. F. (2000). Developing Critical Writing Skills in Engineering and Technology Students. Journal of Engineering Education, 89, 409-412 and 504-505. 15. Anewalt, K. (2005). Using Peer Review as a Vehicle for Communication Skill Development and Active Learning. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21, 155. 16. Hackman, J.R. (1983). A Normative Model of Work Team Effectiveness. Office of Naval Research. Interim Report. A893631. 17. Hackman, J. R.. (1980). Work Redesign and Motivation. Professional Psychology, 11, 445-455. 18. Wageman, R., Hackman, J.R., Lehman, E. (2005). Team Diagnostic Survey: Development of an Instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 41, 373. 19. Shuman, L
National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE). He is currently the President of the Southern Association of Colleges and Employers (SoACE) having presented preconference workshops and sessions during the SoACE conference each year since 2006. In his spare time Eric has authored two books; ”Ryan’s Stories: God’s Perfect Child” (self-published),”A Common Sense approach to Leadership,” is currently writing bedtime stories, and is preparing to start a murder mystery novel. Page 22.882.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Innovative Senior Project Program Partnering
engineering).The literature acknowledges shortcomings in bridge program evaluations, especially with regardto long-term outcomes. 6,7 There are studies documenting the impacts of individual programs;however the results are difficult to extrapolate to others on a broad scale.8 Page 22.1047.3Washington et al. found that at-risk students who participated in bridge programs at eight Texascommunity colleges and universities enrolled in fewer credit hours of developmental coursesthan non-participants.9 Results regarding retention and performance for those students are notyet available (at the time of this writing). A University of New Mexico study showed
running out of time to solve the problems. A homework-type problem set or specific project-based activity is appropriate. Students working in groups are able to receive guidance from other students so that they are kept on focus for the problem at hand. Students benefit also from the chance to teach others during the session. All students have access to informal discussion time with the instructor, who can move from group to group answering questions and making sure that individual students are actually learning for themselves. Indeed, the peer pressure from other students is expected to help enforce an environment of mutual collaboration based on being properly prepared. Aside from the academic benefits of collaborative learning
overview resources available to librarians and researchers to quickly grasp themajor issues of this new discipline.A webliography of digital data curation resources, written by Westra et al, 3 is primarily consistsof organizational reports, and as such, gives an excellent broad overview of current issues in theentire field of digital data curation. It was written to provide easy reference to the seminal reportsin the past decade that have shaped the current practices of digital curation. It also includesreferences to listservs, standards, software and open-source journals.The Digital Curation Centre is in the process of creating a Curation Reference Manual.4 At thistime, twelve chapters are written, peer reviewed and published. Another ten are
Ease of Implementation of Innovative Instructional MaterialsHenderson and Dancy made some suggestions to address issues cited above to inform curriculummaterials developers of possible ways to improve implementation of innovative STEM teachingand learning strategies and materials10. They include the following. Provide easily modifiablematerials to help engage faculty in modifying or redesigning their instruction so innovativematerials are easy to use. Another suggestion is in fidelity of implementation of an innovation.For example, effective learning should not just elicit simple answers to contextualized questions,but also engage students in social construction of knowledge by peer discussion of underlyingconceptual justification of responses
technical but criticalfor the pursuit of a successful engineering career. These needed skills include: team-orientedmentality, problem solving, project planning and control, project management and writing skills,etc. The purpose of the Senior Design Project is to pull them all together and apply them towardsthe design and implementation of a project and to afford the students an opportunity to experienceteam-based design under conditions that closely resemble those that will be encountered in realworld. Students working in teams will develop and sharpen skills in team organization, timemanagement, self-discipline, and technical writing, in order to be successful in this course. Animportant goal of this course is to expose students to “hands-on
engineer in the group. d) At the next design meeting, focus the agenda on the impact of J. T.‟s behavior on the success of the project and threaten to speak with the project manager if he does not “shape up.” e) Have another senior-level engineer in the group have a private conversation with J. T. about his work.The final unit looks at the nuances of teaming within a virtual environment in which fellow teammembers may be located in a distant country and may come from diverse backgrounds. Toolswhich can be used to support and enhance virtual collaboration are explored. Discussion boardsand collaborative writing and editing within a course management program or via a documentediting program like Google Docs are used to
agricultural tools for developingcommunities.MethodsA pre-project survey was piloted in February 2010 to determine a baseline for ComponentDesign students’ attitudes toward engineering as a practice and profession, attitudes towardservice-learning and community, sense of belonging in engineering and “seeing” themselves as Page 22.1192.6engineers, confidence in technical skills specific to Component Design and non-technical skillsincluding teamwork, communication, and technical writing. All of the students in the coursewere required to complete the survey for a portion of their homework grade. The 21-questionsurvey was administered halfway through the
, and his impression about who is the primary determinant of the outcome [15].The value of the task is influenced by general or individual interest, its inherent challenge, thevalue attached to it by peers, its relationship to long range goals of the learner and the immediatepay off. The self confidence of the learner is influenced by his record of success at same orsimilar task, possession of all or most of the skills required for task completion, persuasion bypeer or someone else that success is possible, seeing peers succeed at the same task and theperceived difficulty of the task. The learner’s perception of the primary determinant of theoutcome is influenced by the perceived situation of control (internal or external), flexibility ofthe
the Iowa State University Information Assurance Center. Dr. Jacobson teaches network security and information warfare and has written a textbook on network security. Dr. Jacobson has received two R&D 100 awards for his security technology and has two patents in the area of computer security. Dr. Jacobson has given over 50 presentations in the area of computer security and has testified in front of the U.S. Senate committee of the Judiciary on security issues associated with peer-to-peer networking. Page 22.127.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 AAS + 2
22.879.2The impetus for this study is to compare this course against its peers and attempt to identify ifthere is a quantitative change in the academic performance of alumni of the course. Anothermotivation has been to quantify anecdotal evidence of changes in the spectrum of the studentpopulation taking the course and the means for this change: the number of students taking thecourse that express an interest in Aerospace Engineering has not been keeping pace with thegrowth in the course. In particular, in diagnosing team dynamics, we found that students withsome type of passion for the activity were mostly like to find the time to be available andparticipate. We have used course surveys and interviews7, but in an attempt to obtain quantitativeproof
majorrequirements. Finally, we felt it important to our retention goals to devote some time to preparingregional students for academic life on main campus through introduction to the use of the libraryand online library resources, writing center, and popular university clubs that appeal to engineers(e.g. Engineers without Borders).Thus, we decided to improvise on the current course, retaining the majority of content andtextbook and striving to bring in multi-disciplinary activities (paper based or hands-on) into thedistance setting. While we decided to forgo the cooperative learning piece; we agreed instead toplay to our perceived strong suit: a multi-disciplinary team of instructors willing tocollaboratively teach the course in order to get the Pre
-engineering extracurricular activities and internship experiences, her m/c peer viewed suchactivities as encroaching on her limited time. We argue that a student‟s level of non-academicinvolvement is related to the importance she ascribes to professional and interpersonal skills inengineering. Implications for engineering educators and suggestions for further research arediscussed.IntroductionFindings from the recent Academic Pathways Study (APS) sponsored by the Center forAdvancement of Engineering Education (CAEE) have shown that intrinsic psychologicalmotivation to study engineering and confidence in professional and interpersonal skills are keypredictors of engineering seniors‟ future plans1. Sheppard et al. (2010) have also shown that,when taken
ethics study(including preparation of a code of ethics by students), and preparation of a complete project reportthat contains all design drawings and calculations. This course also involve leadership and oral andwriting components as part of their learning objectives.The student performance in courses involving laboratory also includes evaluation of laboratory reportsrequired from students. Grading of laboratory reports is rigorous and involves evaluation of technicalcontents, clarity and coherence of presented materials, and writing skills.Most of the architectural engineering senior level courses also involve projects. In addition to homeworkproblems, exams, etc. the student evaluation in these courses is also achieved through review of
valuable skills such as theability to “explain, present, discuss, and defend [one’s] work to peers, advisors, and otherfaculty” [1], understanding how scientists and engineers work on real problems, analyzing andinterpreting data, and learning lab techniques [2].As undergraduate programs and institutions grow, it becomes difficult to successfully matchstudents to laboratories. Apart from identifying labs that are willing to accept undergraduates,successful matching requires an as yet unknown combination of interests, skills, implicit orexplicit mindsets, and demographic factors. In a single department these factors may be knownto a limited extent of both the labs and the undergraduate applicants. With enough priorexperience one might intuit a good
of the five areas.As data were collected during one term on a class of only 10 students, the extensive quantitativeanalysis was not conducted. The small class size did, however, allow for the use of thereflective exercises which would have been burdensome to review for a larger class.Reflective ExercisesPre-course ReflectionsThe very first day of class, students were asked to reflect and write an essay on leadership andteamwork. This essay was designed to have students assess their current understanding of Page 22.1231.4various team roles along with their strengths and weaknesses in each of the roles. Students wereasked to address each of
plasticity theory, structural design and analysis, engineering analysis and finite element methods and has interests in remote laboratories, project-based learning and student learning assessment. His research is in the areas of remote sensing and control with applications to remote experimentation as well as modeling of microstructure changes in metal forming processes. He publishes regularly in peer-reviewed conference proceedings and scientific journals. At the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition in Chicago, USA, he received the Best Paper Award for his article ’A Virtual Laboratory on Fluid Mechanics’.Constantin Chassapis, Stevens Institute of Technology
analysis, engineering analysis and finite element methods and has interests in remote laboratories, project-based learning and student learning assessment. His research is in the areas of remote sensing and control with applications to remote experimentation as well as modeling of microstructure changes in metal forming processes. He publishes regularly in peer-reviewed conference proceedings and scientific journals. At the 2006 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition in Chicago, USA, he received the Best Paper Award for his article ’A Virtual Laboratory on Fluid Mechanics’.Constantin Chassapis, Stevens Institute of Technology
not effective to keep students’ interest in their majors. This is particularlytrue for the engineering majors.There are efforts to cultivate more student-centered learning pedagogies in higher education(Bransford, Brown, and Cocking, 2000; McKenna, Yalvac, and Light, 2009). Transformingengineering education context from a teacher-centered orientation to a learner-centeredorientation is a common interest in engineering education research. Group work, formativeassessment, contextualized instruction, use of peer review and self-reflective tools, and out-ofclass collaborations are some learning-centered instructional strategies (Bransford, Brown, andCocking, 2000; Yalvac, Smith, Hirsch, and Troy, 2007; Yalvac, Smith, Hirsch, & Birol, 2006
to understand, their knowledge can sometimes be incomplete or inaccurate. Forexample, the FCI revealed that students struggle to learn the force concept much more than theirinstructors initially believed14. Instructors also may not fully know which misconceptions areprevalent among their students or even how students misunderstand core concepts. Studentsmust be interviewed to determine which topics are truly difficult and why students fail tounderstand these core concepts correctly. If possible, these interviews should catalogue specific,identifiable misconceptions about standard problems in the discipline.Step 3. Write concept inventory items and draft the concept inventory: Using data from Step 2,CI developers should construct multiple
steady; there is increasing interest among stu- dents in interdisciplinary classes as they realize that this is the future of the professions. It is worthwhile to mention, that a number of the guest design professionals regularly serve as judges for the class reviews and find the experience inspirational and look forward to serving on the panel each year. Here is a comment from one of the design professionals serving as a judge. “The Cal Poly Pomona AE design studio project review process is rewarding to both the students and the reviewers…. The peer review process using professional architects and engineers is unique to this class, and gives the students valuable insight into professional expectations when defending
inintroductory courses5, alternative instructional strategies such as collaborative and interactivelearning6, summer bridge programs7,8, and academic support services such as tutoring, AcademicExcellence Workshops (AEWs), and peer mentoring9.In 2008, Cañada College, a Hispanic-Serving community college in Redwood City, CA, wasawarded a Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) grant by the USDepartment of Education. The project, entitled Student On-ramp Leading to Engineering andSciences (SOLES), aims to maximize the likelihood of success among underrepresented andeducationally disadvantaged students interested in pursuing careers in STEM fields byincorporating strategies that address challenges and barriers to recruitment, retention
Mechanical Engineering students, andstudent performance was measured via an identical multiple-choice final examination.Today’s generation of students are inundated with technological devices that provide them withneeded information for daily living as well as socially connecting with their peers. Given thevast integration of technology on one’s daily life, it is no stretch to imagine technology at thecenter of student learning. Faculty are constantly identifying and developing ways to be moreinclusive of technological innovations to help students learn new and difficult materials as wellas demonstrate learning2,3.Because of the use of course management systems such as Blackboard (http://blackboard.com) inmost universities and the availability of
’ notebook supported the students’learning by making their problem solving processes explicit and visible. In addition,Jensen and Harris14 demonstrated that students in a college communication class believedthat notebooks—that included information such as daily journal entries, preliminaryspeech ideas, peer feedback, outlines of speeches, etc.—supported their learning byhelping them identify key concepts in class and relate the course material to daily life.Methods In order to explore the breadth of ways in which students and teachers use and interpretengineering notebooks, we examined the use of engineering notebooks in 3 high-schoolengineering classes. Students in each class were expected to maintain an engineeringnotebook. Each class was taught
the problem is here? What are some questions you might have?‟ And then I would say, „Okay, what do you think about coming up with a plan?‟ I guess I tried to make more subtle…not very obvious…I guess you could say that I guided them…I wanted them to direct their own learning (Ralph, 5th grade teacher, Interview #2, Spring 09) I thought it was important that my first graders see how the process works by actually engaging in each step. I created engineering notebooks and on each page students would write down the step they were working on and then draw a picture of what they were doing. When they got stuck on a step or if their dough was not working, I would say, „why don‟t you draw a picture of
of product designprocesses and provide them with much needed hands-on experience.A hands-on cognitive apprenticeship-type training approach will be used to effectively deliverthe training material. In conventional schooling, the “practice” of problem solving, readingcomprehension and writing is not at all obvious and the thinking processes are often invisible toboth students and teachers. It is very difficult to understand the logic of programming; howeverpeople in general understand better when they see a program that makes a motor turn and asensor to react. This cognitive apprenticeship training makes the process of thinking visible21-22.Six courses in the three programs will be modified: MECH 2335 – Advanced Dynamics andKinematics, MECH
: We expanded on the instructors’ self-evaluation such that more direct assessment of students’ learning outcomes is obtained. A set of standards for instructor’s self- evaluation will be prepared by the faculty and the Board of Advisors and will be implemented with the annual assessment cycle. The main point of these standards is that the evaluation of students’ performance will based on samples of work in three categories of students: those in the upper 75 percentile, those in the 50 – 75 percentile and those below the 50 percentile populations. Thus the assessment results compiled are based on course performances and grades, exams, projects, presentations of students, and writings as required
of work 0.499. My motivation for teaching science is to promote an enjoyment of learning 0.5210. I believe DET should be integrated into the K-12 curriculum 0.5311. I am interested in learning more about DET though workshops 0.6812. I am interested in learning more about DET through college courses 0.3413. In a science curriculum, it is important to include the use of engineering in developing 0.48 new technologies14. I am interested to learning more about DET through peer training 0.5415. My motivation for teaching science is to help students develop an
twice per week basis. Thecourse modules developed for the SSED course are Introduction, Teamwork, Project Life Cycle,Scope and Concept of Operations, System Architecture, System Hierarchy and Work BreakdownStructure, Analytical Hierarchy Process, Requirements–Basics, Requirements–Writing,Requirements-Configuration and CM, Functional Analysis, System Synthesis, Design,Interfaces, Margins, Technical Performance Measures, Cost, Risk, Technology, Trade Studies,Reliability, Verification, Technical Reviews, Schedule, Management, and Ethics. All modulesare available to the students on the course website and remain available to them in the capstonedesign course.Space Systems Laboratory (SSL) The SSL is a one semester-credit-hour laboratory course