Conference Session

Improving Technical Understanding of All Americans

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Elaine Cooney, Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis; Karen Alfrey; Steve Owens, Indiana University - Purdue University-Indianapolis

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

– those thatdiscussed fostering critical thinking at the level of a single class (or at most as aninterplay between two classes) – two distinct themes emerged: improving criticalthinking through writing for reflection, and improving critical thinking through problem-based learning.WRITING FOR REFLECTIONWriting for reflection promotes critical thinking by challenging students to make andarticulate value judgments about data, problems, and possible solutions. Furthermore, thewriting process, approached systematically, can be used to support and develop problem-solving skills.Hierarchical Classification Of Critical and Reflective ThinkingOne theme that emerged from the recent literature was assessing student writing aboutopen-ended problems using a

Conference Session

Service Courses for Non-Engineers

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William Suchan, United States Military Academy; Susan Schwartz, United States Military Academy; Edward Sobiesk, United States Military Academy

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Page 13.745.2Source Web Design (www.oswd.org)3 as a starting point for their work. By customizing an openThe views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Military Academyor the United States Army.source design and integrating their own content, our students produce truly amazing web portalsin a reasonable amount of time.Another central issue that we address in the introductory module is intellectual property rights incyberspace. Before our students begin work on their web portals, they participate in a lessonwith an adjunct professor who is a lawyer specializing in electronic media copyrights and theconcept of Fair Use.4 Then, throughout the process of

Conference Session

Service Courses for Non-Engineers

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College; David Ollis, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

were identified:The Technology Survey Course, The Technology Focus orTopics Course, The Technology Creation Course (Design Course), The Technology Critique,Assess, Reflect, or Connect Course. The technology survey courses offer a broad overview of anumber of areas of engineering and technology. The technology or topics or focus course isnarrower in scope and develops one well-defined area. The engineering design course, ortechnology creation, places an emphasis on the engineering design process to developtechnological solutions to problems. The last model to emerge is concerned with assessingtechnological impacts, connecting technological developments to other areas of society, historyand culture, or reflecting on engineering in a broader

Conference Session

Service Courses for Non-Engineers

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John Krupczak, Hope College; Timothy Simpson, Pennsylvania State University; Vince Bertsch, Santa Rosa Junior College; Kate Disney, Mission College; Elsa Garmire, Dartmouth College; Barbara Oakley, Oakland University; Mary Rose, Ball State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

for a course on technologicalliteracy; instead, four standard course models were proposed and slated for development as partof the follow-on NSF/NAE Technological Literacy for Undergraduates Workshop, which washeld in March 2007 [1,2]. The four standard course models were: (1) Technology SurveyCourse, (2) Technology Focus Course, (3) Technology Design Course, and (4) TechnologyCritique, Assess, Reflect, or Connect Course. The proposed framework was created to serve notonly as a guide for developing these standard course models but also as a method for evaluatingand benchmarking existing technological literacy courses.Description of the Proposed FrameworkThe proposed framework was developed by a team at the 2007 NSF/NAE Workshop

Conference Session

Engineering for Nonengineers: Ideas & Results

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathryn Neeley, University of Virginia; W. Bernard Carlson, University of Virginia; Sarah Pfatteicher, University of Wisconsin - Madison; Bruce Seely, Michigan Technological University; Douglass Klein, Union College; Ronald Miller, Colorado School of Mines

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Page 13.1190.3actually achieving the broad goals for TL articulated by NAE.Some of the outcomes we list below also indicate the presence of “ways of thinking and acting.”The statements in bold come from Technically Speaking. The material in the bullet points thatappear after the numbered items was developed by our group. 1. Recognizes the pervasiveness of technology in everyday life. • Analyzes the social dimensions of a particular sociotechnical system (that is, recognizes that technology is more than just artifacts) and articulates the specific ways in which that system reflects choices. • Describes the various sociotechnical systems in which his/her life is embedded. 2. Understands

Conference Session

Improving Technical Understanding of All Americans

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary Kasarda, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; Brenda Brand, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; Michael Collver, Montgomery County Public Schools; Gabriel Goldman, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

are new to the program and stepping in as manager/mentors of the high-schoolstudents. The capstone design students are still involved directly with the high-school students, butare given additional responsibilities associated with the new mentors and subteam tasks assignedunder them. All levels of mentors are supported by the faculty who meet with these studentsregularly for guidance including lectures on professional leadership topics, and to help them sortout details of their experiences during oral reflections. In addition, faculty are always available forimpromptu consultations so that while students are challenged by new situations, they also knowthat they are fully supported for working through issues when needed.Technological literacy

Conference Session

Improving Technical Understanding of All Americans

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Daniel Engstrom, ITEA/Cal U

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

and science education standards and with connections to mathematics standards. 3. Pilot and assess the model in diverse classroom/laboratory environments. 4. Disseminate resources with professional development support.To write each unit, a strict process was followed that reflected the Understanding byDesign(UbD) approach created by Wiggins and McTighe1. This process has three main steps includingidentify desired results, determine acceptable evidence, and then design learning experiences.This process is important to follow to ensure that educational standards are clearly uncoveredand appropriate assessments are developed prior to the learning experiences.Unit DevelopmentThe writers met as a team to discuss the unit development

Conference Session

Engineering for Nonengineers: Ideas & Results

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Ollis, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

device evolution in the larger cultural and socialcontexts of the time. The format of our Tech Lit course is important: each lab device and associatedtechnical lecture (“engineering solution”) is preceded by an historical survey lecturewhich provides not only prior examples of “engineering solutions” to the same or similartechnical challenges, but also reflects upon the societal and technical settings of the time.While such a lecture pair was first created in order to show the evolution of thetechnology itself over time, it also naturally reveals the “global and societal contexts”within which each version of the device (engineering solution) was created, grew infrequency of application, and ultimately, perished or was replaced with a yet

Conference Session

Engineering for Nonengineers: Ideas & Results

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gregory Zieren, Austin Peay State University; John Blake, Austin Peay State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

electronically, to reference materials. Visual aides, both still images andvideos, are needed to teach this subject. The instructors must have support in preparingmaterials, equipment such as scanners and classroom projection systems, and general supportwith instructional technology.The instructional team approach is not a common arrangement at universities. When this coursewas first offered, we had this option through the university’s honors program. After thisoffering, there was a change in administration. Reflecting general trends in state supportedhigher education, the new administration focused on increasing efficiency and maximizingenrollment. Instructors had to be used as efficiently as possible, and innovations such as team-based instruction had

Conference Session

Improving Technical Understanding of All Americans

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary Rose, Ball State University; Jim Flowers, Ball State University

Tagged Divisions

Technological Literacy Constituent Committee

Computer Use by ChildrenAs the problem scenario is presented, the instructor assigns students to small groups of 3 to 5individuals. Over a six-week period, these cooperative groups engage in a cycle of planning,self-directed study, collaborative analysis and debate, self-reflection, and cooperative decision-making and writing. In essence, these learning groups collaboratively select and apply thetechnology assessment process and analytical methods they discovered earlier in the class to theexigencies of this issue. Eventually, the results of their analytical work enable them to proposefour policy options. Accompanying each is a future scenario that might result if these policieswere adopted