ComputationControl (Spring 2021):The instructor for this course has taught it for many years and had used a structured laboratoryreport for the weekly exercises until it was discontinued during the COVID pandemic tostreamline student online submissions of MATLAB-focused weekly activities. The instructor re-implemented the structured lab report format for the control year’s offering. Students were askedto complete the computational exercises and answer questions in an electronic fill-in-the-blankformat. The structure of the “report” requested (1) objectives of the lab, (2) responses tocomputational tasks in complete sentences and with screen captures of student work, (3)conclusions in complete sentences, including responses to “What did you learn in this lab
expertinstruction from a nursing educator. We invited the students to develop interview guides andinterview local stakeholders in the community and to report the information they collected in anessay that answered the question, “What is the problem with the food system in Phelps County,Missouri?” [21].The current article describes our work as part of a design course entitled, “5605 EnvironmentalEngineering Design”, offered at the Missouri University of Science and Technology. Details ofthis course syllabus, teaching modules, and student feedback have been described previously[21]. In this article, we report on the materials that nurses used to teach engineers aboutqualitative research; provide examples of stakeholder feedback solicited from interviews
ROS in Remote LearningAbstractEven though remote learning has been present and available in a myriad of topics beforepandemic times, robotics remote learning had the limitation of interacting with robotic platformsthrough simulation alone. With COVID-19, postgraduate education was forced to move to remotelearning. Birk et al. 1 conducted a reasonable practice for online teaching of a robotics course atJacobs University Bremen. Although their lectures covered most of the robotics areas, they usedpre-recorded videos to teach and did not hold labs to demonstrate the operations on real robots.The sudden pivot created a paradigm shift for robotics courses traditionally taught in-personwhere students had the opportunity to experience interaction
a university can obtain course content from a personalized learningserver called ISPeL (see details in Section 3.2) remotely and offer the robotics course on campuswithout hiring robotics experts. Students are required to complete a certain percentage of coursecontent in each class, but the learning path can be different. In other words, each student can learndifferent topics in the same classroom by walking through the corresponding course materials,such as videos and sample code wrapped in Jupyter-notebooks, a computer science languageexecution software. If a student has any questions, he/she should ask the general instructor first.The chatbot can answer basic questions, such as the robotics concept and syllabus-relatedquestions. If the
to the liftingof travel restrictions and the growing demand for in-person experiences from both students andeducational institutions. While the core structure remained unchanged, an 8-day onsite programin Indonesia was introduced for the social science learning component. Participants now had theoption to select either a fully online virtual course (VAx) or a hybrid model consisting of halfvirtual and half onsite courses (HAx). The onsite courses were designed to be affordable for allinterested participants, as out-of-pocket costs only included round-trip transportation to and fromSurabaya International Airport. Onsite accommodation, ground transportation, and regularlyscheduled meals were sponsored by ITS. This effective utilization of the
were presented with the flexure on the final exam) with the 2023 Fall cohort, who werepresented with the flexure during the first class meeting and in subsequent group activities.The first measurement was on performance against the relevant learning objective as stated in thecourse syllabus. This learning objective was inherited from a previous instructor and was statedas “Upon successful completion of this course, students will demonstrate an ability to apply theFinite Element Method (FEM) through selection of appropriate analysis methods and applicationof appropriate analysis tools to determine meaningful results and validate accuracy of results.”Fall 2022 students received an average of 4.19 on a scale of 1-5; Fall 2023 students received
from public online course catalogs; only chemical engineering classeswere considered. If a class was taught in another department by a chemical engineeringprofessor, it was not included in our analysis.For teaching load calculations, the majority of course credit hours were simply attributable to asingle faculty member. However, a minority of courses necessitated an alternative counting. If aclass was taught by multiple different professors, those faculty were each given credit forteaching the class. This choice was made because it is unclear, with publicly available data, howteaching load is divided between faculty of co-taught courses. Further, a course taught by twofaculty does not reliably indicate that the sum of their efforts would not
Technology). Thesecourses are unique because they are co-taught by an engineering professor and a historyprofessor who regularly collaborate to develop the syllabus and lessons within the classroom.Both iterations of the course are titled “War, Machine, Culture, and Society: History andEngineering in the Second World War,” and focus on teaching students the social and politicalfoundations of World War II while discussing technical issues, design thinking, and problem-solving skills associated with the war. As we describe in the review below, there are variousreasons to develop an interdisciplinary model in STEM courses, integrating the humanities intoengineering coursework. However, it is often difficult for STEM faculty to integrate their
human-centered design approach, (2) the intersection of socialjustice and design thinking, and (3) the implications of design choices on historicallymarginalized groups. Course artifacts, student reflections, and instructional team reflections areused to understand the growth in mindset of the students and instructor through this course.Additionally, these resources are used to present key learnings for future implementation.This project focused on examining systems. Groups historically excluded from engineering,including people of color, disabled, LGBTQ+, and women, were recentered through the humancentered design process. Students evaluated engineering systems for exclusion and ideated on thesource of these design flaws. In doing so, they
accuracy or fluidity, and finding ways tosupport students’ extrinsic motivations “to spur them to try to continue to work by introducingthe level of competition. There was something there about having a leaderboard or gamifying itthat turned it into something there that helps spur the students to work on their own.”4.6. Benefits provided by SketchTivity to teachingIn the mechanical engineering instructor’s courses, the syllabus did not include sketching inregular instruction and left them little time to teach perspective sketching principles. Therefore,the mechanical engineering instructor reported that SketchTivity was helpful for giving studentsthe opportunity to practice outside the course: “ It's not really changing anything with respect to
areavailable at no cost online. Understanding the IM selection practices of STEM college instructorswould assist librarians in selecting more relevant materials for student use, aid publishers andproducers of OER in the development of new textbooks and other materials, and lead toimprovements in curated online collections of OER and other IM. However, these practices arenot well documented in the literature [4], [5], [6].Our research questions are: ● What criteria do STEM college instructors use when choosing instructional materials for students in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical science (STEM) courses? ● Where do instructors get information/suggestions for instructional materials?Literature ReviewRecent
Need Define the Problem Literature Review Information Search Constrains Alternative Solutions Analysis and Evaluation Decision and Specifications Figure 2: Process Map for the course of ECEN403In the first meeting, the course instructor shares the course syllabus, which includes a schedule ofassignments and deadlines. Table 4 presents the topics covered in this course and the time devotedto each topic. The syllabus also
structure. During theimplementation in ECAM this was done by reviewing material on the Learning ManagementSystem (LMS) and meeting with the faculty member who led the course. LMS content consistedof the syllabus and assignments. Throughout this review process, observers stated that theyprimarily identified learning objectives to see if they were being applied during Section B of thepeer observation process. Evaluator faculty also identified any improvement areas in this area.For lecture-based courses, observers discussed which sections were to be evaluated based on thegoals for the observation and the planned activities for the class period.Section BSection B of the peer observation process is the evaluation period. This step was assessed basedon
problem contexts that students would encounter in appliedscenarios. However, this idealized practice schedule can be at odds against the demands of thecourse syllabus schedule. The breadth of concepts that a ChE course must cover in its syllabus, especially one thatis part of the core curriculum, limits both the amount of time and instructional strategies thatlesson plans or homework can prescribe to a particular concept[2], [3]. This in turn can detractfrom students’ targeted practice on a particular concept to either not sufficiently demonstrate allcontexts or attempt to do too much at once within problems that can then strain the number ofcognitive tasks students can successfully complete[4]. To bolster concept application
demonstratehow ChatGPT could serve as a valuable guide for students [29]. Davis et al. performed a similarstudy with questions suited for introductory programming courses in C [30]. Other researchershave explored students’ use of LLMs and their varied perceptions. Liu et al. integrated AI toolsin an introductory course (Harvard CS50) to aid teaching and learning [31]. A user study byVaithilingam et al. explored how students and programmers utilize and perceive Co-pilot [32].Considering that students use Copilot to learn code, Puryear and Sprint investigated its impact onstudents’ code learning process within introductory computer science and data science courses[11]. In another online introductory programming course, Hellas et al. assessed the
addresses a S/CC issue while incorporating C2C principles.The course description provided in the syllabus is: This course will explore the concept of social entrepreneurship through the lens of sustainability and the context of complex or “wicked” problems. An introduction will provide a foundation in sustainability and social entrepreneurship while exploring methods for analyzing wicked problems. The course project will provide students with an opportunity to work with a team to design a business plan targeting a specific challenge. The course will focus on core concepts and interdisciplinary approaches to create a foundation for students to become agents of change.The course objectives, as listed in the
. Forexample, comparing the course syllabus for Data Structures, the US faculty noted how datacollection for accreditation was explicitly built into the syllabus for more consistent outcomesassessment. A document on the differences between how the course is taught at the twoinstitutions, prepared by one of the Indian faculty members, provided many points for discussion,which resulted in much retrospection and metacognition for the US faculty. From the US side,the effort was mainly on the paperwork front as the faculty from India needed to be appointed aszero-pay adjuncts to get institutional credentials to be added to the LMS. The weekly meetingswere an additional time commitment for the US faculty members.Overall, everybody involved reported this as
the engineering power industry and education sectors and is known for his thought leadership in capacity building and engineering education.Bolaji Ruth Bamidele, Utah State UniversityAbasiafak Ndifreke Udosen, Purdue University, West Lafayette Abasiafak Udosen is a professional Mechanical Engineer in Nigeria and a doctoral research scholar at ROCkETEd laboratory, Purdue University, United States. He earned a B.Eng in Mechanical Engineering and an M.Eng in Energy and Power Engineering both in Nigeria. Over the years he has had the privilege of teaching courses such as Thermodynamics, Measurement and Instrumentation, Engineering Metallurgy, System Design, and Quantitative research methods at the University of Nigeria
available to students a written details should be 2. Having a syllabus, contract description of each course before conveyed to students 3. Clarity/transparency in policies student registration Professors... primary It is essential to the university's mis- 3. New and revised responsibility to their sub- sion to discover, produce, and com
with this proposal and will consult students and alumni via online surveys. The faculty will then consider the responses from all constituents before reaching a decision. IF accepted, action will be taken starting in Fall, 2021.With those modifications, the final consensus that the department … i) should move to the use of CAS calculators for work where students need to use calculus in engineering technology courses while ii) having students learn to perform calculus operations by hand before moving to the calculator; this can be done in the required calculus course.was approved unanimously by the IAB members present.The process continued with seeking input from alumni and from students. This was
solution manuals, 2) online tutoring services, 3) neglect of reading thetextbook, 4) increased absence from lectures, 5) decreased attention to homework, 6) gradeinflation in prerequisite courses, and 7) increased class sizes [1] - [5]. Most of these factors arebeyond the instructor’s control. Efforts have been made to address some of these challenges, whichhave been reported in engineering educational conferences [1] - [5].During the COVID-19 pandemic, all classes were conducted online from March 2020 throughAugust 2021. Teaching the heat transfer course in fall 2021 and spring 2022 revealed that manystudents lacked commitment to attending lectures or diligently solving homework assignments.Additionally, it was observed that many students lacked
mechanical engineering departments in Fall 2023.The mechanical engineering courses were taught at two different locations in a combined mode ofinstruction – simultaneously online synchronous to the rural location (Tyler) and face-to-face in the urban 2location (Houston). In contrast, chemical engineering courses were only offered face-to-face in the ruralarea. These courses were selected for the pilot study as they focus on at least some aspects of energygeneration, use, and efficiency. This approach would allow the student to choose intuitive projects thatsatisfy the course outcomes while focusing on the EOP framework. The courses where we piloted the EOPframework are summarized in Table 1
mastery. Additionally, the list was trimmed to exclusivelyinclude only vehicle balance elements during the development of the course, as it becameapparent that the initial vision for material coverage was too ambitious. As initially conceived, theplanned content was too large for the available high school interval of 50 min of daily classes andwas reduced to an appropriate length, focusing primarily on the balance and ground contactfeatures of off-road vehicles. An ASM instructor, who primarily teaches freshmen and notassociated with the development of the modules, was recruited to review the modules initially andhelp adjust the rigor of the lessons to an appropriate level.Table 1 – Off-road vehicle balance module educational outcomes. 1
and technologicaladvancements rapidly change professional landscapes, engineering students facemounting uncertainties regarding their future employment. This study examines thedrivers of employment aspirations in engineering undergraduates, focusing on theimpact of satisfaction with university courses. Leveraging data from 3,160 engineeringstudents, it investigates how contentment with major coursework influences theireagerness to join the workforce and identifies the conditions that modulate thisrelationship. The study reveals a clear link that satisfaction with major courses notablypropels students’ aspirations to seek employment. A gratifying curriculum directlystrengthens their employment aspirations. The study further unveils that this
could practice their skills and attempt to makeimprovements to their classroom teaching style to find what would be most beneficial to thestudent's learning as well as their own comfort. They also found that they were able to developskills beyond being able to convey material, but also learned how to develop a course from theground up, which included the opportunity to construct a syllabus and lesson plan, run aclassroom taking into account time constraints and student and abilities, and how to account forstudent expectations for the course. As many had not had the chance to teach prior to theSPECTRA experience, the lower-stakes environment of a research course may have providedthem opportunity to develop their identities and skills as
) theresearch articles presented may not reflect all the work and research performed informally and notpublished, (4) the Kitchenham and Bacca method for systematic literature review does not addressthe effects that various types of systematic review questions have on systematic review procedures,(5) industry training programs are not likely to publish peer reviewed studies on their in-houseworkforce training programs, (6) massive open online courses (MOOCs) are also unlikely topublish peer reviewed studies because of the large volume of students, (7) there is not concretedefinition of what a “workforce training program” is and (8) the quality of the identified papersfor this literature review included was not assessed; therefore, any literature that
these changes, traditional textbooks remain prevalent, butthey increasingly struggle to meet modern courses' diverse and dynamic needs. Traditionaltextbooks, typically organized to comprehensively cover a course's syllabus, need moreflexibility to address specific course requirements. This inflexibility often results in a disconnectbetween provided content and the evolving curriculum demands. Additionally, the static natureof traditional textbooks limits their ability to incorporate current information, diminishing theireffectiveness in rapidly advancing academic disciplines.Research has highlighted the limitations of traditional textbooks in comparison to electronicformats. Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. [1] show that students using e-textbooks
Theme Responses Examples Course materials 17 case studies, syllabus Training and best practices, input from professionals, experience 7 field experience Resources 4 financial (for projects), software Projects 4 identifying partners/locationsThe discussion on barriers uncovered several themes, as well as strategies to overcome thebarriers. The companion poll to this discussion is found in Table 11. Foremost among the barrierswere curricular constraints. Many participants felt that their curriculum does not allow much, orany, flexibility where a course on EA could be
didactic staff of the science ofpedagogy constitutes the basis of the essential pedagogical competencies of engineeringteachers, along with specialized competencies. The basic teaching model of the Science ofEngineering Pedagogy follows the principles of an iterative process, making it an effectivetool for the design of a study program, study plan, syllabus, course, or conference. Finally,the integrated quadruple instruction model of Engineering Pedagogy Sciences is the basisof integrated course design and one of the preconditions for effective teaching and learning,as well as the basis of the teaching competencies expected of engineering teachers.Teachers’ pedagogical competencies are becoming increasingly important in evaluating thequality of
(after having reviewed the syllabus during the first course meeting) that45% of their total ENGR 101 grade is related to design project assessments: • First required meeting with first author & MS Teams use 3% • Project Requirement Specification 5% • Second required meeting with first author & MS Teams use 3% • Progress Report 8% • Third required meeting with first author & MS Teams use 3% • Final Presentation 5% • Final Report 10