address topical areas as part of an NSF-funded project. One of these focused on Statics and Dynamics; 24 instructors from research-based, community colleges, and MS granting institutions participated in the Mechanics VCP.The VCP was centered on aligning the classroom around teaching objectives, classroomactivities, and assessment and utilized the How Learning Works framework for discussions.Topics included Bloom’s taxonomy and writing learning objectives, active learning strategies,collaborative learning, conceptual understanding, hands-on activities, and flipping the classroom.An initial 8 week period introduced these topics and helped the instructors formulate their plansfor the upcoming term, and a follow-on period is currently underway to
duringtheir transition from high school into university life: • Mandatory participation in the Engineering and Science Summer Academy (ESSA). ESSA is a six-week, pre-freshmen summer bridge program that provides information about support units and systems across campus. It also exposes participants to successful academic skills to deal with courses that are critical to the success of all college students but, in particular, students in STEM majors: o Mathematics o Chemistry/Biology o Writing • Mandatory schedule building by DPO staff during their first full academic year and approval of schedule during the second academic year. Due to the amount of time spent
Teaching in the Middle School. She has published in numerous teaching and research journals, and written books and book chapters for both mathematics and engineering educators. In addition, Dr. Zawojewski has long been active in writing curriculum related to problem solving, mathematical modeling, and performance assessment. In particular, Dr. Zawojewski is interested in the role of modeling and problem solving in developing mathematical capabilities, and in enhancing mathematics education for all students. Page 24.376.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014
Scholars who become employed in theirfield or continue their education. This paper shares the insights gained about retention andenrollment in engineering technology programs using student demographics, baseline data, and asurvey conducted learn about impact of financial and academic barriers on student enrollmentand retention during the grant-writing process. Demographics and baseline data shows that thecommunities served are disadvantaged, come from low-income families in West Virginia,require financial assistance, and require developmental courses upon enrollment. The surveyconducted shows that 84% of students receive financial aid, 55% stated that a lack of fundingdelayed progress toward a college education, and 88% expressed concern over
to theclassroom; an overview of Massive Open Online Course (MOOCs) and their potential use for“flipping the classroom”. Faculty were also requested to perform the following: create apanoramic outline (divide each course into 30 class sessions) prior to starting the SFIP in June;write granular learning outcomes for each and every class session during the SFIP; and prepare areview sheet for students per exam that is based on the learning outcomes created during theSFIP. Partial results of the SFIP are also provided.Introduction The Summer Faculty Immersion Program (SFIP) strives to ignite and sustain innovativeclassroom practices in engineering and physics courses in a manner that will promote lastingchange in the faculty. In essence
,the course gets started with three one hour lectures, with examples, on the basics ofArduino programming. These three lectures can be broken down as follows:1.) Getting Started with Arduino - Outlines basics of Arduino hardware, software, and robotics programming2.) Arduino Programming Language - Details sketch structure, programming syntax notes, and pin functionality3.) Starting Arduino Examples - Demonstrates integrated analog and digital writing and reading examplesTeams of two are formed, which stay together for both the lab exercises and the project.These can be self-formed by the students or assigned as they would be in industry.Beginning week 2, each week of classes for the next 8 weeks consists of two one
Engineering) from Ok- lahoma State University in 1986. He has published 60+ abstracts and articles in journals and contributed chapters to four books. Dr. Yuan continues to serve as peer reviewer for state, private grant programs and different professional journals and magazines. He is the board member of USEPA Monitoring Group, Gulf of Mexico Program. He is also council member of Mississippi Citizen Crops, Mississippi Office of Homeland Security. Dr. Yuan is the recipient, 2002 Outstanding Mentor of the Year, The Alliance for Graduate Education in Mississippi. 2004 recipient of Recycler of the year, presented by Mississippi Recycling Coalition. Professor Yuan is the JSU/Hinds County/MDEQ Computer Recycling Program di
assignment where students write problems and use some in future semestersObscure the source of the exercise and/or solution by: taking problems from other textbooks Page 24.681.5 rewording questions making them harder to find with a text search changing the names of people/organizations in problems never distributing solutions with problem statements and not including the semester/year on problem/answer sheetsUse newer pedagogies which promote learning through an avenue other than homework Problem-Based Learning (PBL) Team-Based Learning (TBL) Process-Oriented Guided-Inquiry Learning (POGIL) Peer-Led Team
researcher’s judgment that a rater possesses bothknowledge of the domain and “familiarity with the kinds of creative products typically producedby the kinds of subjects in the study” 16. In recent years researchers have looked at comparisonsof novice and expert judgments. At least three categories of raters stand to provide valuableassessment data for engineering design education: self-evaluations conducted by students; peer-evaluations conducted by students enrolled in the same or similar courses; and adult ratingsconducted by raters with experience in the domain 17, 18. Across a range of domains, preliminarybut significant correlations have been seen between peer evaluations or otherwise non-expert, butsomewhat experienced, raters and those made by
in 2007 (i.e., theprogram was conceived in 2006, and the first cohort began in 2007). The students represent across-section of two technology and five engineering majors. Participants choose a studentorganization in the College of Engineering (e.g., Society of Women in Engineering) in whichthey would like to lead. A student then has their peers assess their leadership effectivenessthrough the results of the organization’s projects. This information is then recorded in the LDP’sX-matrix.The LDP has used the X-matrix over the past three years and the results illustrate a progressiveimprovement in the overall efficacy of the program each year. The quantitative resultsdemonstrate that students are improving their engineering leadership skills as
which includes writing assignments, classroom debates, and student presentations.Beyond concrete skills, the curriculum also aims for students to improve upon soft skills andhigher order thinking as well as creativity; this aspect of the curriculum meshes well with thestandards for mathematical practice that should occur at every grade level. For example, theopening project of the AMES curriculum that introduces the Cartesian coordinate systeminvolves students guiding a peer to a certain spot in the class using only verbal instructions.Unless the student giving directions is very specific, the student following the instructions mayend up in a completely different position than the directing student intended. The resulting affecton the students
, the current approachto teaching materials science does not appeal to students studying new manufacturing processesand systems for green plastics manufacturing technology (GPMT).6-9The higher education community has strived for reforming the undergraduate STEM educationso that traditional lecture-based instructions and laboratory exercises are transferred to morestudent-centered learning formats. Innovative approaches, such as student-centered, activelearning, peer-led team learning, process-oriented-guided-inquiry-learning (POGIL), project-based learning (PBL), and other educational approaches have received increased attention withinthe educational communities.10-15Process-Oriented-Guided Inquiry-Learning (POGIL) adapts guided inquiry
investigated how amulti-disciplinary team could coordinate tasks using a novel Computer Aided Design (CAD) toolthat enables multiple users to simultaneously access and modify a model [10]. The projectdemonstrated that students from three institutions in three time zones could effectivelycollaborate on the design of an aircraft wing assembly. The 2012 – 2013 project successfullyimplemented a “multi-site, cloud-based capstone design project” within a cross-cultural, peer-to-peer design-build-test environment [11]. Within this environment students were exposed to theindustrial principles of collaborative digital design and manufacturing, targeting complex cyber-mechanical systems. These previous projects were evaluated in order to develop a betterprogram
Paper ID #10767African American Undergraduate Success in Engineering: ”Proving themDr. Kalynda Chivon Smith, Howard University Dr. Smith earned a Ph.D. and an M.S. in Social Psychology from Howard University in Washington, D.C., and her B.A. in Psychology and English from Truman State University in Kirksville, MO. Dr. Smith has managed a three year longitudinal NSF-funded research project across four campuses, which has included collecting, analyzing/interpreting and reporting data through article writing and conference presentation. She has also taught various psychology courses.Dr. Lorraine N. Fleming P.E., Howard
discussion and feedback. Third, students’ peers critique their solutions andprovide comments. Finally, students are given the opportunity to respond to these comments and Page 24.1135.2criticisms, and to modify their solutions appropriately. Note that SBL, as defined above, differs from a variety of other instructional techniques that also use the terminology “studio”. Among the more notable is the Scale-Up4 program introduced at North single or individual or
not likely to result in newengineering courses examining the collected works of Shakespeare, writing poetry, or teachingverse in iambic-parameter. On the other hand, anything is possible. We engineers need not be seen as bland. Nor must we fear to reach out to our peers, Who teach of things we do not understand. Let us reach out and overcome our fears. Then shall we strive to find a common ground, And train a grad whose skills are found well round.References[1] Snow, C. (1956). “The Two Cultures.” New Statesman, 6 October 1956.[2] Snow, C. (1959). “The Rede Lecture.” Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.[3
Introduction to the engineering design process Form teamsWeek 1: Problem Laboratory LEGO MindStorm NXT (project hardware)Definition LEGO NXT/Robot C (project software) Entrepreneurial Teamwork Thinking Deliverables The problem definition Study controllers, sensors, motors, chassis and Lecture other physical structures of robots Write an engineering design specificationWeek 2: Hands-on labs for
sequence aims totrain the students in identifying projects of relevance to the society, in planning and scheduling asolution, and in entrepreneurial activities that may result from the project. The course is worththree credit hours per quarter offering. The course is also intended to cover an industrial projectstarting from the proposal writing and conceptual design to final prototype building and conceptrealization steps. The course is focused on proposal and project progress report writing,prototype fabrication as well as design improvement and optimization. Each quarter, studentteams must submit a progress report and demonstrate a physical working prototype at the end ofacademic year. During fall and spring quarters, they conduct an oral
be open-minded about sharing their life, work andeducational experiences. Visual barriers that hinder some students are eliminated, and studentshave time to reflect in preparation of written responses. Since most course correspondence is bywriting, students must be able to communicate clearly through writing. Students need to be self-motivated and self-disciplined to stay on schedule with the course materials and assignments.When they have problems with the course content or assignments, they need to speak up.Instructors are not able to recognize student problems from visual interactions and cannot help ifthey are not notified of problems. Students need to recognize that they are responsible for theirlearning and need to be proactive. On
, in mathematical modeling activities, the kind of detail infeedback that offers a better learning experience is still not well understood16. The prerequisitefor understanding the nature of effective feedback is to understand how students perceive andrespond to various types of feedback they are provided. The feedback TAs and peers provide andthe way students respond to it when revising their solutions capture important data aboutstudents’ thinking processes. In the literature, these thinking processes have been revealedmostly through an analysis of documented works, such as written feedback and studentsolutions15,17. However, such approaches do not reveal the whole story of students’ interactionswith feedback. The purpose of this study is to
Paper ID #8503A New Vision for Enginering EducationDr. Hamid R. Parsaei PE, Texas A&M University at Qatar Hamid R. Parsaei is Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Texas A&M University (College Station) and also Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at Texas A&M University at Qatar. He is a registered professional engineer (PE) in Texas and a Fellow of the Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE). He has published more than 200 articles in peer-refereed archival journals and conference proceedings. He also served as editor for three international academic
by computerizedscoring of student work 3 and computer-supported peer review 4, and considerable success hasbeen found by enhancing lecture time using an interactive classroom format and frequent in-classassessment.5,6 When combined with small group work in approaches like peer instruction,regular-in class feedback has been shown to yield significant learning gains as measured byconcept inventories.5Audience response systems have been widely used to provide feedback to the instructor aboutand their impact on engagement and learning has been presented widely. These include handhelddedicated transmitters, often known as clickers 7,8, and web-based response systems that allowstudents to use their laptops, tablets, smartphones, and SMS to
global workforce, which includes theability to travel to other countries, respect other cultures and understand engineering through theeyes of other cultures. Additionally, the WCOE believes this requirement will improverecruitment of top freshman and transfer students from peer institutions and other high qualityprograms.Historically, the WCOE has had approximately 100 students per year participate in faculty-led oralso referred to as faculty-directed programs. Less than 20 students per year have participated inreciprocal or affiliate programs.The WCOE demographics are as follows. The WCOE has eight different departments providing10 different undergraduate degree programs including chemical engineering, civil engineering,computer engineering
summer bridgeprograms; however, a few studies do show improved retention for summer bridge participants. Page 24.1140.3A study of 617 students who participated in the Georgia Tech summer bridge between 1990 and2000 found that underrepresented minority students who participated in the program were 19%more likely to graduate than their underrepresented minority peers who did not participate in theprogram 5. African American, Hispanic, and Native American student who participated inPurdue’s Academic Boot Camp showed higher retention rates and first semester grade pointaverages14.Institution Overview and Program ObjectiveThe College of Engineering
controlled.” 9 After discussing several casestudies, students were then invited to identify opportunities within the mobile app arena: whatneeds do they think that they, their peers, or their families have, that could be addressed withapps; how could existing apps be improved to better meet consumers’ needs? In the first twocourse offerings, students discussed their ideas and formed their own teams within the groupmembership policy presented earlier in this section. In the third and fourth course offerings, weformalized the team creation process by encouraging students to post their reflections on an“Idea Bounce” blog; the students then “pitched” their app ideas in class, and listed their threebest ideas in order of preference. The instructors then
participants expressed positive working relationships with peers in theircollaborative work projects. This was the first time I had a positive group experience in my engineering studies. I told my team, “If you can explain it to me simply, or in an analogy then I will understand. And then we can explain it to others.” So that was sort of our guide in writing our reports. And this was a really good team to work with. Google Group 17, focus group interview, March 7, 2013 Homogeneous Shared Work vs. Heterogeneous Autonomous Work The theme of homogeneous shared work versus heterogeneous autonomous work ispertinent to the first half of our first and second research questions, “Which instructionalscaffolds
conservation methods.At Stanford University, around 100-170 students enroll per year in two courses on energy and itssustainability taught consecutive quarters. In the first course, an engineering problem-solvingapproach has been implemented to analyze the existing energy landscape and guide designs forfuture energy supply. Students complete a group project, write a report, present their finalprojects, and answer questions from their peers in the first course. In the second course, studentsexamine alternative energy processes, such as, renewables and nuclear energy, with the potentialfor low carbon intensity and environmental impact.At CSULB, 100 to 300 students enroll in the energy and environment course in every semester.Roughly 20% of students are
, Allahabad, India in 2009. Her research interests are global engineering education, community learning and cross cultural competences in engineering education.Trina L. Fletcher, Purdue University, West Lafayette Trina Fletcher is an Engineering Education doctoral student at Purdue University. Her research focus includes the recruitment and retention of underrepresented groups in STEM education with a special focus on women. Prior to Purdue, she spent time in industry along with completing research and writing on STEM education related topics. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Industrial Technology and a masters degree in Engineering Management. Follow her on Twitter at STEMGenius.Molly H Goldstein, Purdue University, West
T2I2 Learning Objects. T2I2 Project Learning Objects are granular, scalable, andadaptable professional development learning modules that teachers interface with and implementin their existing learning environments. The Year 1 pilot began in September of 2012 andconcluded in May of 2013. Throughout the pilot year, a number of teachers were not able toparticipate in the project. As a result, only six teachers submitted data.T2I2 online professional development materialsThe T2I2 materials were created to meet the need for high quality professional development fortechnology, engineering, and design educators. During a one-week writing workshop, a 20-member writing team of NBPTS certified teachers, in-service technology, engineering anddesign
studentreflections. Next, using videotape and peer prompting, the authors developed and collected averbal protocol from individual Dynamics students as they worked through the activity using a“talk aloud” approach. Based on analysis of the videotaped transcripts a better understanding ofthe sources of misconceptions was identified and further refinements to the IBLA are beingmade. The paper contains the IBLA along with suggestions for implementation andimprovements.Introduction and BackgroundIt is well documented that students enter the classroom with deeply rooted misconceptions.1-3This is especially true in STEM disciplines, where the literature contains thousands of studies ofstudents’ lack of conceptual understanding.4 The importance of conceptual