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
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
incorporated problem-based learning into her lectures, lab- oratories, and outreach activities to engage students and the community in the STEM education process.Dr. Morris M. Girgis, Central State University Morris Girgis is a professor at Central State University. He teaches undergraduate courses in manufactur- ing engineering. He received his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Hannover University, Germany. His current research in engineering education focuses on developing and implementing new educational tools and approaches to enhance teaching, learning and assessment at the course and curriculum levels. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Application of
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
Paper ID #18454Development of the Engineering Learning Classroom Observation Tool (EL-COT)Ms. Timeri K. Tolnay, Colorado School of Mines Timeri joined Mines in November of 2015 to support the growth and Development of the Trefny Innova- tive Instruction (I) Center, and to bring her extensive background in instructional coaching to the college level. Prior to joining Mines, Timeri worked for a nationally recognized online Learning and Assessment System called ShowEvidence where she supported educational institutions in transferring their teaching, learning, and assessment practices online to create greater coherence
research of learning and teaching based on particular designs for instruction” (pp. 199-200)5. In DBR, we use theory to inform our course design and collect data to evaluate the desiredstudent outcomes. DBR differs from laboratory experimental research in that DBR is situated inreal-world contexts where confounding factors are difficult to control, whereas laboratoryexperiments aim to control for such factors6. DBR also differs from action research in that DBRapplies theory in real-world contexts, whereas action research serves to solve an immediateproblem that often involves the use of non-research personnel7.The outcomes of DBR include theory generation and practical educational interventions.Through our study, we will generate theory by
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
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
to meet at least weekly outside ofthe classroom with their design teams. The main lectures had approximately 350 students; while,each of the 24 laboratory sections had a maximum of 32 students. The laboratory sections meetin a classroom located in the back of an open engineering lab (OEL) that was available tostudents from 9 am – 9 pm seven days per week. The OEL is a large open work space wherestudents are encouraged to work on their semester-long design project as well as to use it as astudy space. The OEL was open to all engineering students but was primarily used by students inthe first-year course. Typically, between 30 and 100 students as well as 3-8 members of theteaching staff (three lectures, 13 graduate teaching assistants, and 11
. 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
Paper ID #19627Resolving Epistemological Tension in Project-Based Introductory Engineer-ingBernard David, University of Texas, Austin Bernard David is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in STEM Education at the University of Texas at Austin, where he holds an appointment as a Graduate Research Assistant and serves as a Teaching Assistant in the UTeach program. In 2011, he received his B.S. in Physics, and in 2012, he received his M.Ed. in Secondary Teaching in Physics, both from Boston College. During his M.Ed. program, Bernard was awarded the Science Educators for Urban Schools Scholarship funded by the NSF Robert Noyce
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
learning domainsand their learning levels for engineering specializations. An analysis of culminating ABETEngineering Accreditation Commission student outcomes is made with reference to Bloom’s 3learning domains and their learning levels. A hypothetical model is presented for this analysis. Thecorrelation of ABET student outcomes, course learning outcomes and performance indicators isclearly outlined. The necessity of the use of performance indicators is highlighted especially inreference to the measurement of course learning outcomes, development of assessments, teachingand learning activities. The importance of scientific constructive alignment of learning outcomes,performance indicators, assessments, teaching and learning strategies is
interested in a topic for a long period of time.4,5 This couldrelate back to activities that can teach students basic engineering principles that they can usethroughout college and in their careers. The final component, caring, can also be broken downinto two components: academic caring and personal caring. Academic caring deals with studentsbelieving that their instructor cares about their academic success.4,5 The benefit of a gamifiedlearning environment is that feedback is given to students throughout their participation to letthem know if they are doing well, or what areas should be improved upon. Personal caring dealswith students believing that their instructor cares about their well-being.4,5 Instructors canexplain to students within the
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
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 A Pilot Program in Open-Ended Problem Solving and Project ManagementAbstractThis research is motivated by the need for students’ early exposure to work readiness skills thatpromote effectiveness in dealing with complex open-ended technical problems as may beencountered in senior capstone projects or professional practice. This paper presents preliminarywork in the building of Rube Goldberg machines as student projects to foster some of theseskills. Design of Rube Goldberg machines may be employed in a number of settings as a vehiclefor teaching basic engineering skills. These designs require students to creatively consider avariety of
Paper ID #19206Complex Systems Research and Evaluation in Engineering EducationDr. Jonathan C. Hilpert, Georgia Southern University Dr. Jonathan C. Hilpert is an Associate Professor of Educational Psychology in the Department of Cur- riculum Reading and Foundations in the College of Education at Georgia Southern University. His re- search interests include student motivation, engagement, and interactive learning; emergent and self- organizing properties of educational systems; and knowledge construction of complex scientific phe- nomena. He teaches courses in learning theories, research methods, and assessment and statistics
Paper ID #17703Evaluating Freshman Engineering Design Projects Using Adaptive Compar-ative JudgmentDr. Greg J. Strimel, Purdue Polytechnic Institute Dr. Greg J. Strimel is an assistant professor of engineering/technology teacher education in the Purdue Polytechnic Institute at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana. His prior teaching experience includes serving as a high school engineering/technology teacher and a teaching assistant professor within the College of Engineering & Mineral Resources at West Virginia University.Dr. Scott R. Bartholomew, Purdue University My interests revolve around adaptive
Paper ID #19918Characterizing the Complexity of Curricular Patterns in Engineering Pro-gramsProf. Gregory L. Heileman, University of New Mexico Gregory (Greg) L. Heileman serves as the Vice Provost for Teaching and Learning at the University of New Mexico (UNM). From 2011 until 2016, he served as the Associate Provost for Curriculum at UNM. During that time he led campus-wide student academic success initiatives, and worked with key stakeholders on campus, to produce all-time record retention and graduation rates. In 1990 he joined the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at the University of New Mexico
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
CMOS In- tegrated Circuit designer and a system engineer at NewLANS, Inc. in Acton, Massachusetts until 2010. He became a Visiting Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of North Florida in Jacksonville, Florida in 2010. Since August 2012, he has been with the School of Engineering at Western Illinois University, Quad Cities as an Assistant Professor of Engineering. His current academic interests include project-based learning with real-world problems, training in critical thinking for students to improve efficient problem solving skills, and enhancement of interactive teach- ing/learning inside and outside classroom. His main research interests are integration of high performance
Paper ID #18371An Introductory Overview of Strategies used to Reduce Attrition in Engi-neering ProgramsDr. Niranjan Hemant Desai, Purdue University Northwest Name: Dr Niranjan Desai Qualifications: Ph.D Civil Engineering University of Louisville, USA MES (Master of Engineering Studies) Civil Engineering University of Sydney, Australia BTECH (Bachelor of Technology) Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India. Work Experience: Assistant Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University North Central (2013 - Present) Engineering Intern, Watrous Associates Architects, (2011 - 2013) Graduate Research and Teaching
of Construction. He received is doctorate from Clemson Uni- versity. His research is at the intersection of cognitive psychology and engineering decision making for sustainability.Darren K. Maczka, Virginia Tech Darren Maczka is a Ph.D. candidate in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. His background is in control systems engineering and information systems design and he received his B.S. in Computer Sys- tems Engineering from The University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He has several years of experience teaching and developing curricula in the department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Virginia Tech.Miss Mo Hu, Virginia TechDr. Robin Panneton, Virginia Tech 1981-1985 Ph.D. Developmental
Paper ID #18621Work in Progress: Validity and Reliability Testing of the Engineering Con-cept Assessment Modified for Eighth GradeDr. Kristin L. K. Koskey, University of Akron Dr. Kristin Koskey is an Associate Professor in the LeBron James Family Foundation College of Educa- tion at The University of Akron. She holds a Ph.D. in Educational Research and Measurement and M.E. in Educational Psychology. Dr. Koskey teaches courses in evaluation, assessment, research design, and statistics. She also works as a psychometric consultant and serves on the Editorial Board for the journal of Psychological Assessment. Her work is
Paper ID #19316A Socio-cognitive Framework and Method for Studying Technology-mediatedProblem SolvingDarren K. Maczka, Virginia Tech Darren Maczka is a Ph.D. candidate in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. His background is in control systems engineering and information systems design and he received his B.S. in Computer Sys- tems Engineering from The University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He has several years of experience teaching and developing curricula in the department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Virginia Tech.Dr. Jacob R. Grohs, Virginia Tech Jacob Grohs is an Assistant Professor in Engineering
motivation in academia.Dr. Bashirah Ibrahim, Ohio State University Bashirah Ibrahim is a postdoctoral researcher in physics education in the Department of Teaching and Learning at the Ohio State University. She has interdisciplinary research experience ranging from physics education, science education to teacher education. Her research interests include problem solving, the role of visualization in the teaching and learning of physics and scientific reasoning. She has co-authored publications in peer reviewed conference proceedings and journals such as the International Journal of Science Education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Physical Review Physics Education Re- search and the African Journal of Research in
foundational courses” (p. 95). Thefollow-up to these analysis can help our students feel greater personalization in their instruction aswe tailor our teaching to their needs.References1. Aron, A., Aron, E., & Coups, E. J. (2009). Statistics for psychology (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.2. Pellegrino, J. W. (2012). Assessment of science learning: Living in interesting times. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 831-841. doi: 10.1002/tea.210323. Jain, A. K., Murty, M. N., & Flynn, P. J. (1999). Data clustering: A review. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(3), 264-323. doi: 10.1145/331499.3315044. Vest, C. M. (2008). Context and challenge for twenty-first century engineering education. Journal of
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