functionalcardiograph that estimates heart rate and respiratory rate. This set of project-based learningactivities addresses industry’s complaint that students lack practical experience (“how devicesare made/work”).The cardiograph project, including learning outcomes for the first semester and ABET studentoutcome for the entire project are discussed. We hypothesized that participating in theseprojects facilitates engagement in the course and Engineering Science major. Each learningoutcome is assessed by the instructor using a custom rubric. In addition to student performance,we also consider how this project may support student engagement and retention viainstructors’ reflections and student surveys. The findings demonstrated that the students wereactively
engineering service-learningprograms [28, 29] are more likely to pursue a graduate degree or enter the engineeringworkforce, maintain a greater belonging to the engineering field, and experience increasedgrowth in professional and professional skills.However, despite these positive impacts, undergraduate engineering students are less likely totake advantage of such experiences than their non-engineering counterparts and spendsignificantly more time on academic coursework [30]. While this may reflect a traditionaltendency to focus on technical competencies in engineering education, current thinking amongengineering professionals, as evidenced in engineering education standards, aligns with moregeneral trends in undergraduate education that emphasize
development for use in Summer 2018. To evaluate the program for the 2018cohort and beyond, we will use both quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitativemethod will involve assessing student performance and perception. Entrance surveys, exitsurveys, and course evaluations will be used to collect data. The qualitative method willcomprise interviews with students, course instructors, and internship mentors. Surveys andinterview questions have been developed by working with Northwestern University’s Center forAdvancing Learning & Teaching. The results of the analysis will be then used to reflect on thecurriculum and form a basis for possible future revisions. As the alumni of the program builds,we will conduct follow-up surveys to assess
group relative to the (*p<0.05); quiz scores remained the same (p=0.7).control group (p=0.002). To assess how each course assignment contributes to the process-knowledge gained inthe lab students were asked to complete an end-of-semester survey (Figure 2). The experimentalgroup of students reported that pre-lab assignments helped prepare them to troubleshoot anyequipment more so than the control group (Q2; p=0.078). Further, students in the experimentalgroup responded with higher average survey scores, reflecting higher confidence in technical andprocess knowledge associated with each assignment and troubleshooting more generally, thanthe control group (p=0.002
to understand changes in student outcomesfrom the initiation of the internship to its end. The pre/post testing was delivered througha digital survey instrument using Qualtrics software and included quantitative Likert-typescaling and qualitative open-ended questions. Other qualitative data was collectedthrough reflections, interviews, and ethnographic observations. Qualitative data was usedto provide context, augmentation, and nuance. Ethnographic observations providedinsights to the learning environment, culture, and other socially constructedprogrammatic concerns. This study was submitted to and approved through theUniversity of Notre Dame’s Institutional Review Board.Analysis and FindingsAfter data cleaning, quantitative information from
, Studying Engineering: A Road Map to a RewardingCareer [7], has been used by over 100,000 students at more than 300 institutions [8]. Throughthis course, students gain a clear picture of what success in engineering study will bring to theirlives [6].The major goals of this course are to: (1) encourage students to develop the study skills neededto succeed in engineering and (2) guide them in becoming integrated into the engineeringcommunity on campus. To accomplish these goals, students participate in interactive classdiscussions and projects related to academic success and community building, as previouslyreported [5]. In addition, students are required to attend and submit a reflection on each of theacademic and community building resources
of the project.AcknowledgmentThis research is supported by the NSF under IUSE #1712210. The contents of this manuscript donot necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the funding agency.Reference[1] Dalryrmple, O., Sears, D., & Evangelou, D. (2011). The motivational and transfer potential of disassemble/analyze/assemble activities. Journal of Engineering Education, 100, 741-759[2] Grantham, K., Okudan, G., Simpson, T. W., & Ashour, O. (2010). A study on situated cognition: product dissection’s effect on redesign activities. In ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, (pp. 617-626). American Society of Mechanical Engineers.[3] Simpson, T
criteria, brainstorm ideas, select a solution, and create a cardboard prototype of a solution to the problem. 3. Introduction to the Engineering Profession. In this lesson, students are introduced to the profession of engineering through the people who are engineers. Stories of Navajo engineers and the impact they make are shared, and students are asked to reflect on their own motivations as they explore potential career pathways. 4. Solving a Problem with the Scientific Method and the Diné Engineering Design Process. In this lesson, students learn about and explain differences between the scientific method and the engineering design process, and then conduct hypothetical investigations using the different
, socio-emotional, and behaviorallearning objectives that together equip students with not only the knowledge about the SDGs, butalso the engagement as global citizens. Students, as global citizens, will ultimately be taskedwith effecting the necessary socio-emotional and behavioral transformations for sustainabledevelopment and change to society. Sustainability competencies need to be acquired throughaction, experience, and reflection; they cannot be taught but are developed by the learnersthemselves [15].Engineering education for sustainable development and global citizenship: Early endeavors inHong KongHong Kong is a major city and financial center the Asia Pacific. In the past century, it hasundergone a rapid transformation from a small
program and undergo an interview process. Factors considered in theselection of participants include academics, work experience, effective communication, andinvolvement in student or civic organizations. Since its inception, the program has always beenled by either the currently acting dean or a former dean of the College.The course is structured with the following elements:Curricular elements: 1. Leadership literature and leadership from history: Students were regularly assigned articles and books on leadership and leaders. Students then were required to write reflections on these and to discuss these within the class. 2. Learning from leadership journeys of alumni before: Successful alumni of the college were invited to
Visualizer) to help them visualize the transition from 2D models to 3Dmodels with the UAV augmented to the scene.Our research examines how using 3D modeling with AR can enhance youth spatial reasoningskills. We collected both product and process data in the form of artifacts generated duringdesign iterations, pre and post activity mental rotation tests, screen-recordings of youth using the3D AR Visualizer, and youth design reflections. Our results indicate that youth were able tobetter understand the strengths and weaknesses of pre-designed 3D models with the help of theAR application, and they made better and more informed design decisions that resulted insuccessful delivery of supplies to the disaster area.IntroductionAs Osborn and Agogino [1
to solveauthentic problems with an inquiry approach. We wanted the students to develop problem solvingand self-directed learning abilities while they also remain motivated to learn increasinglychallenging topics. To incorporate experiential learning in our curriculum, each module beginsfrom concrete experience to reflective observation, then to abstract conceptualization to activeexperimentation. In other words, the first stage is where the learner actively experiences anactivity. The second stage is when the learner consciously reflects back on that experience. Thethird stage is where the learner attempts to conceptualize a theory or a model of what is observed.The fourth stage is where the learner is trying to plan how to test a model or
coursematerials for their classes. Teachers are active observers throughout the program – theyparticipate in all the EDP workshops, bioinstrumentation labs, and prototyping sessionsalongside the students, with additional time to reflect on their own experiences and observations.The workshops consist of a series of lectures that teach the critical components of the EDP. Thesessions are interactive, providing students opportunities to develop and employ the variouscomponents of the EDP. For example, during the concept generation phase, students are givensome example problems and challenged to brainstorm as many potential solutions as possible;the exercise is then repeated, this time challenging students to conceive and outline newproblems before
). It containedinformation about the research and a place for students to sign granting access to their collegetranscripts. Additionally, the consent form contained information about the risks and benefits ofthe research, confidentiality, and what to do if a research subject had questions about theresearch.3.3 Kolb Learning Style Inventory (v3.1)The LSI is a twelve-question survey that takes between five and ten minutes to complete. The LSIcharts cognition on a two-axis scale: concrete experience (CE) versus abstract conceptualization(AC), and reflective observation (RO) versus active experimentation (AE).The LSI presents twelve, multiple-choice style questions. For instance, the question might startout: “When I learn, I prefer to:” and then
).OutcomesCourse SurveysStudents at the end of each semester anonymously took a Purdue University created andcirculated course evaluation survey. The survey contains demographic-based questions, PurdueUniversity wide questions about course and instructor, course specific questions, and optionalwritten comments section. Based on the purpose of this paper, the author has chosen to presentthe survey results for the university questions. On the two university questions, students self-reported on their satisfaction of the course and instructor by selecting a response on a five-pointLikert scale (where: 5 = extremely good, 4 = good, 3 = fair, 2 = poor, and 1 = very poor) thatbest reflected their perception (see Table 2). Table
. Costs reflect resource requirements to address complex endogenous and exogenouschallenges that require strategies for allocating resources, and monitoring and adaptingstrategies to ensure accountability.Program accountability is also important in flagship institutions. However, smallperturbations in degree programs strategies of flagship institution can be major problemsfor regional universities because of insufficient resources to quickly adjust for unintendedconsequences of these strategies. The signature of engineering degree programs in regionaluniversities is graduating successful practicing engineers and mid-level managers for regionalcompanies and regional operations of larger companies from a student population that includes
Fall 2016 semester, the combined enrollment of the four-yearand two-year institutions was over 175,000 students, in a state whose population isapproximately 5.8 million. [6]In his proposed 2015-17 biennial budget, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin proposed severalmeasures that directly impacted both the daily operations of the University of Wisconsin Systemas well as its long-term operations. The proposed changes reflected growing sentimentsthroughout parts of the United States questioning the value of higher education in its currentform, and the role that a state should play in providing public higher education. After modifyingthe proposed budget, the state legislature passed a 2015-17 budget which included cuts of $250million to the UW System
supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. (1505006). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. References[1] B. L. Yoder, “Engineering by the numbers,” in Engineering College Profiles & Statistics Book, Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education, 2011, pp. 11-47.[2] J. Mortimer, M. Shanahan, and M. Johnson, Handbook of the Life Course. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2003.[3] J. Blickenstaff, “Women and science careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter?” Gender and Education, vol. 17, no. (4), pp. 369-386
SEM610B Figure 3. Student Teaching Evaluation on Capstone Courses – Student-Learning and TeachingCapstone project implementation is the ultimate stage for students to develop and demonstratethe competencies described in the PLOs, and they provide this feedback at the end of theprogram. This feedback is also important because they do this evaluation right after the capstonecourses. This feedback is shown in Table 1. PLOs directly reflect the full curriculum and thecapstone projects in particular. Overall the student population feedback on the capstone coursesin particular and the PLOs, is very positive demonstrating the value of the framework and itsoutcome in the capstone projects. Table 1 – Student Evaluation on Achieving PLO
ability [16]. As people gain experiencein intercultural situations, and reflect on those experiences, they develop a more complexunderstanding of culture. This leads to greater ability to discern cultural differences andultimately, to appropriately modify their own behavior in nonnative cultural circumstances [16]and therefore work more effectively in the global job market. Bennett (1986, 1993b) suggested aframework for conceptualizing dimensions of intercultural competence in his developmentalmodel of intercultural sensitivity (DMIS). The DMIS constitutes a progression of worldview 5‘‘orientations toward cultural difference’’ that comprise the
female. Laboratory assignments werebased on the specified interests expressed by the students, who worked with individual facultyand laboratory personnel on original research projects. Data were collected using pre- and post-experience surveys and student reflections. Findings indicate that students enjoyed working inthe laboratory settings with the researchers and participating in authentic research activities.Their career goals in STEM and health-related professions were reinforced and strengthened as aresult of their participation.IntroductionInterest in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields has been decliningamong students in the U.S., while the number of available positions in STEM fields is steadilyincreasing [1
evaluation content, knowledge memory and test scores aretoo much more emphasized than students’ overall quality; regarding assessment function,appraisal and selection are taken more important than diagnosis, feedback and motivation; asfor evaluation criteria, students are taken as a whole, ignoring their individual differences;evaluation subjects are biased towards teachers, ignoring the diversification of evaluationsubjects; with regard to the evaluation process, conclusive nature is obvious while the processis ignored; for evaluation methods, written forms are dominant, neglecting other forms ofevaluation. Besides, quantified results are excessively employed, and adoption of evaluationmethods reflecting the diversified quality of students required
research team we document our positionality.The research team consists of members with a wide range of political views (consisting ofregistered democrats, republicans, and independents) and demographic diversity (including butnot limited to individuals who identify as mixed race, White, male, female, cisgender, gay, andstraight). All members of the research team had an interest in understanding and improving theexperiences of diverse individuals in engineering. Prior to conducting the interviews, the entireresearch team documented and discussed their positionality so as to understand the ways inwhich their position as a researcher could influence the interview and analytic processes.During the interview, participants were asked to reflect on the
all licensedphysicians in the United States are Board Certified Medical Specialists [27].This high percentage reflects the medical profession’s collective commitment to providing thepublic with a high level of specialized expertise; however, it also reflects the system’s stronginternal incentives for board certification. Most hospitals require board certification to practicein a medical specialty area, and insurance fee reimbursement rates are typically tied to boardcertification. Furthermore, many hospitals have independently made the decision to requireboard certification for staff privileges [28]. Thus, from the physician’s perspective, certificationserves as both a carrot and a stick.In summary—and in sharp contrast with civil engineering
evaluation of student work that is valid, fair, and trustworthy, motivate and focus students’actions to learn, and promote data-driven student and instructor reflection [1]. For theseinstructors, grading is not about selecting talent - meaning the issuing of grades is primarilyintended to differentiate students, but rather, grading is about developing the talent of all studentsthrough feedback. The notion that grading is feedback, and “feedback is teaching” [2] resonateswith them.Riley is the instructor of a small class and sole grader of student work. He quickly gets to knowthe students in his class. He is aware of their individual and collective performance throughpersonal interactions in the classroom and office hours and the grading of their
research locations more intentionally or offersupplemental programming for students to ensure they achieve all of the program’s intendedlearning outcomes.Literature ReviewGlobal education research has explored how learning outcomes may vary across different typesof global programs. In particular, research has found correlations between global learningoutcomes and variables such as duration of the program, language of the program, housingarrangements, and level of reflection incorporated into the program [6]. Global engineeringprograms take many formats, including courses, study abroad, internships, degree programs, andresearch projects [7]. However, few studies within engineering education have explicitlyconsidered how these different types of
havelimited documented evidence of their effectiveness. To better address their needs and provide afoundation for future efforts to support transfer student success at four-year institutions such asUC Davis, it is necessary to obtain relevant knowledge regarding barriers to facing thesestudents.The objective of this paper is to present identified barriers to UC Davis College of Engineeringtransfer student success and to document perceptions and experiences of these transfer students.Data was obtained through an analysis of survey data from upper division engineering studentsand three focus groups of transfer students. Current transfer students both confirmed previouslyreported barriers and identified new barriers, reflecting their struggle with a
objectivity within our existing body of research.Conceptualization of GenderThe embedded logics of a professional institution or culture is adopted by those who identifywith that institution or culture [8]. With the highly gendered field of engineering, this includesthe conceptualization of gender and its corresponding logics. Discussions around gender inengineering often reflect one particular conceptualization of gender which is often termedbiological essentialism, or binary gender essentialism. This view of gender posits that perceivedsecondary sex characteristics form the basis of gender, and that sex and gender can be usedinterchangeably as they are believed to be the same [9]. Research and demographics whichreflect this conceptualization offer
understanding and education of engineering themselves [1], [4],[11]. The facilitation of learning about engineering requires more than just hands on activities, asteachers shape engineering experiences by posing questions, reflecting on student responses andlearning, and giving direction to students [1], [6], [8]. Other engineering fundamentalshighlighted by teachers include allowing the students to develop their own approach, affirmingthat failure and revision are okay, and the idea that a technology is never final [8], [12], [13]. Theteachers are responsible for laying the foundation for the problem, including explaining anyconstraints or requirements, controlling variables, mediating teamwork, and introducing andguiding the use of the engineering
engineering educationA multitude of factors can influence student engagement and retention in engineering programs,such as students’ background and preparation, attitudes, behaviors, self-efficacy, motivation, andlearning strategies [2, 9]. As such, universities across the world are implementing initiatives thatseek to transform engineering education in order to increase student engagement and reducedropout rates from courses and programs [10-12]. These initiatives demonstrate that studentengagement is a multidimensional construct that needs to be approached through a holisticperspective that transcends the presentation of content in the classroom [13]. Instructors canappeal to students’ personal interests, offer opportunities for self-reflection, or