Project 15 7 15 O 8 0 0 8 4 Total points 100 50 79 70* + 40 70 90 90 90The grading for modified mastery learning includes both Required as well as Optionalassessments. To pass the class, a student must complete ALL of the Required assessments beforethe deadlines listed on the syllabus. By providing the deadlines at the beginning of the course,the instructor allows the students maximum flexibility in self-paced learning to complete theRequired work. Also, please note that a Required assignment is included as part of every learningmodule. This is essential to ensure that every student has mastered the content in the module,regardless of
subset of motivated students. For practical purposes, it wasscheduled once a week at a time that generally does not interfere with students’ schedules, 8-8:50am. In 2024, 26 students enrolled in the gateway course.Learning objectivesThe course syllabus described several objectives. At the conclusion of the course, students wereexpected to be able to: • Articulate the values of international experiences to their peers, faculty, and potential employers, in both group and individual settings. • Make a compelling (clearly argued, articulated, inspiring, and well prepared) presentation about how their international experiences are relevant and beneficial to becoming a successful engineer. • Anticipate the cultural
. Ostrowski, J. Zhang, M. Das, C. Breazeal, D. Catherine, and A. Verma, “Design justice strategies for design education: Evidence and recommendations from syllabus analysis,” in 35th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology (DTM), Boston, MA, 2023, pp. 1–13. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2023- 115270[18] ABET, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2024 - 2025,” ABET. Accessed: Dec. 12, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation- criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2024-2025/
(oftenworksheets distributed and students encouraged to work with a partner or table group).The course was largely structured around the topics in the textbook by Callister and Rethwisch,Materials Science and Engineering: An Introduction [33], with one to two chapters groundingthe topics covered for the week. Students purchased the WileyPLUS 10th edition of the book,giving them access to the additional online materials (practice problems and solutions, muddiestpoint videos, etc.). Each week students were given a list of textbook problems that they wereencouraged to complete on their own; solution sets written up by the instructor and/or TeachingAssistant (TA) were provided for those problems via the Canvas course management system.Most of the weeks in the
Paper ID #47465BOARD # 70: Instructor Practices for Supporting Neurodivergent Studentsin Undergraduate Computer Science Courses: Neurodivergent Faculty andStudent PerspectivesMs. Valerie Elise Sullivan, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Valerie Sullivan is a neurodivergent graduate student research assistant in the Department of Engineering Education at the University at Buffalo working with Dr. Bonnette. She was awarded the Arthur A. Schomburg Fellowship to support her education. She graduated in the Spring of 2024 with a Bachelor’s degree in Environmental Sustainability at the University at Buffalo
proficient at basic to advanced data science skills, has not made acquiringthese competencies in undergraduate programs obsolete but rather more relevant, as criticalthinking abilities developed through data science literacy education are essential for analyzingLLM outputs [2]. Moreover, when properly integrated into pedagogical practices, these LLMscan facilitate the teaching of data science literacy skills through enhanced personalized learningapproaches [3]. Data science literacy education typically follows two main approaches: standalonecourses (including general and core disciplinary courses, immersive degrees, minors, certificates,and MOOCs (massive open online course)) or integration within existing disciplinary courses.While
entrepreneurial mindset. Thecourses discussed are the Advanced Manufacturing and the Additive Manufacturing andCharacterization. These courses are offered at both the undergraduate and graduate levels atRowan University (RU). Typical enrollments are between 30-40 students per course. The coursesare offered as in-person electives in the Fall semester with 2 lecture sessions per week. Thecatalogue descriptions and the syllabus of these courses are as followsCatalogue description of Advanced ManufacturingThis course will provide students with knowledge of modern manufacturing processes, how designis optimized for manufacture, and information on future directions of manufacturing, such asadditive (3D printing) manufacturing techniques and the use of digital
moreresponsibility in the course, could also be used. At our university, only the lead instructor was atenured faculty member and the co-authors were subject matter experts in the Vanderbilt Instituteof Nanoscale Science and Engineering (VINSE), the Wond’ry, the Center for TechnologyTransfer (CTTC), the business library, and the engineering management program withenthusiasm for the course goals and working with undergraduates.With many co-instructors, we found it helpful to start planning a detailed syllabus including acourse schedule at least one semester before the first time the course was offered. We firstdetermined together the most important content to convey in the 14-week course, balancing thenanoscience, innovation, and entrepreneurship content
recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] American Society for Engineering Education. Profiles of Engineering and EngineeringTechnology, 2019.[2] American Society for Engineering Education. Profiles of Engineering and EngineeringTechnology, 2023.[3] USC Center for Urban Education (CUE) Syllabus Review Guide https://cue-equitytools.usc.edu/[4] Emily A. Johnson. Designing the syllabus for an online course: Focus on learners and equity.In Laura Parson and C. Casey Ozaki, editors, Teaching and Learning for Social Justice andEquity in Higher Education: Virtual Settings, pages 45–83. Springer International Publishing,Cham, 2022.[5] Harnish, R. J
attendanceand citing fictitious resources. This is emphasized here as ChatGPT, like other AI bots [2], hasbeen known to “hallucinate” and generate references that do not actually exist.ISU’s Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching also offers some draft syllabus language[25] as a faculty resource. In addition to providing other required language for course syllabi andacademic integrity, it includes a companion site containing specific language with respect to theuse of GAI [26]. Different scenarios are outlined, including when content generated by AI is notallowed; when content generated by AI is allowed but with attribution; when content is allowedbut under certain instances; and when content is allowed and encouraged broadly. This languagealso
teaching that seeks out divergent and creative thinking5. Examples of stepswithin this process may be (a) revision of syllabus to reflect a more inclusiveenvironment, (b) revision of course materials and assignments to reflect a morediverse perspective (for example, choosing readings which reflect a diverseperspective), and (c) using teaching methods which promote openness andinclusivity (including use of non-agonistic rhetoric). These particular methodshave been successfully developed and employed in the authors’ iSTEAMworkshop program which has been applied to a wide variety of STEM courses.Reported results show an increase in student comfort and motivation, reflected inenhanced learning gains6. These rhetoric-based interventions can also help
Enhancement of Engineering Education in October 2021 and shared with the task force.Table 1 depicts the syllabus statements reviewed in the coding analysis and the percentage ofinstructors who included those topics in their course syllabus. This review found that facultyexpectations in FYS sections varied greatly by instructor. It was determined that the extant FYSgoals and objectives outlined by the College were not being consistently communicated tostudents via FYS instructor syllabi. The Engineering Passport to Success, a COE-sponsoredcollection of assignments which presently represent the only centralized content in FYS coursesacross all sections, were referenced in only half of the reviewed syllabi. The most commoncomponents across most FYS
instance, is the oldest and largest sportrocketry organization in the world, with over 100,000 members. Online platforms also offer courseson rocket science, making it more accessible to a wider audience.The lead author has often been queried by students regarding the possibility of offering such a courseat the University of Alaska Fairbanks over the past several years. Now that UAF has been successful inspawning its new Aerospace Engineering degree program, student demand for rocketry experienceshas sharply increased. It is expected that this course will be very popular and that it will attractnumerous students to UAF (and to all schools within the UA network) in the long term. In addition,the new course has quickly drawn support by university
second semester. Students meet for in-person assistance duringthe scheduled class time in the Math Assistance and Learning Lab (MALL) which is staffed bygraduate teaching and undergraduate learning assistants. Using the online adaptive ALEKSplatform, students begin their journey in the math subject (course) determined by the mathplacement test or college level credit earned while in high school. During the first few days ofclass, students complete a concept test to determine their knowledge and if they can move uptheir starting point in the class. Guided by instructors, undergraduate learning assistants and peercoaches, students then begin working through the different concept modules. Students receiveadditional in-person assistance during their
non-CEE majors. They are typically taken inthe second, third, and fourth year of the program and have the enrollment range of 60-180students per section. One goal of the redesign was to build flexibility into courses, allowingstudents to choose how they learn and demonstrate knowledge, thereby potentially reducing theneed for formal accommodations. To achieve this, faculty modified class policies andassessments and offered content in multiple formats (online videos, lecture recordings, etc.). Thisapproach not only aimed to minimize challenges that neurodiverse students face in traditionalclassrooms, but also to empower them to leverage their strengths in learning and assessment.This approach was embedded in the faculty experience, as well. I
assignments followed. Some assignments were run once, modified based on feedback, and run again later on. At the end of the course, we asked the students to create the syllabus and assignment calendar for the next iteration.FindingsI n this section, we describe three themes that we identified to address our research questions: self-awareness, professional exploration, and collaborative network. In addition, we discuss the challenges and barriers encountered during the course implementation.Self-Awareness elf-awareness emerged as the first major theme from our pilot course necessary to support bothSholistic education and student agency. In the context of the course, self-awareness is defined as understanding oneself and
support of the overarching academic program goal and is often interdisciplinary innature.Course Development Table 4 shows an ET credit crosswalk between the USMA AE and ME programs. It alsovisually depicts which courses need to be created, which require modification, and which areexisting and satisfy the requirements. Figure 5 depicts the planning, approval, and executiontimeline for the provisionally approved courses for the Aerospace Engineering Major (AEN0).USMA AE and ME faculty will develop courses while simultaneously teaching the previouslyapproved courses, on the fly. These courses, in their entirety, to syllabus, textbook, courseobjectives, lesson objectives, etc., must undergo review and final approval by the CurriculumCommittee
Presidential Award 2023 ASEE 2023: Multidisciplinary Engineering Division’s ’Best Diversity Paper’ Award DSIR 2021: ’Outstanding Paper’ AwardProf. Dita Puspita Sari, Shibaura Institute of Technology I am a condensed matter physics experimentalist with expertise in superconductivity and magnetic materials, particularly organic-based compounds, studied by muon spectroscopy. I am currently an Associate Professor in the Innovative Global Program (IGP) and the Global Course of Engineering and Science (GEneS), Shibaura Institute of Technology, where I teach Physics subjects for undergraduate and graduate courses. My colleagues and I have been conducting the Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) Program for our
lectures for health reasons or other circumstances. The students also had theopportunity to attend lectures online if they were feeling unwell or traveling. Through activelearning strategies, group discussions, and meaningful group projects, we promoted various meansof expression and engagement. The exams were part of the course, but they were not the only wayof assessing learning. As all students might not feel comfortable speaking up during the class, dueto being an introvert, being afraid to be wrong, or coming from a culture where assertiveness isnot the norm, we used online polling and online discussion boards to engage all students. Thegroup projects had oral and written components, which allowed the students to demonstrate theirverbal and
Engineering Design Framework,” 2023 ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. Proc., p. 43626, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.18260/1-2--43626.[19] “Design Kit.” Accessed: Jan. 08, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.designkit.org/resources/1.html[20] L. Lawrence, S. Shehab, M. Tissenbau, T. Rui, and T. Hixon, “Human-Centered Design Taxonomy: Case Study Application With Novice, Multidisciplinary Designers,” Nov. 2020. doi: 10.3102/1690347.[21] University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA and S. Shehab, “Measuring the impact of integrating human-centered design in existing higher education courses,” Learn. 2021 Engag. Chall. Des. Educ., Sep. 2021, doi: 10.21606/drs_lxd2021.04.254.[22] L. Oehlberg and A. M. Agogino, “Undergraduate
individual communication modes (writing, speaking,visuals) to integrated approaches that reflected the complexities of modern engineering work.Engineering courses at LSU rarely focus on discrete modes of communication, even when theyare certified in only one mode. This is akin to presenting a technical paper without includingfigures and tables. Technological literacy also became a priority. From digital portfolios tovirtual collaboration tools, the program adapted to new technologies and prepared students for aworkforce that increasingly relied on digital communication. This adaptability proved crucialduring the COVID-19 pandemic when the CxC program’s experience with online learningpositioned it as a campus leader during the forced shift to remote
aforementioned research in mind, the EME was developed to enhance inclusion andautonomy, and thus motivation, in a third-year required civil engineering course (CE 3311:Geotechnical Engineering), rooted in EML course outcomes. Two specific course outcomes aswritten in the course syllabus, which are assessed as part of the project grade and reflection, areas follows: Create connections between class content, and create value for general audience science communication, via a museum exhibit group project. Function effectively in a team environment by establishing goals, assigning tasks, and meeting objectives.The project and its ties to EML are outlined below, with student motivation analysis using self-determination theory
Cooper, S., Process Oriented Guided Inquiry-based learning-like pedagogy(POGIL-like) in Online Software Testing and DevOps–A Replication Study. In 2023 IEEEInternational Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops(ICSTW) (pp. 438-445), 2023.[5] Shekhar, P. and Borrego, M., After the workshop: A case study of post-workshopimplementation of active learning in an electrical engineering course. IEEE transactions onEducation, 60(1), pp.1-7, 2016.[6] Asok, D., Abirami, A.M., Angeline, N. and Lavanya, R., Active learning environment forachieving higher-order thinking skills in engineering education. In 2016 IEEE 4th InternationalConference on MOOCs, Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE) (pp. 47-53), 2016.[7
. Figure 4: Project and Course TimelinePhase IObservation of Teaching: Observation of teaching was done on 3 separate occasions. Since thecourse was split into the theory portion (10 weeks) and the design portion (5 weeks), teachingpractices were observed for each segment. Additionally, observation of teaching was conductedwith a view to gauge the classroom environment and the interaction of the students with eachother, as well as with the instructor. Inspection of the students as they asked questions regardingthe homework and worked through in class-activities on BioWin was critical to understand theirreceptiveness to the course.Analysis of Course Design: The other component of analysis was the course design. Readingthrough the syllabus and
Paper ID #47379Fostering Effective & Enduring Advocacy in STEM: Exploring the Role ofCommunity Through a Collaborative AutoethnographyDr. Jacqueline Rose Tawney, California Institute of TechnologyDr. Morgan L Hooper, University of Toronto After completing her PhD at the Graduate Aerospace Laboratories of the California Institute of Technology (GALCIT), Morgan Hooper is now an Assistant Professor (Teaching Stream) at the University of Toronto. There, her teaching focuses on building community within hands-on Engineering Design courses and beyond. She encourages students to engage with multi-faceted, trans-disciplinary
is a critical needto create and publicize shared materials addressing this gap. Developing diverse teachingmaterials that influence future generations is best achieved through collaborative efforts. Wehope this paper can help kickstart a collaborative effort within the engineering educationcommunity, bringing together resources that help students understand how diversity in race,gender, social background, cultural perspectives, economic status, and other differences canimpact engineering decisions.In this paper, we present the collaborative method implemented by the Mechanical Engineeringdepartment at Pennsylvania State University to develop teaching material that incorporatesholistic awareness into core courses, encompassing thermodynamics
publication for the journal’s May 2024 deadline.J ATE URE program approachCommunity college faculty applied to participate in the J ATE URE program. Eleven facultywere selected and each nominated between 1 and 3 students to work with. 23 undergraduatestudents were selected, forming 12 writing teams (one faculty was on two teams). Four of theURE faculty also fully participated in Connect as writers or coaches and an additional two wereable to attend the Connect workshop in January. There was great diversity among the faculty:they had different levels of experience with writing to publish; they mentored communitycollege research in several formats, including Course-based Undergraduate ResearchExperiences (CUREs), funded research that provided students
majors. This context creates a logjam, with no clear indication ofwhat the course should and should not include. But the course’s vague title and multiplerequirements afforded me the opportunity to integrate history of technology into my students’already crowded engineering curricula.The course syllabus design reflects my own perspective on the engineering profession, based onmy training and professional experience both as a historian of technology and as an engineer. Iselectively draw from the wide range of available sources, relying heavily upon the work ofscholars from history of technology, engineering studies, and engineering ethics. The course’sstructure follows the seminar model: nineteen students are put in small groups to
to share their stories through authorship of engineering educationliterature.How this paper took root: Contending with institutional ‘EDI.I’JT: The idea for this paper started with the question: “Why do we learn to incorporate Indigenousbuilding design principles without questioning why our buildings are constructed on stolenlands?” This question came up for me two years ago while taking a geography seminar course,engaging with decolonial and critical Indigenous theories for the fourth time. In this course, webegan unpacking the colonial assumptions and practices of academia. At this point, I had startedengaging with ‘EDI.I’ initiatives and research within engineering education. Upon readingUnsettling the University by Sharon Stein [13], the
aroundspecific DEI topics to support the teaching-learning process and students as culturally competentfuture engineers, (2) build mentorship capacity by connecting faculty with experts in various DEIspaces, (3) embed inclusive and equity in teaching using the Universal Design for Learning(UDL) framework, (4) increase access to DEI-related resources and provide course redesignsupports, (5) create organizational change across the College of Engineering to prioritizeuncommon voices and create a learning environment where all students feel respected, and (6)foster a cross-disciplinary community of faculty across the College of Engineering acting aschange agents for DEI in engineering education.Our year-long program is conducted in two phases using a cohort