their personal experiences, reflect on howthey are affected by the course, or critically assess the course curriculum and classroompedagogy” (p. 46). Moreover, as they argued, in traditional approaches, students’ knowledge andexperiences are often disregarded and more than not perceived as irrelevant to the coursecontent. Knowledge is treated as static, distant, and disembodied from class members (Ochoa &Pineda, 2008).Despite the sources of resistance that have been noted, other researchers have pointed out thepotential benefits of stretching engineering curriculum beyond technical content. Ochoa andPineda (2008) raised the importance of creating environments that benefit from collaboration byproviding democratic spaces to “enhance learning
matrices or House of Quality. However, in the process of providing rationalistic toolsto students, engineering education may be implicitly perpetuating the belief that engineers makedecisions through rationalistic reasoning alone. In reality, other types of informal reasoning, suchas empathic and intuitive reasoning, are utilized for decision making in ill-structured contextssuch as engineering design. The beliefs that undergraduate students hold about decision makingin the context of design is not well understood, and this work contributes to this gap in theliterature.To learn more about students’ beliefs about decision making, we collected qualitative pilot datain the form of both one-on-one, semi-structured interviews and written reflections
to consider a wide variety ofusers. A second assignment addressed the need for psychological safety [2] in teams via a casestudy of the NASA Columbia disaster. A third assignment had students watch TedX talks relatedto why diversity makes teams smarter and reflect on how the students should consider diversityin teams as a strength and a highly desirable quality. Existing activities and documents aboutteam norms, team compacts and conflict resolution have also been updated and refined to set amore inclusive tone in these classrooms.Activities to teach students about diversity within the engineering or computing contextThis portion of the project has focused on developing activities that fit within technicalengineering or computing courses
Engineering Ambassadors reflected on student learning andtheir own practice after each presentation. The EAs responded individually to a six-questionopen-ended survey (Appendix C). Responses that were general in nature are displayed in Figure3.Figure 3. Engineering Ambassadors’ General Reflections on Lesson PresentationsBriefly describe Which part(s) Which part(s) Which part(s) What will you What your lesson of the lesson of your lesson of your lesson do to make that knowledge went really will you do the will you change? and/or skill well? same? change
of criticalthinking (Chinn et al. 2014). Both the broad term of critical thinking and the more niche term ofsystems thinking share similar meanings of thoughtful analysis or analytical reasoning, and callto mind King & Kitchener’s Reflective Judgement Model (King & Kitchener, 1994, 2001, 2004),a stepping stone between the cognitive development research started in the 1970s and morerecent epistemological research. This researcher argues that discovering the epistemic beliefs offaculty and the ideas being disseminated to students in their chemical engineering classroomswill prove useful in the field of chemical engineering education as well as related academicfields concerned with systems and critical thinking.TheoryResearch preceding
and old-age dependency, however, is evenmore revealing. Figure 4 below [1, p. 6] reflects this combined dependency on the working agepopulation. From the below figure, two lines in particular are worth noting. In the year 2020, thetotal dependency ratio, as a measure of the burden on the working age population, is 64. Meaning,in the year 2020, there will be two dependents for every three working age adults. The combineddependency ratio, with the elderly population taking a higher percentage of the total dependencyratio, increases steadily through 2060, the last of the current estimated years. This dependency is,again, a reflection of a slower growing population, a declining fertility rate and a generally agingpopulation
roller coaster fora local amusement park in 60 minutes. Their interaction was videotaped and pictures of theirdesigns were captured. We have analyzed the video data video analysis approach based on thecodebook we developed by reviewing literature on problem scoping. The instances that we haveseen in mom-child interactions and conversation provided evidence that the child with autismwas capable of engaging in all three actions of problem scoping. The behaviors we haveobserved were mostly associated to Problem Framing and Information Gathering. However, wehave seen some evidence of Reflection. We believe, that the findings of this study laysfoundation for future studies on children with autism and engineering design, and how toeffectively engage
recognize the existing efforts of educators and fostertheir curricula and scholarship ideas. A series of three workshops were conducted in 2018 byvisiting educators engaged in engineering education at both two and four-year HSIs. Before,during, and after the workshop series, attendees were asked to reflect on three guidingeducational philosophies: intrinsic motivation, students as empowered agents, and designthinking. Thirty-six engineering educators from thirteen HSIs from across the Southern UnitedStates participated in one of two, two-day workshops where attendees prototyped examples ofhow they would implement these philosophies at their home institution. Using these prototypes,participants identified the assets they already had and resources
education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, liberatory maker spaces, and a RED grant to increase pathways in ECE for the professional formation of engineers. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Work in Progress: Creating a Climate of Increased Motivation and Persistence for Electrical and Computer Engineering Students: A Project-Based Learning Approach to Integrated LabsAbstractThis work in progress studies the impact on students and faculty and their perceived value ofintegrating project-based labs with lectures on student learning in a
is characterised by the use of realworld problems as a context for students to learn critical thinking skills and problem solvingskills and to acquire knowledge of the essential concepts of the course.” In fact, it has beenshown that learning to apply theoretical principles is much better done when given real problemsand hands-on activities in projects [2].Overall, PBL has been described as ‘reflecting the way people learn in real life’[11] and lendsitself as a teaching strategy that leads students to ‘learn to learn’ and encourages students todevelop critical thinking and problem solving skills that they can carry for life [12]. The goals ofPBL include fostering active learning, interpersonal and collaborative skills, open inquiry
concepts and techniques.However, a major portion of teaching still takes places in classroom settings. Educators adoptvarious pedagogical practices, teaching-aids, and technologies to engage students in learningthe course contents effectively within the controlled environment of classrooms. In ideal classsettings, an instructor should be able to reach out to all students regardless of their learningstyles. These learning styles could be sensory, intuitive, visual, verbal, reflective, active,sequential and global as defined in the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) classification system[1] - [5].Active and hands-on learning in environmental engineering is not new. More recently, theauthor has been involved in multiple studies focused on promoting
engineering can beexplored.MethodsStudy contextIn fall 2017, students in a total of eight sections of a common first-year engineering course tookfour surveys throughout the semester and were taught by three distinct instructors. Eachinstructor had an equal number of intervention (four sections, n =116) and comparison sections(four sections, n = 137).The students in the intervention sections participated in multiple activities, which are describedsubsequently. Table 1 shows when each of the activities occurred throughout the fall term.Table 1. Activities and Timeline Activity Week of Semester Dean’s Talk and Reflection Questions 2 Teamwork
differences in the interests and/or training indifferent majors. The very short responses from many students are somewhat troubling, giventhat all students should be able to readily answer these questions with more complex and detailedresponses after having taken a course that included ethics content. This raises interesting issuesaround students’ feelings about the importance of these topics, and indicates that these questionsmay reflect on the affective domain (e.g. value) to an equal or greater extent than the cognitivedomain (e.g. knowledge, reflected in the response to Q2).IntroductionEngineering has significant and important impacts on society, being critical to providing basicnecessities (e.g. access to clean water) as well as contemporary
included in the communitypartnerships with two main foci: middle school robotics leagues and a community makerspace.Two surveys (Pre and Post course) helped to identify initial impressions and changes in students’(1) understanding of community partner’s geographic location, (2) impressions of location, (3)propensity to frequent a business in that location, and (4) knowledge of actual persons residing inthe community. Students were asked to write reflections after S-L site visits which acted asassessments of their growth in understanding of course concepts. The reflections were also usefulto see the students’ perception of professional growth and their perception of the community andtheir impact on it.Initial surveys indicated that news and word of
Sky’s the Limit: Drones for Social Good courseincludes critical aspects that relate to multiple engineering disciplines, which allows students toidentify the connections between drones and their particular engineering concentration. Thecourse is also multi-disciplinary and encourages critical social reflection. Students consider abroad range of applications of drones with the goal of promoting social good. The courseculminates in an entrepreneurial project that incorporates knowledge and skills from severalengineering disciplines in the context of engineering for social good.Research has found that female, Black, and/or Latinx engineering students are drawn to pursuingcareers that they identify as promoting social justice and a greater social
return to their institutions(workshops), have time to practice these skills (practice writing time), and discuss how things aregoing (writing clusters). Figure 1. Dissertation Institute Main ActivitiesWorkshop Sessions: Multiple 1 or 2-hour sessions lead by experts in dissertation topics toprovide the participants with ideas, concepts, techniques and reflections about the writing habitsand process, time management, communication with advisors, and overall topics germane to thecompletion of their dissertation.Practice Writing Sessions: Significant amount of structured writing time distributed along theweek to provide students with the opportunity to apply the workshop’s lessons, practice theirwriting, and advance in
contextualized curricula, spurring many technical programs to reform,for example by “humanizing” engineering, developing technical literacy in nonengineers, ortrying to produce more integrative socio-technologists.Several initiatives reflect the mid-to-late 1960s interest in educating “socio technologists” tobridge the gap between competing admiring and critical visions of technology; this period wasinformed by both the triumphs and the tragic consequences of WWII and Cold War technology.Wisnioski [7] calls this gap “a rift about the purposes of engineering and the nature oftechnology...sparked by a combination of changes in the organization, content, and scale ofengineering labor, and by a trenchant critique of technology from intellectuals, activists
end, student takes the final challengeassignment, which consists of multiple choice 10 questions. In addition to the 3 self-assessment and onefinal challenge quiz-type assessments, the students complete two reflection essay papers in the 9th an 10thweeks of the semester.Research Survey and Data collectionThe students in the 4th year seminar were asked to complete the online module in the 9th week of the courseduring fall 2018 term and the survey was administered in the last week (Week 10). The online module wasintegrated as a take-home assignment, where students were able to complete the online ethics module onBlackboard (the University’s Learning Management System). A survey consisting of 10 sections with 18questions was given to the
behavior. Structure and The way an object is shaped or structured determines many of its Function properties and functions. Stability and For both designed and natural systems, conditions that affect stability Change and factors that control rates of change are critical elements to consider and understand. Table 1 NGSS Crosscutting ConceptsHow crosscutting concepts are implemented and assessed alongside core ideas and practicesraises exciting opportunities to deepen student motivation and learning. Rich resources includingNSF funded, University of Washington’s online STEMteachingtools.org provide a frameworkfor asking deep reflection questions [3
, soteaching staff are dealing with larger workload [6], [8]. Consequently, they spend less timereflecting about curriculum and teaching practices [9], [10], and they resist to fulfillingadditional assessment requirements at a program level [4]. Besides lacking opportunities to reflect, most faculty lack opportunities to collectand analyze meaningful learning data due to the complexity of assessing student learningoutcomes on a program level [11]. To deal with this challenging but essential task,teaching staff rely on both quantitative (e.g., quiz results, test scores, mid-term students’satisfaction and end-of term evaluations) and qualitative data (e.g., open-ended responsesto end of term comments from students and colleagues) to identify
scientific theories ofgender/sex, race, disability, and sexuality influence one another. Throughout the course,students are asked to reflect on who gets to be a scientist or engineer, who defines whichquestions researchers ask and which problems engineers solve, who benefits from thesesolutions, and what role social justice plays in science and engineering practice.Throughout the course, we explore these inter-related questions: 1) How do our cultural ideas about race, gender, disability and sexuality influence science/engineering knowledge and practice? 2) On the other hand, how does our science/engineering practice influence our cultural ideas about race, gender, disability and sexuality? 3) How can we use science and engineering
others would also consider your recovery successful/unsuccessful? Why or why not? g. Has your event affected your future behavior? Based on their class section, participants were either given the “unsuccessful” recovery or“successful” recovery first, followed by the other option. This difference was implemented tomitigate the potential effects of the first failure type reflection on the answers for the other (i.e. anegative reflection could influence the next positive reflection). How an individual responds tofailure can give a good amount of information pertaining to the general trends of saidindividual’s motivation. For analysis of this qualitative data we used emergent thematic analysisto code and subsequently identify thematic
students, one instructor, and fiveteaching assistants, with course activities spread across multiple lecture, lab, and recitationsections meeting at different places in time and space.This research paper explores the consequences of this scaling for the students enrolled in thecourse, as well as for the instructors, teaching assistants, and facilities involved in courseimplementation. A mixed-methods approach featuring quantitative data including studentacademic performance metrics, demographic characteristics, and pre- and post-survey resultsrelated to attitudes and motivations to persist in engineering are combined with qualitative datafrom individual student interviews and textual responses to biweekly reflection questions tounderstand how the
particular skill after taking theworkshop and to provide feedback about the workshops, the workshop instructors, and their skilldevelopment in their engineering projects course. The data in the surveys is analyzed alongsidequalitative data from individual student reflections and focus groups to determine theeffectiveness of the workshops and how students report subsequently using those skills. Thegoals of this study are to 1) identify if and how students are using the skills developed duringskill-building workshops, 2) determine if and how those skill-building workshops affect studentsself-efficacy levels in engineering, and 3) generate suggestions for improvement to theworkshops to make them more equitable experiences for all students.BackgroundThe
project was LED Dexterity Challenge. A survey wasconducted to collect data right after students completed each workshop to evaluate the content ofthe workshop. 169 girl scouts members participated in the STEM program and took the survey inthe past two years. The survey shows 95% students enjoyed Electrical Engineering workshopactivity while 98% of the students enjoyed Computer Engineering. Students reflected that theywould like to participate more STEM related activities in the future.The program represents part of our university’s ongoing efforts to interest young women inSTEM and is part of the Girl Scouts' “fun with purpose” K-12 curriculum. That initiativeintroduces scouts of every age to STEM to inspire them to embrace and celebrate
student engagementsurvey also asked students to reflect on what they learned in the course, and asked them to reflecton how the course could be improved.Skills assessmentStudent performance was evaluated through a pre and post exam in mathematics, several quizzesand a final exam in the course, and through assignments and presentations. In addition, studentsself-evaluated themselves at the beginning and end of the course on a list of skills that werecovered. Students rated their confidence in each skill on a 4-point scale at the beginning and endof the course. The average score for skills in each category is shown in Figure 1 for both the2017 and 2018 cohort of students. At the beginning of the course, students felt the mostconfident in chemistry
capstone courses. • To provide a mechanism that requires students to work on keeping their portfolios up-to- date.The second innovation of the new curriculum is the portfolio requirement, in which the studentdemonstrates that he or she has attained the student learning outcomes (SLOs) of the program.For their portfolios, students are required to: ● Showcase their strongest work from a variety of classes, both in and outside of their major. ● Discuss the thought and effort that went into creating the work shown. ● Include written reflections that discuss the challenges faced, strengths and weaknesses, and what was learned from creating the work.Pedagogical advantages of portfolios have been discussed in the literature. The
critical thinking activities. LCs first cameto our institution, City Tech, through a Title V Grant in 2000 and were adopted by the college in2005. The academic performance of students participating in LCs at City Tech reflects nationaltrends. When compared to the general population at the College, students in LC earn higherGPAs, have higher retention rates, and demonstrate greater satisfaction.In order to complement the community-building efforts within learning community classrooms,we, a cohort of faculty leaders and administrators of City Tech’s First Year LearningCommunities, a program offered through the college’s Office of First Year Programs, developed“Our Stories” digital writing project which extends the student’s network beyond the
engineeringdesign process. For example, Wendell, Wright, and Paugh [4] describe the reflective decision-making practices observed in 2nd through 5th grade classrooms as students completed designactivities within the Engineering is Elementary curricula. Previous research on the middleschool curriculum described in this paper [5] utilizes longitudinal interview data to documentprogressions in how individual students describe their work with the stages of the engineeringdesign process over the course of several exposures to the curriculum.Researchers have also investigated how integrated STEM curricula promote the transfer ofknowledge from one STEM subject or context to another, ultimately enhancing student learning[6], [7], [8]. Because STEM integration
, and to summarize thecombination model of university path selection. Specifically, the research questions in thisstudy are as follows: (1) What are the core paths of China's new engineering construction? (2) What is the selection model of the "new engineering" construction path for differenttypes of colleges and universities?2. Literature review2.1 The concept of new engineering conceptThe "new" of new engineering construction is reflected in five aspects [4]: (1) The newconcept of engineering education. With the new economy and new industries as thebackground, the new engineering construction needs to establish a new concept ofinnovative, integrated and full-cycle engineering education. (2) The new structure of thediscipline