simplify the model as they see fit, and then apply the canonical mathematical models theywere taught in their engineering science courses to guide their design decisions in a group settingand reflect on their answers. Previous research has focused on engineering students workingtogether within designated design courses, but little is known about how students work togetherin a group to solve a problem in an engineering science course.This full research paper serves as our first attempt to answer the questions: 1) How do undergraduate engineering student teams solve an open-ended statics problem? 2) How does solving these problems contribute to building professional engineering skills?BackgroundOne of the main activities of
of the COVID-19 pandemic, to the current year’s team concentrating onimplementing sensors in the hand and refining the ergonomics of the existing design. The paperwill also include student & faculty reflection and discussion of the faculty facilitation needed forsuch a service-based project and how engineering educators can consider implementing suchprojects into their programs.IntroductionInterdisciplinary team-based projects in engineering education are an approach to experientiallearning which can provide students with a diverse learning opportunity to work closely withindividuals from different disciplines [1, 2, 3]. Some of the benefits of participating on aninterdisciplinary team include unique solutions to solving complex problems
. According to the NationalResearch Council [3] and Savey [4], inquiry-based learning (IBL) is a pedagogical approach inwhich students begin with a question followed by investigating the solutions, reflecting, andcommunicating findings, and creating new knowledge based on the collected evidence. IBL hasbeen widely adopted in science education because of its great potential to facilitate more positivestudent attitudes and a deeper understanding of scientific concepts [5], [6]. Additionally, accordingto Specht et al [7], inquiry-based learning has been increasingly suggested as an efficient approachfor fostering students’ curiosity and motivation by linking science teaching in schools withinformal learning and phenomena in everyday life. To ensure the
university setting. The success of an advanced digital design course deliveredusing a remote Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGA) lab inspired the creation of anintroductory digital logic curriculum for 2-year community college and high school students. TheBEADLE curriculum is designed to prepare students for a junior-level course in computerengineering at a 4-year university, where digital logic is typically taken during the first twoyears. To evaluate the curriculum, we offered it to a sophomore class on digital logic design at a4-year public university and collected pre- and post-assignment surveys to gauge understandingof the material. Reflection pieces were also used to evaluate the students' approach and level ofcomprehension. In this paper
essentially more of a coaching ratherthan correcting[2], and collaboration with communication experts for training is one approach todevelop more efficient and purposeful grading rubrics. The goal of rubrics is to reflect the skillstargeted in the assignment in order to effectively evaluate technical communication[2].In previous work, the lead instructors for a two-part series of senior-level chemical engineeringunit operations laboratory courses worked with the Writing Center on campus to developassignments and activities targeted at specific technical communication skills[9]. Through thiscollaboration, preliminary rubrics were developed to assess communication skills tied to learningoutcomes. These rubrics were constructed based on reflecting what
can help.’”The article referenced is a collection of excerpts from the book “Peer-to-Peer Leadership:Transforming Student Culture” by Aaron Thompson, Greg Metz, and Joseph B. Cuseo. Contentsections summarized include Why Peer Leadership Matters in the 21st Century, The Importanceof Social Capital, The Power of Peer Leadership, and Positive Outcomes Associated with PeerLeadership. In the content referenced as the most impactful reading of the practicum, leadershipis undeniably linked to peer mentorship, yet the connection was missed in PL reflection. As thePeer Leader Practicum further develops, activities and discussions should reinforce theimportance of leadership development within the practice of peer mentorship.Peer Leaders Self-Identify
group, selected to better ensure that content on diversity andinclusivity is well-integrated into the course in a meaningful and effective manner. This contentincludes interviews with industry professionals who themselves can effectively represent diverseperspectives; readings selected from texts on engineering failures resulting from a lack ofinclusivity (“missing voices”) in design, and case studies on the impact of locating high risktechnologies and facilities in socio-economically disadvantaged areas (often correlated with largeminority populations). Students are asked to reflect on factors which impact their own values aswell as those of engineers who design, site and implement technologies. DIV learning outcomesto be achieved via the
know”. Some codes appear both in theFacilitators and the Barriers data, with different interpretation: for example, prep coded a response to thebarriers question when a student said they didn’t feel adequately prepared to succeed in their next class,and it coded a response to the confidence question when the student reflect on the extent to which thepreparation that they do have equips them for success.A. Most frequent categories for facilitators and barriersWhen coding responses of CSE majors in the eight participating classes to the question: What makes youfeel good about your plans to take the next course in this sequence?, the most frequently seen category wasKnowledge, which includes the codes prep and cs-skills. Students feel confident
for public education is “burning the buildings and hanging the professors”[15]. From its inception, ASEE has been advocating for the same basic teaching reforms of theRousseau/Dewey pedogeological ideology, yet “there is nothing new under the sun” [16]. Whenengineering educators are tempted to blame to K-12 education, in a confused exercise ofHegelian synthesis, more and more of ASEE’s policy recommendations reflect the failingpedagogical and sociological ideologies adopted by that same K-12 system [17].Perhaps, the educational reforms of the last century have inverted the problem. More and moreemphasis has been placed on the teaching innovation. Western culture since the world wars hasvalued Rousseau’s “noble savage” and Wordsworth’s “Idiot
challenges if they are given freedom with appropriate responsibility.2. A Key issue is “how should we grade?” to accurately reflect student learning. When we asked the following question to Open AI’s ChatGPT it immediately generated the answer shown with the citation and references given below. Question: “How can a teacher grade an assignment, which is completed by a student using ChatGPT?” ChatGPT Answer: “ChatGPT is a chatbot that uses a variant of the GPT (Generative Pre- training Transformer) language model to generate text based on a given prompt. It is not designed to be used as a tool for completing assignments or for grading purposes. If a student has used ChatGPT to complete an assignment, it would not be an accurate
at least one “micromoment activity” in their courses. To support faculty in theseactivities, we created a set of 25 micromoment activities [16] that faculty could use immediatelyand easily adapt to the content at hand. Not only would these activities help faculty to be moreconfident in their teaching, but they would support pedagogical change and encourage morefrequent implementations. Students would also have more opportunities for engaging in learningexperiences to develop an entrepreneurial mindset [16].After implementing each micromoment activity, faculty completed a reflection and submitted toan online forum on Engineering Unleashed [17] to discuss the activity, how it went, and howthey can improve. They were also asked how they felt
], [13].It is also a pre-cursor to motivation and engagement [14], [15], and sustained academicperformance [16], [17]. Therefore, it is critical, and especially for students who are the mostvulnerable to attrition such as URM, to develop a strong SOB early in a college career [18].Similarly, while retention models recognize the importance of academic success and intellectualgrowth to retention, they do not connect effective Self-Regulation of Learning (SRL) toretention. Zimmerman’s social-cognitive model of SRL [19] focuses on an individual’scognition, actions, and affect while learning. Effective SRL occurs when learners are activelyengaged in the task (or performance in SRL-speak) and bookend each task with forethought andself-reflection. The
student perceptions change over the duration of the first laboratory course? • To what extent do these experiences differ for students enrolled in the traditional course and the revised course?By providing thematic analysis of these responses, we hope to glean further insight into themerits and limitations of both modes of class operation. While the quantitative analysis wasuseful for observing general shifts in knowledge, skills, and attitude, there is value in readingstudents’ reflections that allow for context. Since student responses on Likert scale questions canbe subjective and personal, we anticipate that qualitative analysis of the open-ended responseswill expose the deeper thought processes of our students, allowing us to
then develop original multi-day engineering design-based lessons for enactment in their classrooms over the following two semesters. Following theirNUWC visit, teachers participate in ongoing professional learning workshops (i.e., fall andspring) where they learn to use the 7E model of STEM instruction (Eisenkraft, 2003) to guidetheir lesson planning and implementation and reflect on their lesson development with theirpeers. Aligned with our framework, engineering design-based instruction is at the core of thismodel. Teachers self-identify their Naval STEM lesson topics and form teams of 3-5 teachers(based on these interests) to develop their lessons. “Naval STEM” tasks are those contextualizedusing Naval research that include NUWC-based
freely and unconditionally through stories[60], that can convey the intended messages [58], such that stakeholders can fully understand hislived experiences both at home and abroad over time [61]. The narrative inquiry approach has afluid nature and is flexible, to capture distinct and reflective narratives [59], [62] of the lived andeducational experiences [47] of Apex through various data collection methods (e.g., interviews,participant observation, and focus groups), and from that creating experiences for theengineering education community, that is tension-free, calm and relaxing storytelling [58], [63]–[65]. This way, the research team will be able to gather extensive and triangulated data whoseconstructs, themes, and interpretations [66
Reflections, Review Review Review Review 4:15 - 4:30 Feedback, 4:30 - 4:45 Photos Reflection Reflection Reflection Reflection Closing and Thank You! 4:45 - 5:00emotional intelligence [30, 31], and effective communication skills [32].Introductory technical skills were covered early in the Guild workshop so that the participantscould start applying these skills and programming languages
Carthage College, Dr. Nagel is leading development of two new degree programs: a Bachelor of Arts in Engineering and a Bachelor of Science in Engineering. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Learning from an Omnidirectional Mentorship Program: Identifying Themes and Outcomes through a Qualitative LensAbstractMentorship has many benefits which may include sharing, reflection, and empathy. Mentoringfosters understanding of others and their perspectives. Being mentored increases one’s potentialfor success and satisfaction, opening doors for new opportunities in personal and professionalgrowth. Omnidirectional mentorship is a type of organizational structure that emphasizes
students develop a sense of agency,deeper relationality, and inclusive leadership practices. We present how these outcomes arehighly important for effecting change both as a part of Access and in other spaces studentsoccupy.In this paper, we begin by introducing background information on both Access and put the workof the NF team in conversation with other educational change initiatives. We then describe themethods we have used in this work. Next, we present the results of our analysis and reflect onthese results in the discussion section. Finally, we use the conclusion section of this paper todiscuss implications for other practitioners and motivate future research possibilities.II. BackgroundIn this section, we first describe how Access is
activities used in ethics and non-ethicsengineering courses. We share details and examples of some of our activities, including examplesof student made scenarios. We share our challenges and reflections about the process.(3) Developing and curating different resources for ethics educators through the Virtues andVocations and Ethics at Work initiatives and through a student developed ethics tool.INTERDISCIPLINARY AND PAN-INTITAIVE COLLABORATIONVirtues and Vocations initiativeThese endeavors came into contact with the Virtues and Vocations initiative at the University ofNotre Dame’s Center for Social Concerns. The Center for Social Concerns is an interdisciplinaryinstitute dedicated to justice education and research for the common good with
marginalized local knowledges. It attends to the way power is reflected in socio-technical systems and whether power sharing exists and/or power is being exerted and treated as a limited resource [36]. 2) Politics of artifacts [37] asserts that science and technology aren’t neutral. Many of the values and politics of artifacts remain invisible, by design. In order to build socially just socio-technical systems, we must reveal these values in existing artifacts and attend to what values are shaping the design of new artifacts. Otherwise knowledge production and technological development will continue to reproduce social inequalities. 3) Feminist standpoint epistemologies (e.g., [38]) help us empathetically orient “Self
thecourse. The survey also allowed students to expand on any challenges they were still facing atthe end of the course. This final survey allowed us to explore in depth the students’ interests,prior exposure to ECE, course expectations, learning experiences, and takeaways, in addition toany remaining challenges and final reflections. We provide a brief class profile in Table 2,generated from the final survey data. It is important to highlight the different making andelectronics experiences that students had been exposed to prior to taking E40M, in addition to thedifferent academic major interests of the enrolled students. This diversity helped us collect amore representative body of data pertaining to the overall student population’s
/or manufacture. They too had to form together as a network so as to bringtogether much tacit knowledge that would otherwise be unavailable.Bingham and Hames show the importance of skill in liaison and coordination. In the pursuitof the Task force’s goals. Just as the principles of networking are generic so are the skills oftechnical (scientific) coordination. Indeed Trevelyan believes they are the key skills in theengineer’s repertoire “Engineering itself is a large symphony of combined collaborationperformances” [12]. That could equally be said of the VTF as described by Bingham andHames.Finally, evidence supports the view that teams are more effective when their membership isdiverse. Bingham reflected, “I now realised that we did not have
elicitation processes – meaning the way in which the authors of each article took out theinformation that would create the mental model – was unique, though they can be broadlycategorized as having a significant visual element (e.g., Pathfinder Networks in Braunschweig &Seaman (2014)), being derived from text(s) that were either generated by the students themselves(e.g., in the form of reflective writing found in Sochacka et al. (2020)) or observations ofdesigning (e.g., audio recordings found in Quinones et al. (2009)). Depending on the context ofthe study, the elicitation technique that was used could also act as the generation process of themental model – meaning the way in which authors interpreted or translated the knowledge togive it
example, are ill-structured withunderdefined constraints and unknown criteria to assess solutions [26]. In contrast, anengineering optimization problem focuses on using data collection and analysis to determineand/ or improve the performance of an existing process, product, and/ or system [9]. A reverseengineering problem, on the other hand, encompasses understanding existing processes and/ orsystems to document, learn about or from, and/ or redesign it [9]. Although these engineeringproblems are described as individual problem types, within professional engineering practice,engineers are tasked with working on a combination of the different kinds of problems. As such,engineering problems designed for K-12 settings should reflect the diversity of
students across both iterations, along with students’ final projects andwritten reflections on the awareness events [8].There was some shift in students’ perceptions of the issue of homelessness. Pre- and post-responses revealed that the deficit perspective that homelessness is the result of inherentindividual characteristics was mostly present in pre-surveys and decreased but did not disappearafter the project [8]. Students' written reflections demonstrated their surprise that their previousnotions of the causes of homelessness and the demographics of individuals experiencinghomelessness were inaccurate or incomplete [31]. However, several students did present acritical and systemic view of social injustices, mostly in their post-responses [8
, and developing and using models. CT within the literature is framed as a set ofpractices to engage in problem-solving implying that, within K-12 settings, CT can serve as adisciplinary body of knowledge in its own right, and as a set of epistemic practices for problem-solving and meaning making in general.This framing is echoed in student discourse and practices around CT and engineering design(Ardito et al., 2020; Tofel-Grehl, Searle, & Ball, 2022; Yang, Baek, & Swanson, 2020). Ardito etal. (2020) for instance found that students used CT as epistemic practices to problem-solve andmake meaning of engineering challenges in robotics, often reflecting on this in their journals.Yang, Baek, & Swanson (2020), pulling from observations
experience (i.e., apprehension). They later transformthese experiences through internal reflection (i.e., intention) or manipulation of externalphenomena (i.e., extension). In our courses, we use case studies and simulation/game-likeactivities. Prado et al. [15] found that both simulations and case studies as pedagogical toolsworked well to convey the main ideas in a course on sustainable development.In this paper, we describe our approach within a Civil and Environmental Engineeringdepartment, where we have developed two policy-oriented courses for upper-level undergraduateand graduate students. The primary questions we answered when developing the policy forengineers courses were 1) what learning objectives to prioritize and 2) what teaching and
happens to the power of various elements in a resistivecircuit as the value of one of the resistors decreases. The second exercise has students considersituations in which the ideal independent voltage and current source models might fail. Bothwriting exercises are built from a template that includes several metacognitive prompts to spurself-reflection on the part of the user. A rule-based approach was taken to detect evidence ofcommon misconceptions [2] and errors in student responses, as well as to identify sentences thatrevealed the student was correctly addressing the problems. Based on identified misconceptionsor correct concepts in a student’s writing, the web-based application selects appropriate directedline of reasoning (DLR) feedback
course content – redesign of a local food system – was not a “favoritetopic” of some of the students.A further detailed analysis of Figure 2 shows that for Spring 2021, the same five questions wereadministered during the fifteenth week of the course. The response rate (N=9) was equal to one-third of the full course enrollment (N=30), and again reflects the poor rate of response typicallyobserved on our campus. As mentioned above, in Spring 2022, only three of the same fivequestions were administered during the fifteenth week of the course (i.e., question 1 and question2 are no longer included in the campus-wide instrument). The response rate (N=6) represented aminority of the enrollment (N=28). While the overall response reported in Figure 2 was
intentional choice made after pilot testing the protocol. We were interested in howparticipants’ perceived the role of topical expertise because research suggests engineering faculty see it ascritically important [15]. When asked about the role and importance of a teacher's topical knowledge, participants’consensus was that it could be assumed, rather than being something that differentiated good or bad teaching. Wesee this as important, and likely contextual. Upon reflection, we see it as unsurprising for participants in ourinstitutional context to see faculty as inherently experts to the point that it can be unspoken. To many participants,assumed expertise is reputational and a motivation for attending their institution.The second theme was the