affiliated with the paper can serve as reviewers. Theyshould provide written reviews of the submission in the same manner as would occur atprofessional journal. Such student-student interaction allows them to establish a formalprofessional relationship with the colleagues in their group.As a final example, students can benefit from learning to write professional correspondenceregarding committee meetings, abstract submissions, or requests for papers. It may be necessaryto instruct the student on email etiquette (carbon copying advisor on lab correspondences, papersubmissions, etc.) including salutations and signatures

Conference Session

Teams and Teamwork in Design I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janice Miller-Young, Mount Royal College; Sean Maw, Mount Royal College

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

course. Revision is also encouraged, forexample in an early assignment where groups of students write instructions for building a given Page 12.621.4Lego mechanism, which are then marked by another group who try to follow the instructions andgive feedback. The groups learn from their peers the importance of accuracy and clarity inwriting as well as drawing, then get a chance to revise their instructions before handing them into the instructor. We believe these activities not only help to improve the students’ performanceon subsequent projects, but to increase students’ awareness of the skills they have gained.Team evaluationsThe students work

Conference Session

Design Methodolgy

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Hugh Jack, Grand Valley State University

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

team andassume they are a professional is to overlook the much needed education in basic professionalism.As with any pedagogical method we have identified perpetual problems with problem studentsand specifically address these through project team design. The general categories that weencounter with students at our institution are listed below in relative frequency/importance. Theyhave been developed using personal interactions during, and peer evaluations after studentprojects from a variety of courses and faculty. Each school will have a different list. For example,our list obviously excludes cultural differences. • Working - Students working outside school 20 or more hours per week often have schedules that do not fit with regular full