engineerAbstractIn the fall of 2004 a college with five undergraduate academic programs decided to integrateservice-learning (S-L) projects into required engineering courses throughout the curriculum sothat students would be exposed to S-L in at least one course in each of eight semesters. Theultimate goal is to graduate better engineers and better citizens. Four of the degree programshave achieved on average one course each semester, with an actual coverage of 103 out of 128semester courses, or 80% coverage over the four years. Of the 32 required courses in theacademic year that had an average of 753 students each semester doing S-L projects related tothe subject matter of the course, 19 of the courses (60%) were considered engineering science,that is, not
and Bowers (1997) of studentsstudying physics found that reading is, in fact, more important than hearing.IntroductionHaving been challenged by a member of the public—specifically a K-12 school teacher—toprovide authoritative source(s) of the STATEMENT, what was envisioned as a simple search andproof would ultimately reveal a lack of evidence for the cited statistics. The STATEMENT beingreferred to here is that people (or students) learn (or recall/remember): • 10% of what they read • 20% of what they hear • 30% of what they see • 50% of what they hear and see • 70% of what they say (and write) • 90% of what they say as they do a thingThere are various forms and permutations of the STATEMENT found in published
collected prior to the beginning ofthe first year of study to answer the following research questions:- To what extent do the data collected for this study support the Gender Similarity Hypothesis?- For characteristics which show a difference, is there evidence that these differences are decreasing over this four year period?Background:Prior to the 1980’s, theories that male students were superior to female students in mathematicalability were widely accepted. For example, in 1974, Maccoby and Jacklin5 wrote “Boys excel inmathematical ability” under the heading “Sex Differences That Are Fairly Well Established.” Page 14.612.2They state that
development of this ability, and determine theeffect of this ability on self-efficacy and attitude toward engineering.AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. EEC-0835987.References1. The National Academy of Engineering, The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century, The National Academies Press, 2004.2. The National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the Next Century, The National Academies Press, 2005.3. The National Academies, Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, The National Academies Press, 2006.4. Sheppard, S. D., K. Macatangay, A
confidence using theseinventories, although efforts should be made to improve the reliability. Page 14.1260.5 Table 1 Statistics for Concept Inventories Class No. Mean Score Standard Reliability Std Error Students Deviation Coefficient, of Meas. Score % alpha Thermo S 06 116 21.0 65 4.2 0.69 2.3 F 05 110 19.4 61 3.9 0.66 2.3 Fluids S 06 114 14.9 50 4.1 0.69 2.3 F 05
intothe results in an attempt to correlate performance with other data. Currently, our team isanalyzing data associated with students’ behavior during the intervention including theexplanations that were generated and the time spent studying the solutions provided. Thisanalysis should reveal aspects of the intervention that had the greatest effects and guiderefinements of the current intervention. Page 14.712.14AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantEEC- 0550707. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not
of the engineeringdisciplines by addressing the motivational factors that are specific to each group.AcknowledgementsThe Academic Pathways Study (APS) is supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. ESI-0227558 which funds the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education(CAEE). CAEE is a collaboration of five partner universities. We would like to thank MicahLande and George Toye for all of their support from helping to develop the research question toencouraging us to think more deeply. One of the authors (SP) received support from the NSFGraduate Research Fellowship and the Stanford Graduate Fellowship.References1. S. Sheppard, Atman, C., Stevens, R., Fleming, F., Streveler, R., Adams, R., & Barker, T. (2004
atMissouri University of Science and Technology. The principal conclusion is that it is imperativeto the success of this type of program to provide a mechanism for frequently collecting feedbackin order to prioritize and schedule activities to best meet the needs of participants.IntroductionThe National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded project “A Program to Facilitate ScholasticAchievement in Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics” at Missouri University ofScience and Technology (Missouri S&T) ran from August 15, 2004 through July 31, 2009. Thegoals of this program were to address: (1) the decline in the number of students pursuing degreesin mathematics, computer science, and engineering, and (2) the minimal rate of low-incomestudents
a turbine? Stream 1: Steam flow rate = 10 kg/s. Temp. = 200C Pressure = 2 atm Stream 2: Steam flow rate = 100 kg/s Temp = 190 C Pressure = 2 atm. Page 14.469.8 a. Stream 1 has the potential to produce more electricity b. Stream 2 has the potential to produce more electricity c. Either stream has the potential to produce the same amount of electricity d. Not enough information given Explain your reasoning.This question was somewhat easy, with 71% of students being able to answer it correctly.However, it was a poor discriminator with a discrimination index of only 0.02
effective in teams attributes as compared to the architecturaland civil engineering students. Table 2: Rubrics for assessment of MDL dimensionsKnowledge: Pts.Level Awarded Description Student does not have an understanding of the characteristic, e.g., does not A 0 mention any of the attributes related to the characteristic. Provides a good understanding of the characteristic or provides A 1 evidence/artifact(s) that suggest a good understanding of the characteristic. Provides evidence/artifact(s) and a good understanding of the characteristic A 2 but does not connect the two together
.”using prior knowledge: Some students expressed that they did not look solely at the informationin the problem, but also looked to prior knowledge that might help them. Jose felt that your levelof prior knowledge affected how you might answer a question. “I know, because I have seen theword maybe a thousand times by now…But if we bring [in] someone that [does] not…know[s]anything about the problem, this would not be enough information.” For Alice, the ability to useknowledge is a key component of critical thinking: “I had to really like, reach in and kind of pullout something that maybe wasn’t right on the paper. And when you have to like go through yourfiling cabinet of stuff, then that would be a lot more critical.” Mike saw critical thinking
significant accomplishments,the students still wanted younger speakers. This may be accomplished by including collegestudents who are majoring in IT as part of the summer workshop, linking high school and college Page 14.1104.10with a career in IT. A similar approach is likely to be appropriate to other high schoolinterventions which share similar goals. Even without these changes, the SPIRIT workshopsappear to be accomplishing their goals with respect to the participating student groups.Bibliography1. Patterson, D. A. (2005). “Restoring the popularity of computer science”. Communication of the ACM, Vol. 48(9),pp. 25-28.2. Reges, S. (2006). “Back to
from reading, for instance,and this is backward from what Dale’s Cone suggests. I’m not “ear-minded” as the learningpsychologists say, and I understand that about a third of the U. S. population is like me (and Ican’t quote an exact source for this number either – I got it from learning psychologist FredKeller7 in a conversation with him). I don’t receive vocal information as efficiently as I do whenI read about something – I can always read text over again, but it isn’t usually possible to“replay” a lecture or a conversation. So my learning skills don’t match the lower levels of Dale’sCone. But after 43 years of teaching engineering subjects I am quite comfortable with the ideasthat, for most engineering students, Visual Receiving is superior
TEPEER. The team effectiveness from the one general team effectiveness in the peerevaluation instrument is designated as TECT. The detailed list of the items is shown in Table 2.Constructs are labeled I, G and P, representing interdependency, goal setting and potency, shownas the last letter of “Item ID” in Table 2.Table 2: Peer evaluation items for measuring how a student evaluating their peers.9-items within TEPEER: Item ID Item Description CI021I Collaborates well with my team on all in-class and out of the class assignments. CI022I Contributes to my team's effectiveness by having a clearly defined role(s). CI023I Is a reliable team member. CI024G Often helps my team think of what we were/were not achieving
if they just had some confidence, sat down and did it, that—I mean I'm sure they could all do it, you know, just as well.Elizabeth, a Computer Engineering major, had a great deal of experience with classes wherethere were relatively few women. Elizabeth explained that men tended to talk more than womenin class because they were more confident in themselves and cared less about others’ perceptionsof them. [S]ometimes [guys] don’t care how people are going to react, you know, like I think girls tend to care more about the emotions of other people, you know…what Page 14.614.8 they’re going to think of us and so on
. Markman (Eds.), Carmichael’s manual of child Page 14.907.21 psychology (Vol 1, pp.77-166). New York: Wiley.6. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.7. Carlson, E.R. (1997). Experienced cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.8. Cohen, M.S., Freeman, J.T., & Wolf, S. (1996). Metacognition in time-stressed decision making: Recognizing, critiquing, and correcting. Human Factors, 38(2), 206-219.9. Collins, A, Brown, J. S., & Newman, (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching students the craft of reading, writing, and
papers, including anexamination of relevant background information and author biographies, also suggests thatcollaborations frequently grow out of pre-existing individual and institutional relationships. Forexample, researchers who move to another country may continue to collaborate and publish withpeers and partners at their former institution(s). In other cases, cross-national collaborationsinvolve visiting professorships, post-doc appointments, Fulbright exchanges, and advisee-studentrelationships that cross national boundaries. International initiatives undertaken by universities,including partnerships with foreign institutions, also seem to encourage research collaborations.Keyword and Category AnalysisFigure 1 presents total number of
Thematic Topics Advising: a. …I had difficulty getting any advising help… (2, Advising) b. …the academic advising from [my institution]’s central advising has been incorrect, inconsistent, and typically rubbish (at best) (2, Advising) Co-op: c. …Co-ops are the key to learning what engineering is like… (4, Co-op) d. I had very little idea of what a job in engineering consisted of before I became a co-op student. I think these types of programs are crucial to creating capable engineers. (4, Co-op
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2006.2. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79-122. Page 14.306.93. Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action : A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.5. Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (1996). A test of a social cognitive model for middle school students: Math and science. Journal of
, 1978; North American Association forEnvironmental Education, 1999). Despite this, ‘two-thirds of adult Americans consistently failsimple tests of environmental knowledge’2.It can only be imagined, how much high school and beginning college students know aboutenvironmental and ecological engineering and are aware that engineering is a major careerchoice for students who want to make an environmentally and ecologically sustainable impact.The following examples demonstrate that engineering skills and knowledge are essential toenvironmental protection and enhancement. First, would a person switch from a standardresidential home to an “energy efficient home”, if s/he knew that the carbon footprint, use ofenergy, and greenhouse gas emissions of
exchange about the challenges of working on diverse studentteams and about how to resolve these challenges, faculty can go a long way to helping Page 14.1312.7engineering students develop the skills, knowledge, and awareness they will need upongraduation.References1. Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330-366.2. Hong, L., & Page, S. E. (2004). Groups of diverse problem solvers can outperform groups of high-ability problem solvers. PNAS, 101(46), 16385-16389.3. Kaplan, M., Cook, C. E., Steiger, J
. One busy intersection on campus is the crossing of Fifth Ave. in front of the bookstore. Dangers at this intersection include heavy traffic and busses which run against the general traffic flow (see diagram below). The University would like to design a cost effective method for students to cross Fifth Ave. which would reduce the possibility of accidents at this intersection. You have been assigned to design a solution to this problem for presentation to the University Traffic Committee. In the process of designing your solution you have been asked to respond to the set of questions on the following pages. The interviewer has more paper if you need it. 1. What is the problem as you see it? 2. List potential solution(s) for this
(1), 33 Lesniak, R. J., & Hodes, C. L. (2000). Social relationships: learner perceptions of interactions indistance learning, The Journal of General Education, 49(1), 34-43.4 Gray, G. L., Evans, D., Cornwell, P., Contanzo, F., and Self B., (2003). Toward aNationwide Dynamics Concept Inventory Assessment Test, Proceedings of the2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Vol Sessions 1168, Nashville,TN: ASEE.5 Timoshenko, S. P., (1983) History of Strengths of Materials, New York: DoverPublications, pp 67-70.6 About the Ecole Polytechnique (2008) Retrieved July 28 2008from: http://www.polytechnique.edu/page.php?MID=177 More Than 75 Years of Quality Assurance in Technical Education, Retrieved 28 July2008 from
Page 14.83.10appropriate comprehensive map, this method does provide a much clearer insight into thefundamental understanding students gain based upon their enrollment in assorted courses.References[1] National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Learning Research and Educational Practice., J. Bransford, J. W. Pellegrino, S. Donovan, and NetLibrary Inc., "How people learn bridging research and practice," Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999, pp. x, 78 p.[2] J. R. Anderson and C. Lebiere, The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998.[3] J. D. Novak, Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations
% DB- DB- M D O D O M Spr DL- DB-S B-DL- S-Sum M- Sum S-Fal l DB-D 0% ing Spr p ing ring Sum me me L- F all
been studiedwithin this framework.Identity and Career Choice With roots in Erik Erikson’s 20 foundational theory, career choice has remained connected todiscussions of identity development. In Erikson’s theory 20 successful resolution of the identitycrisis phase of development marks the end of childhood and the beginning of adulthood. Crisisresolution includes selecting and committing to a vocation 20, 21. Marcia 22 operationalizedErikson’s theory as a four-staged model with the lowest stage representing no identity crisis andno career choice and the highest stage incorporating resolution of identity crisis and careercommitment. In this theory, identity and career choice are tightly linked. In the 1970’s and 1980’s, many identity studies
work.BackgroundThe eleven middle and high school teachers who participated in the RET site during the summerof 2008 spent six weeks conducting research under the mentorship of an engineering facultymember. Teachers typically interacted with a graduate student(s) or a post-doctoral fellow on aday-to-day basis. Program deliverables included several short presentations on researchprogress, a scientific poster for their classroom describing their research project, and the creationof a teaching module related to their engineering research project, which teachers were toimplement during the subsequent academic year. Professional development activities took placeonce or twice per week during the summer program. Some of these sessions were directly relatedto
solution” (Interview One) and how she “struggle[s] with like, what is best” (InterviewTwo). This emphasis on a “best” solution type is in contrast with Chris’ approach to workingwith whichever solution type the individual team had chosen, and giving feedback tostrengthening that particular solution type. In his interview, Chris recognized that when he was anew TA, he also was tempted to “advise [every team] to do the exact same thing” (InterviewTwo), which suggests that it may be common for new TAs to advise teams to adopt the “best”solution type, rather than helping teams to fully develop a strong solution for whichever solutiontype they had chosen.Robin, as a new Teaching Assistant, often identified with the role of grader. An
meters (solve for D) m = the rocket mass in kilograms g = the acceleration of gravity = 9.81 m/s2 rho = the density of air = 1.22 kg/m3 Cd = the drag coefficient of the chute, 1.5 for a parachute (dome-shaped chute) v = the speed we want at impact with the ground (3 m/s or less)The technology education teacher then presented an example using the equations to predict thediameter of a parachute required for a model rocket, finding it to be 17.1 inches in diameter.The teachers planned to provide analysis methods for the students, but the students wiil conductthe analysis. In most cases, students were expected to perform analysis on alternative solutionsgenerated by the teacher