thatstudents’ self-assessments are not accurate, often reflecting over-confidence (e.g., Kruger &Dunning, 1999 [27]).One challenge in data analysis was that fewer students completed the post-test (16) than the pre-test (36), likely because the participation in the survey was voluntary and the post-test came at atime when students were finishing high-stakes final projects. So, in addition to enhancing thecase study materials and refining the STSS instrument, future work will also include exploringways to better incentivize students to complete both the pre- and post-test.Finally, it is possible that the STSS results could be somewhat skewed by the fact that, unlikemost other universities, students at CMU have two capstone experiences to choose
difficult to adequately evaluate these programs. In order to evaluate andassess new experiments and projects, prior to introducing them in our curriculum, we use summerprograms with different students to develop content and test learning objectives. We introduce thenew topics to a cohort of students of diverse cultural background from local and internationalstudents. Our methodology is similar for the curricular development of each program (Figure 1)and consists of four main and distinct stages: (1) planning and administrative preparation, (2)content development and small-scale testing, (3) deployment and daily student assessment, (4)reflections, modifications and adjustments for a final course implementation. [6
/instructorsupport) that encourages students to identifyways they could utilize the product they dissect in their redesign by asking them to identifyapplication opportunities. Following the dissection activity, students are given 10 minutes tocome up with additional ideas for the design prompt. As a final step, the students are led througha 20-minute discussion activity led through the PowerPoint presentation that focuses on theusefulness of the product dissected for the activity, the impact of the complexity of the productdissection on design outcomes, and the reuse of features from the product dissected in the designideas. The module is culminated in a student-reflection which captures their understanding of thedissection lesson.Case Study of Module
education and developers of instructional materials and curricula, as well asteachers and designers planning classroom strategies, of initiatives in formal engineeringeducation. The development of educational strategies is explored with the intent to move studentsalong a trajectory towards expert design behavior.AcknowledgementJeff Kan carried out the sentiment analysis. This material is based upon work supported by theNational Science Foundation under Grant Numbers: 1463873 and 1463809. Any opinions,findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authorsand do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References Ahmed S. (2001). Understanding the use and reuse of experience in
Middle School Classroom: Key Elements in Developing Effective Design Challenges,” Journal of the Learning Sciences,Vol.9, No.3, pp.313-314.26. Oakes, W. C., Jamieson, L. H., and Coyle, E. j.,(2001), “EPICS: Meeting EC 2000 Through Service Learning,” Proc., ASEE Conference and Exhibition, Session 3461.27. Bright, A., and Dym, C. L., (2004), “General Engineering at Harvey Mudd: 1957-2003,” Proc., ASEE Conf. and Exhibition, Session 1471.28. Adams, R. S., Turns, J., and Atman, C. J., (2003), “Educating Effective Engineering Designers: The Role of Reflective Practice,” Design Studies, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp.275—294.29. Mills, J. E., and Treagust, D. F., (2004), “Engineering Education- Is Problem – Based or Project - Based Learning the
, Beghetto and Kaufman [46] added 2 additional c’s: 1) pro-c level creativity,demonstrated by professionals who haven’t reached Big-C eminence and 2) mini-c creativity,which focuses on personally meaningful discoveries that may occur while a student is learning.All of these definitions reflect the idea that creativity is the foundation of innovation; asinnovation is recognized as something new (product, process, etc.). Furthermore, creativitygenerates spaces where meaningful ideas impact society.To implement this approach, we relied on an evidence-based, active learning process thatintegrates techniques drawn from actor training, improvisation, and theatre of the oppressed[47]with creative problem-solving methods drawn from multiple, research-based