oral presentations and betterquality discussions of data as presented in final written reports.IntroductionFor more than 20 years, chemistry faculty have been proponents of Problem-Based Learning(PBL) as a means to bridge the gap between what students learn in the classroom and whatstudents’ experience in the laboratory.1 Traditional assessment measures such as formativefeedback on problem sets or draft laboratory reports enable students to improve learning prior tosummative assessments such as unit, midterm or final exams.2 However, students who performwell on exams may not possess the skills required to excel in the workforce environment such asa chemical production laboratory or manufacturing engineering plant.3 Senior undergraduateresearch
practitioners areeducated for their new professions”4(p52). According to Shulman, signature pedagogies have threestructural dimensions – surface (operational acts of teaching and learning), deep (assumptionsabout how best to impart knowledge) and explicit (moral dimension that comprises a set ofbelieves about professional attitudes, values and dispositions). Signature pedagogies inprofessional disciplines also have three temporal patterns: an initial pedagogy that frames andprefigures professional preparation, capstone apprenticeships and a sequenced and balancedportfolio4. Engineering, with its mix of analysis courses, laboratories and design studios, ischaracterized by the latter. Shulman also notes that a signature pedagogy can also be illustratedby
engineering design and students were required towork in teams to solve a variety of design tasks (e.g., designing a net-zero energy house forhabitat for humanity). Instruments previously established by Brewe and colleagues16 for use inintroductory physics laboratories were adapted for use. In brief, students were asked “Who doyou work with on engineering assignments (i.e., homework, projects, etc.)? Please list all.” Ofthe 860 students enrolled in the class, 725 responded to the survey resulting in a response rate of84%. This SNA question was administered as part of larger, pen and paper survey of studentattitudes towards diversity during the final weeks of the semester.Data was manually compiled into an edge list, a paired list describing all the
inengineering.In this work-in-progress paper, we describe a design-based research project that explores howstudents adopt positive learning behaviors and dispositions through a course, because positivelearning behaviors and dispositions have been shown to increase persistence through challengesand setbacks4.We have designed a course titled Engineering the Mind as an eight-week, second-half semestercourse that is offered for one semester-hour of credit. We plan to pilot this course in Spring 2017to prepare for the Fall 2017 offering.BackgroundDesign-Based ResearchDesign-based research (DBR) is a research paradigm that attempts to bridge laboratory studieswith complex, instructional intervention studies5. DBR is described as “theoretically-framed,empirical
Laboratories, Lucent Technology, Inc. as Member of Technical Staff and Ciena Corp. as Principal Engineer, doing research in photonic networks and optoelectronics. His teaching interest fo- cuses on the project-based learning (PBL) model of engineering education with self-directed learner as enhanced educational outcome. His research area focuses on optoelectronics, semiconductor lasers, and metamaterials.Dr. Robert Scott Pierce P.E., Western Carolina University Robert Scott Pierce is an Associate Professor of physics and engineering at Sweet Briar College in Sweet Briar, Va. He received his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Georgia Tech in 1993. Prior to his teaching career, he spent 13 years in industry designing
majors. The course is not tailored toengineering in so much as the content covered is not presented or framed within the context ofengineering. Different than pre-medical or biology majors, the engineering students are notrequired to take the laboratory portion of the course.InstrumentsThe engineering students were given a series of instruments at the end of their biology course.Four different instruments were utilized to assess the relationship between future timeperspective, course belongingness, and interest.Future time perspective was measured using two different instruments that represent the twocomponents of future time perspective: perceptions of instrumentality and career connectedness: Perceptions of Instrumentality (PI): The
; Benson, Kirn, &Faber, 2013; Felder & Brent, 2016; Vogt, 2008) all contain central features of interaction-dominantcomplex systems. These features include complex, dynamic qualities that produce emergent outcomes(Kaplan, et al., 2012; Mitchell, 2009; Richardsen, et al., 2014). Research conducted within learningenvironments (i.e. classrooms, laboratories, etc.) necessarily involves the interaction of settings, tasks,teachers, and students (Schwab, 1971) and the study of motivation and engagement involves competingintraorganismic and extraorganismic factors (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Because cooperation, competition, andinterference are ever present features of these areas of study, changes in any system variables results inchanges to another
and Fire Research Laboratory at NIST as a Post-Doctoral Researcher before joining the faculty of the School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering at Washington State University. His research is in thermodynamics and heat and mass transfer. Over the last five years he has become involved in developing and disseminating research based learning methods. He was a participant in the NSF Virtual Communities of Practice (VCP) program in Spring, 2013, learning research based methods to instruct thermodynamics. More recently he introduced the concept of fabricating very low cost thermal fluid experiments using 3-D printing and vacuum forming at the National Academy of Engineering’s Frontiers of Engineering Education in
Paper ID #19460Work in Progress: Using Conceptual Questions to Assess Class Pre-Work andEnhance Student Engagement in Electromagnetics Learning Studio ModulesProf. Branislav M. Notaros, Colorado State University Branislav M. Notaros is Professor and University Distinguished Teaching Scholar in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Colorado State University, where he also is Director of Electro- magnetics Laboratory. His research publications in computational and applied electromagnetics include more than 180 journal and conference papers. He is the author of textbooks Electromagnetics (2010) and MATLAB
Engineering’s Engineering Education Research Center at the University of Pittsburgh. Prior to joining the University of Pittsburgh, he was a science educator at Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS). Dr. Spiegel also served as Director of Research & Development for a multimedia development company and as founding Director of the Center for Integrating Research & Learning (CIRL) at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, Florida State University. Under Dr. Spiegel’s leadership, the CIRL matured into a thriving Center recognized as one of the leading National Science Foundation Laboratories for activities to pro- mote science, mathematics, and technology (STEM) education. While at Florida State University
ILTs. In the context of engineering education, the body of research has focusedon introducing developed computing systems or technology, such as virtual laboratories [9-10],e-learning [11], and interactive learning tools [12], as interactive educational tools. However, weknow little about how students’ individual personal traits leverage the effect of such tools,especially concerning the tools’ psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral effects. Thus, thisstudy will fill this gap in the literature in engineering education.2. Roles of Interactive Learning Tools in Engineering EducationStudents usually perform much better when they actively engage in their learning process,evaluate what they are learning, and regulate their own learning path
work, she developed and validated a new interdisci- plinary assessment in the context of carbon cycling for high school and college students using Item Re- sponse Theory. She is also interested in developing robotics-embedded curricula and teaching practices in a reform-oriented approach. Currently, a primary focus of her work at New York University is to guide the development of new lessons and instructional practices for a professional development program under a DR K-12 research project funded by NSF.Dr. Vikram Kapila, New York University Vikram Kapila is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at NYU Tandon School of Engineering (NYU Tandon), where he directs a Mechatronics, Controls, and Robotics Laboratory, a
methods used to explore neural processes of decision-making andproblem solving under laboratory conditions are electroencephalography (EEG) and functionalmagnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). However, each have limitations, which has led to anemergent viable third option to study complex processes in more realistic environments, calledfunction near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). We will briefly discuss all three methods.EEG involves a head covering (e.g., cap or net) which places electrodes on the scalp andmeasures electrical changes in the brain. Temporal resolution is very good (detects quickchanges) though spatial resolution is poor because signals often interfere with one another andmake it difficult to pinpoint specific brain regions involved
2016 semester, introductory civil engineering, arequirement for all students seeking to major in civil engineering, consisted of two one-hourlectures per week supplemented by one three-hour laboratory meeting during which studentscompleted standalone labs meant to supplement content introduced during lecture. In thetraditional version of introductory civil engineering, guest lecturers specializing in one of thesub-disciplines of engineering—structural engineering, environmental engineering,transportation engineering, water resources engineering, geotechnical engineering, andconstruction engineering—were invited to offer students a general overview of their areas ofexpertise.The curriculum for the PBL sections of introductory civil engineering
question:How did the implementation of a gamification platform impact students’ academic motivationtowards homework within a freshman design course?MethodsGamification Platform DesignThe 3D Game Lab platform was originally designed in the fall of 2015, and was created withnine different levels that students could move through by acquiring experience points (XP).Each quest provides students with a number of experience points (XP) that combine together toachieve students overall XP within the 3D Game Lab platform. This platform builds off anexisting beta software platform that has been developed by GoGo Laboratories.19 3D Game Labconsists of a software platform that allows individual instructors to build in quests (or activities)for students to complete
in the general area of systems theory with focus on control and communications systems. His research has been funded by national funding agencies, national laboratories, and by various companies. He has also been active in designing and implementing various international graduate programs with Latin American and European countries. He was a co-founder in 1990 of the ISTEC consortium, which currently includes more than 150 universities in the US, Spain, and Latin America. He has published 7 books, and more than 300 peer- reviewed papers. His PhD students hold academic positions in the USA and in Europe, and senior technical positions in various US National Laboratories. Professor Abdallah is a senior member of
developing nation after the onset of a natural disaster. Studentsworked individually in various laboratories and were provided access to a variety of materials,tools, and supplies while engaged in the challenge. Students were also provided with a turbiditysensor, connected to a computer interface, which allowed them to evaluate how well their deviceremoved potential contaminates from a water sample. On average, the participants completed thechallenge within one hour, 21 minutes, and 16 seconds. Prior to assessment, all identifiableinformation was removed and student portfolios were assigned a letter. Traditional Assessment. While designing a solution to the design challenge, eachstudent utilized an engineering notebook to document information
and ACS Publications Division of the American Chemical Society.Faber, C., Vargas, P., & Benson, L. (n.d.). Measuring Engineering Epistemic Beliefs in Undergraduate Engineering Students.Ferguson, L. E., & Braten, I. (2013). Student profiles of knowledge and epistemic beliefs: Changes and relations to multiple-text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 25, 49–61. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.11.003Galloway, K. R., & Bretz, S. L. (2015a). Measuring meaningful learning in the undergraduate chemistry laboratory: a national, cross-sectional study. Journal of Chemical Education. Easton: American Chemical Society Division of Chemical Education.Galloway, K. R., & Bretz, S. L. (2015b). Using
Engineering, NY, USA. His research and teaching interests include robotics, mechatronics, control systems, electro-mechanical design, human factors/ergonomics, engineer- ing psychology, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, computer vision, biomimetics and biomechanics with applications to industrial manipulation and manufacturing, healthcare and rehabilitation, social services, autonomous unmanned services and STEM education.Dr. Vikram Kapila, New York University Vikram Kapila is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at NYU Tandon School of Engineering (NYU Tandon), where he directs a Mechatronics, Controls, and Robotics Laboratory, a Research Experience for Teachers Site in Mechatronics and Entrepreneurship, a DR K
component modeling of elastomeric space seals for manned spaceflight; an asset to NASA and the development of advanced aerospace seals for the next generation of manned spacecraft. The unique problem necessitated a grasp of both fluid dynamics and material science, as well as experimental and computational analysis. As a DAGSI/Air Force Research Laboratory Ohio Student-Faculty Fellow, Dr. Garafolo gained experimental knowledge in structural dynamics of turbomachinery. In particular, his research on engine order excitation yielded insight into generating high cycle fatigue of turbomachinery using acoustic excitation.Dr. Nidaa Makki, University of Akron Dr. Nidaa Makki is an Associate Professor in the LeBron James Family
Delaware where he expanded his knowledge on simulation of multiphase flows while acquiring skills in high performance parallel computing and scientific computation. Before that, Dr. Ayala hold a faculty position at Universidad de Oriente at Mechanical Engineering Department where he taught and developed graduate and undergraduate courses for a number of subjects such as Fluid Mechanics, Heat Transfer, Thermodynamics, Multiphase Flows, Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic Machinery, as well as Mechanical Engineering Laboratory courses. In addition, Dr. Ayala has had the opportunity to work for a number of engineering consulting companies, which have given him an important perspective and exposure to industry. He has been
system. Again, thispractice echoes their problem solving practice in class.Like the examples of PDE found in Engle and Conant5 and Koretsky and Nolan2, this instance ofPDE was triggered by disagreement. Like students in prior studies, this argument created adiscipline-rich discussion where students debated assumptions and considered alternative modelsof reasoning. This study highlights an unstudied type of problem solving; this was not a designproblem with conflicting constraints or a problem the students themselves choose to pursue.Instead, it was a narrowly defined problem with a single answer.Conclusions & ImplicationsKoretsky and Nolan make the claim that “standard, linear textbook and laboratory tasks providea narrower, more sequestered
.9. Bedard Jr., A.J. (1999). “Inhancing Student Creativity and Respect for the Linkages between Analysis and Design in a First Year Engineering Course.” Proceedings of the 1999 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, pp. 2893-2908, Charlotte, NC.10. Pierson, H.M. and Suchora, D.H. (2002). “The Rube Goldberg Three-minute Timer: A Design Based Learning Tool for Engineering Freshman.” Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, pp. 1-9.11. Graff, R.W., Leiffer, P.R., Green, M.G., and Koblich, J.K. (2011). “Thirty Years of Rube Goldberg Projects: A Student-driven Learning Laboratory for Innovation.” Proceedings of the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, AC 2011-792
student success inengineering by removing the first-year bottleneck associated with the traditional freshmancalculus sequence.The first-year engineering math course, Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Applications,included lecture and collaborative laboratory and recitation components. The course addressesonly the math topics used in core engineering courses such as physics, engineering mechanics,electric circuits and computer programming sequences. Using an application-oriented, hands-onproblem-based learning approach, it replaced traditional math prerequisite requirements for theaforementioned core courses in order for students to advance in the curriculum without firstcompleting a traditional first-year calculus sequence. This structure
Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems Special Issue on Design Quality and Design Closure: Present Issues and Future Trend”, 2005. He also served as the Guest Editor of the Microelectronics Journal on Quality Electronic Design, 2005. His research interests include VLSI circuit and system design, CAD methodology for VLSI design, and bioelectronics.Prof. Branislav M. Notaros, Colorado State University Branislav M. Notaros is Professor and University Distinguished Teaching Scholar in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Colorado State University, where he also is Director of Electro- magnetics Laboratory. His research publications in computational and applied electromagnetics include more than 180
Professorsand Lecturers who have the responsibility for the majority of the teaching activities and forthe instructional design and pedagogy of the course. PhD students are typically workingas laboratory assistants and teaching assistants helping students with exercises designed bymore senior staff.Academic status and credibility is an important aspect of academic teaching, this is reflectedin differences in perception in relation to ITTF4. ITTF4: I feel that I should know the answers to any questions that students may put to me during this subjectBeing able to always answer questions (ITTF4) is ranked Professor, Lecturer (high) vsResearcher and PhD student (low) (χ2 (2, N=487) = 13.12, p < 0.05). We interpret thisresult to mean that
. For this study, the case was the CSCE instrument with each facultymember serving as an individual unit of analysis. The courses taught by the faculty participantsranged from small (46 students) to large (over 200 students). The course structures were alsodifferent and included lectures, laboratories, workshops, and recitations (mandatory groupproblem solving sessions). In addition, the range of experience between faculty membersencompassed first time instructors to others with over five years of teaching at the same institution.Description of caseThe CSCE instrument consists of two major sections. Section one is split into two main categories,in-class and out-of-class activities. In category one, students are expected to answer
Engineering Education, 104(1), 74-100. doi: 10.1002/jee.2006612. Lin, C.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2009). The relationships between students' conceptions of learning engineering and their preferences for classroom and laboratory learning environments. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(2), 193-204. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01017.x13. PÉRez, C. D., Elizondo, A. J., GarcÍA-Izquierdo, F. J., & Larrea, J. J. O. (2012). Supervision typology in computer science engineering capstone projects. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 679-697. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01124.x14. Kumsaikaew, P., Jackman, J., & Dark, V. J. (2006). Task relevant information in engineering problem solving. Journal of Engineering Education, 95
-goals(e.g. add a feature) and engage in multiple sub-problems (e.g. debugging, feature testing). Bytaking a discourse perspective, we can view the relationship between subject and problem as anegotiation between multiple sub-problems, each which may take the focus of the participant atdifferent times, e.g. while implementing a new feature, the participant may notice a bug andengage in a debugging process before returning back to feature implementation.Example caseIn this section we describe an ongoing study that is utilizing these methods. While this study isconducted in a laboratory setting which restricted participants’ range of options, it provides aconvenient example of how the theoretical framework of sociomateriality might be combinedwith