Asee peer logo
advanced search
Displaying all 2 results

Inclusive Course Design Checklist: A Living Document for Faculty to Create Inclusive Classrooms

Conference Session
Faculty Development Division (FDD) Technical Session 3
Collection
2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors
Swetha Nittala, Uber Technologies; Sheri D. Sheppard, Stanford University; Helen L. Chen, Stanford University
Tagged Topics
Diversity
Tagged Divisions
Faculty Development Division (FDD)
out how to operationalize them in theirclassrooms. Research has shown that faculty interested in pedagogical transformation areoften overwhelmed by the many tools, frameworks, and theories available [13]. One of theobjectives of this paper is to remove this burden on faculty and instructors by providing themwith an organized checklist of inclusive teaching practices stemming from variedframeworks, along with some easy-to-use resources, strategies, and examples, all in a singleresource. Further, our inclusive course design checklist is organized around the variouscomponents of teaching (e.g., writing the syllabus, selecting/training TAs, etc.) so it is (wehope) more pragmatic, accessible, and implementation-ready to educators, all the
Relevance Score: 0.4183655

Understanding Environmental Factors in Academic Honesty Awareness Towards a Better Interpretation of Plagiarism via Turnitin Similarity Scores

Conference Session
Faculty Development Division (FDD) Technical Session 1
Collection
2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors
Mireia Perera-Gonzalez, Northeastern University; Shiaoming Shi, Northeastern University
Tagged Topics
Diversity
Tagged Divisions
Faculty Development Division (FDD)
University,instructed by the authors of this paper, were evaluated (104 total students, roughly 50/50 ratio menand women). They were tasked to analyze a CRISPR/Cas9 publication by R. Barrangou et al. asthe first assignment of the course, then they had a lecture on academic honesty, and they wereasked to repeat the assignment if their similarity score was above 20 % (optional if < 20 %). 29students repeated the assignment.Demographic information (country of origin, undergraduate/graduate background, languages) wascollected from voluntary surveys and combined with the Turnitin data. In cohort 2 (Fall 2022), wecarried a more exhaustive evaluation of academic honesty[10] from a voluntary survey to gageunderstanding of the university guidelines[11
Relevance Score: 0.030997097