other industries. The data does notdifferentiate the type of incidents that contribute to the injury rate. A low overall injury rate doesnot necessarily correlate to the degree of lab safety since some injuries will be unrelated to labwork. Actual injury rate is likely higher than the data shows because it only includes reportedinjuries above a certain threshold. The BLS tracks causes of days away of work by industry, butit groups education with health services, which is the industry with the highest injury rate.Therefore, no analysis was done on whether the types of injuries at universities could reflect labaccidents.Generally, city governments are responsible for building and fire safety. Other alternative safetymonitors are found at the
understand how to model the equation but also have to solve the equation. Cui,Rebello, and Bennett [31] mentioned that students need prompting and scaffolding to connect thecalculus knowledge with physics problems, so we did it with some success, reflected in thequantitative results shown in Figure 2.Figure 2 shows that there is a large percentage of students with a high score in the qualitativeindicator (44% of students had a score greater than 80%). From those, the spread in scores forthe quantitative part is large. On the other hand, all students who have a high score in thequantitative part (i.e., greater than 80%) also have a high score in the conceptual part. It seemsthat it is required to have a strong conceptual understanding, but this is
completeda questionnaire surveying their experiences with their current partner.During each laboratory meeting, the instructor would introduce the prescribed group assignment,then support the students as they completed the prescribed assignment. Attendance and tardinesswere recorded, as were observations made by the instructor during the course of the laboratory.After each laboratory meeting, the instructor would first reflect, then record their thoughts,impressions, and perspective on the laboratory they had just taught. As the laboratory instructorwas also the laboratory instructor for the subsequent course, Game Development II, observationswere continued for the first 4 weeks of the next class to explore the residual impact of thecollaborative
results as an experience; and• Reflective observation consists of reviewing the simulation results and reflecting on how to design a cache memory with a new idea.Two steps for design-based learning:• Abstract conceptualization consists of designing a new idea by porting the code into the Simple Simulator to implement; and• Active experimentation consists of finalizing the design after analyzing the simulation results. Figure 1. Flowchart of Kolb Experiential Learning Cycles.Simulating conventional cache schemes for experience-basedlearning:The Simple Simulator’s purpose is to design and implement multi-core cache memory schemes for computer architecture labs forsenior- and/or graduate-level students. Figure 2 shows the majorsteps to
grounded in the work of Crismond and Adams [94], who developed the InformedDesign Teaching and Learning Matrix based on a meta-literature review. The matrix includesnine design strategies that are fundamental to informed engineering design and include:understanding the challenge, building knowledge, generating ideas, representing ideas, weighingoptions and making decisions, conducting experiments, troubleshooting, revising or iterating,and reflecting on the process. In addition to identifying these strategies, the authors describelearning progressions to highlight the range of design behaviors that develop from beginningdesigners to informed designers.The design strategies in the Informed Design Teaching and Learning Matrix are intended to beused
. These steps aresummarized here: 1. Demonstrated examples during lecture 2. Online homework with intermediate step feedback 3. Traditionally presented textbook problems during recitation 4. Assessment during midterm/final examsIt was stressed during lecture that circuit analysis, and in this case mesh analysis, is a methodicalprocess that can be applied to any circuit. The steps of the method were demonstrated to eachsection using eight problems prior to the assignment of the online homework. For each lectureproblem the methodical approach reflected in the online homework was demonstrated on awhiteboard. This was the first step listed above. If students needed additional support in thisform, video lectures were also provided using
like the nineties and in December drop.” (Student TH3_7) SD- The student has a sequential explanation “Well I change the roof a lot because it was, the way that can be across different disciplines. it works, at first, I had the roof panels on the wrong However, there is no evidence she/he side of the house, and then I had to move them that considered concepts from other disciplines around a bit. I also tried to make it (the roof) flatter during their trade-off decisions. and other roof designs to see the way the sun reflected more
conducted for two summers in Australia, and application of practices and ratingsystems in that country were used to develop projects that could be certified through the LEED(Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system in the U.S. Several offerings ofa traditional on-campus course were then made, with a similar project development aspect at theconclusion of each. The learning outcomes from each type of offering are compared usingsimilar assessments, and an evaluation of the differences is made. Besides considering thebenefits of study abroad programs in sustainability education, a reflection on the benefits ofbringing an understanding of the global aspects of sustainability to on-campus course offerings isalso
formulation and development.Evaluation: Each topic was aligned with a laboratory assignment, problem identification, group(2-4) oral presentation, and a final project deliverable.Module 2: Weeks 3-4, United Nations SDG-4 Quality of EducationThe second module focused on the integration of vectors, geometry, trigonometry, andexperimentation for analysis of scientific phenomena and engineering systems, addressing UNSDG-4 Quality of Education.Specific objectives of this moduleStudents will learn to apply mathematical concepts to determine: (i) forces and stresses in staticsystems comprising linear elements, (ii) reflection and refraction of light from plane interfaces,and (iii) current in a simple circuit. Students will also learn to take measurements
Education, 2019 Exploiting Digital Twin Technology to Teach Engineering Fundamentals and Afford Real-World Learning Opportunities University of Southern CaliforniaAbstractThis paper presents an innovative instructional approach that capitalizes on digitaltwin technology to transform traditional lectures into “learning-by doing”experiences in the course laboratory. In this paper, we address how the use ofdigital twin technology in laboratory simulation environments affords studentsauthentic learning experiences, i.e., experiences that reflect what a learner isexpected to encounter in the real-world. The immediate feedback feature, enabledby the connection of the digital twin to the physical twin, provides
they have the interview with the professor.The interview with the professor involves a dialogue tree that allows the participant to choosehow they wish to respond in real-time in the conversation. This ability, coupled with theparticipant having Becky’s vantage and mirrored body movements, enables participants to feelmore immersed as the actual character. Although the evolution of conversation is dependentupon the selections of the participant, there are key statements made by the professor that areindependent of the participant’s response. These statements reflect what is constant in allinteractions. Specifically, all constants in the dialogue involve at least one of the followingconcepts—(P)rejudice, (R)acism, (I)mplicit bias, (S)exism, (M
chosen strategy. Designmemos were originally conceived as an artifact for dissemination to other instructors interestedin adopting new practices, but they also served as useful reflection tool for the writer. Beyondthis guidance, groups had significant freedom and flexibility to operate in the way they felt wasmost valuable to their members.Each group was facilitated by a group leader who either received a semester of training prior toleading the group or had been a member of a group before assuming the leadership role. Groupleaders were identified and recruited by the project research team and were known to have priorexperience with active learning and other evidence-based teaching methods. The leader wasresponsible for recruiting group
currently involved in their thirdacademic year of implementation. During this time, Cohort 1 faculty were introduced to: (1) thePrinciples of Teaching and Learning [3] as a framework for thinking about and guiding changesin their practice; (2) Teaching as Research as a strategy to effect changes in their courses andassess the impact [4]; and (3) a Community of Practice to share and reflect on their efforts tochange practices. Workshops with experts in the field on active learning, deep and transferablelearning, and cross-course connections were supplemented with research on how people learn [5,6] and discipline-based education research.The extent of participating faculty and classroom transformation is being examined through thelens of limiting
practices for implementation in theeducation sector are still being explored.Methodology Mixed methods were used throughout this study and included a variety of quantitativedata (pre-/post-test instrument) and qualitative data (workshop reflections, focus group, lessonplans, student artifacts); however, this paper only reports on the lesson plans developed by thefaculty participants.Participants. A call was made to all of the Colleges of Education and of Science and Engineering toseek 20 faculty participants. Faculty participant demographics included 15 females, 5 males, 14of which taught in the College of Education (COE) and 6 taught in College of Science andEngineering (COSE). The faculty participants taught a wide range of courses
subject. The studentwho did not work hard was met with overall approval, and he said that it was likely to be in thecircumstance of the subject they were best at, and that everyone has such a class. Alice,contrastingly, rejected the questions altogether. She holds that “smart” is a subjective termdefined by the person describing it, and that everyone is smart, just smart in different ways. Herown subjective view of smart rejects the idea of tying intelligence into the amount of effortneeded to do something, but instead is reflected in an individual’s own conscious choice to tryand learn more.When Ivan was asked about a class he had to work very hard in, he claimed that the reason hehad to work so hard was that the professor was not good at
through a Service LearningProject (SLP). This existing community- oriented outreach activity, which is run through theUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, not only provides students with a sense of pride and belongingthrough their efforts during the event, but this event also has a reflection component to allowScholars to deeply connect with themselves and the community. At the end of each semester,Scholars will present their service learning project experience to their fellow Scholars, peers, andfaculty during a Scholar appreciation event. Professional Development Seminars. During the spring semester of their third year, S-STEM Scholars will enroll in the first course of a two-course sequence on ProfessionalDevelopment, 499.1. This course
Fellows:Modeled after the Action Research Fellows Program of the ESTEME@OSU community, theTeaching Innovation Fellows Program is designed to support CBEE instructors and staff totake the next step in educational innovation through participation in a Professional LearningCommunity (PLC) and action research while addressing project goals. The PLC option isdesigned to encourage teaching or co- curricular development and reflection without the needto formally collect and analyze data, though we encourage assessment of current and/orreformed teaching/co-curricular practice through evaluation of informal measures (e.g.,observations of groups, feedback from TAs and LAs) and artifacts or work products (e.g.,completed assignments, exams). Each project is
or teaching assistant support, as well as by providing students who take the course as partof their graduation, professional development, and/or teaching requirements. Finally, external in-dustry sponsors offer additional, sustainable financial support as well as some industry-perspectiveinstruction in return for the opportunity to recruit from a pool of graduate students.ActivitiesThe course consists of a weekly seminar that can be taken for one or two credit hours. Seminarsare taught in an active-learning style, with plentiful group discussions and in-class activities suchas think-pair-share. Some seminars are supplemented by reflective writing assignments. Studentswho take the course for two credits also complete a research project and
understanding of engineering concepts [4], insufficient backgroundin engineering [5], or a lack of self-efficacy [3] [6] [7]. Because of this gap in the ability andconfidence of science teachers to teach engineering, there is a need for improved professionallearning opportunities for these teachers.Instead of having the eight participating STEM teachers be only chaperones, they were given theopportunity to experience the engineering activities with their students and were able toparticipate in several evening workshops led by the researchers. In these workshops, the teacherswere able to reflect on and discuss their engineering experiences in the camp, participate inactivities related to implementing engineering in their classrooms, and were given time
score, citing the fact that the performance of therocket was “like stuck in the middle,” so the score should reflect that. Her use of “like,” “kindof,” and “doesn’t really” served to highlight her uncertainty, while still positing that a design was“stuck in the middle” and required some score that was not featured on the decision matrix.Sympathizing with a designRebekah and Bonnie spent several turns sympathizing with one of their designs that scored 0 inevery category (named “mega-hedgehog,” Figure 2). This sympathy was indexed by aheightened affective stance adopted by the girls, marked by diminutive affix, repetition, andvocabulary choices (strategies underlined in the following excerpt). 11 Bonnie: I feel bad this was our best
publication[8]; Book chapter (in publications and global educators review); Plenary Talk at the 11th networks. International Workshop on Design Theory; ASEE 2019 Workshop Biomimicry Educators Network contribution Evaluate the learning impact of the evidence-based instructional resources. Objecti ve 2 a. Assess student engagement in learning. Reflection analysis for JMU and
would help focus students on seeing themselves as engineers andhave their ideas, rather than the LEGO bricks, drive the creation of the scene. We also added abrief time at the end of the activity to talk about what an engineer is and does, the variety ofscenes created and how that reflects the variety of engineers, and how students’ interests can fitwith the many different types of engineers. This shift moved the activity more into the realm ofan intervention rather than just data collection alone. The revised version of the activity was usedin the remaining nine classrooms. When they completed their scene, we encouraged students tocreate a brief video using a GoPro camera to describe what their engineer was doing. However,time constraints
join a small committee of teachersworking to redesign the science curriculum resources for the city.Data Collection and AnalysisTo track the evolution of Vanessa and Dani’s choices for teaching engineering, we invited bothto be interviewed periodically as they implemented engineering units, which ranged in lengthfrom one class session to several months. The first author conducted three interviews withVanessa and five with Dani, using the same protocol each time. Each interview began with theteacher describing her most recent units, often with pictures of student work and binders oflesson plans. The second part of each interview asked teachers to explain their instructional andpedagogical choices, reflect on why they persisted in teaching
phases or activities; other elements spanned the entire innovation process.In general, learning in this theme extended beyond realization of the importance of thesecomprising elements. Instead, learning came from a place of personal experience, as studentsembraced or internalized an approach or mindset. There were, however, some differences in thedegree to which participants accepted and inhabited these elements. For example, Let go ofselfish innovation was typically an important realization for participants, but one they oftenstruggled to persistently embrace.Table 4. Elements Comprising the Approaches and Mindsets Theme Elements Description Apply critical thinking Critical and reflective thinking are essential at key
engineering at the professional level. Oncea new BOK is published, COA appoints a Civil Engineering Program Criteria Task Committee(CEPCTC), which is charged with reviewing the criteria in place, and if needed, revising thecriteria using the new BOK, input from the civil engineering community, and other relevantinformation. The BOK is developed based on an extensive review of the scholarly literature,relevant visionary documents, and by identifying the needs of the profession with input from, andreview by, practitioners and educators. The BOK also reflects the strategic goals of ASCE and isapproved by the ASCE Board of Direction. As such, use of the BOK to develop the CivilEngineering Program Criteria ensures that the needs of, and strategic goals
exam provides evidence of the assessment’s validity as ameasurement instrument for representational competence. We found a positive correlationbetween students’ accurate and effective use of representations and their score on the multiplechoice test. We gathered additional validity evidence by reviewing student responses on anexam wrapper reflection. We used item difficulty and item discrimination scores (point-biserialcorrelation) to eliminate two questions and revised the remaining questions to improve clarityand discriminatory power. We administered the revised version in two contexts: (1) again as partof the first exam in the winter 2019 Statics course at WCC, and (2) as an extra credit opportunityfor statics students at Utah State
Objective Core Activities 1. Learn about other members in the group and begin 1. Introductions building a learning community 2. Reflect on group dynamics and ways to make the group 2. Examining constructive and functional destructive group behaviors 3. Establish ground rules for participation 3. Generate ground rulesSection 2: Equity and Inclusion: Diversity, in many dimensions, offers both challenges andopportunities to any relationship. Learning to identify, reflect upon, learn from, and engage withdiverse perspectives is essential to fostering effective relationships and vibrant intellectualenvironments
semester, students are required to submit a ½ to 1-page analogy reflection. Inthe assignment, students must either reflect on one of the analogies given throughout the courseto connect it to a personal life experience, or to create their own analogy that connects the circuitcontent to another topic, and reflect on the connection to a life experience. The analogy shouldbe stated, and the underlying deep structure between the source and target should be described.For grading, the correctness of the statements made about the analogy and the related circuittopic are checked (i.e., the stated deep structure is sensible and correct). Also, how well theanalogy is related to the student’s own life experience is assessed. The grading of the
learning that are independent of specificpedagogies or tools: (1) intrinsic motivation, (2) students as empowered agents, and (3) designthinking.The first, intrinsic motivation, allowed participants to reflect on factors within their courses thatcontribute to students’ motivation and ultimately, their academic performance [19]. During theworkshops, participants worked individually and in small groups [20] to explore differentapproaches to supporting students’ sense of competency about the topics within the course,autonomy to control their own learning, and relatedness to others around them and theengineering topics within the course. As agents of their own learning, students are self-directedand empowered learners who actively construct their
develop instudents their ability to know when to apply each of the two modalities of thinking, logical-mathematical or artistic-narrative, depending on the circumstance. To date, traditional teachingschemes not only fostered the culture of individual performance but also prioritized rationalthinking, and avoided incorporation of the artistic-narrative modality in engineering courses in anattempt to the rigor of the search for empirical truth. The use of cognitive tools for thedevelopment of the abilities of creative thinking must be complemented with the application ofmetacognitive tools in order to also influence the development of specific dispositions oftemperament, that is, the exercise of reflection skills in engineering students [13]. The