, turning, welding, tapping, and threading components. • One additional lab period could be added if needed. • Additional pieces of equipment could be used, but they must already be at the university. • Similar materials must be used: aluminum for machining and steel for welding. • The cost of the materials should not be significantly increased from the current year’s lab.Each team submitted a report describing the proposed product and the sequence of lab activitiesneeded to fabricate each component. Each team also presented a 5-minute “sales pitch” to theirclassmates. The students peer evaluated the projects in four categories: feasibility, cost,presentation quality, and appeal. The highest scoring project (Fig. 5) was created in
program requirementsand higher expectations of academic preparedness, particularly in mathematics and sciences. Asignificant number of students enrolled in a minority institution like a Historically Black Collegeand University (HBCU) are still first-generation college students in their families. Hence, thechallenges they have to overcome as the first-year students are greater than their peers. Thissituation warrants a first-year course that is specifically designed to help the first-year studentwho intends to pursue an engineering major to successfully navigate their academic life withinthe campus. The first-year students are challenged with a number of issues including financialmanagement, time management, student advising and alcohol, and drug
and discussions over fifteen weeks covering 1) anintroduction and overview of STEM and STEM literacy, 2) guiding principles in STEM Education,3) typical components of STEM, 4) workshops on developing an instructional STEM unit(curriculum unit), 5) STEM instruction from an integrated approach, and 6) pre-service teacherresidency peer experiences (Appendix A).Evaluation Approach and Method Reflection in engineering education has become highly regarded as an evaluation approachinvolving the concept of “doing and reflecting on the doing” [8]. Supported by several engineeringeducation researchers, “reflective techniques” are important in fostering effective teaching andstimulating student learning [9-13]. Turns [9] defines reflection “as
offensive competitions, the use of peer instruction [10] and mentoring[11] have also been proposed. Other approaches include professional certification-drivencurriculum development [12], challenge based learning [13] and systems [14] and multi-disciplinary based approaches [15]. To help determine what approaches are best for thischallenge, Mirkovic, et al. [16] propose a protocol for evaluating cybersecurity educationinterventions that is outcome driven and combines skill assessment, self-assessment andlongitudinal follow-up. Harris and Patten [17] suggest the use of Bloom’s and Webb’sTaxonomies as another approach for driving curriculum development.The use of a variety of learning technologies has also been proposed. These have includedvirtual
teaching practices [13]. Kuh et al. [15] studied theeffect of engagement in meaningful academic activities on retention of first year students andshowed statistically significant impacts on GPA and persistence. They also noted a proportionallyhigher impact of educationally engaging activities on students from underserved groups. Acommon theme in the literature on engagement is academic challenge, faculty-student interactions,and peer interactions. In this regard, Carini, Kuh, and Klein [16] conducted a survey of over 1000students and determined a positive impact of engagement on critical thinking skills and grades.Empirical evidence resulting from research on strategies for engagement indicates that activelearning such as problem-based learning
movie and television examples are becoming dated anddo not resonate with new faculty. Additionally, determining one’s place in Lowman’s modelremains difficult. As evidenced by the authors’ experience writing this paper, debating where anindividual sits in a category, while entertaining, is not a simple task. This paper describesdevelopment of a rubric to assess teaching in both of Lowman’s dimensions and applies therubric to contemporary movie and television teachers.In this paper, the authors present a summary of Lowman’s Two Dimensional Model of EffectiveCollege Teaching1. Next, development of a rubric to assess which style of instruction bestdescribes an instructor is presented. The rubric is applied to several contemporary teachers
practiced in other projects throughout the semester.IntroductionThere are many challenges in STEM education, including stimulating student interest, retainingstudents of diverse abilities and backgrounds, and preparing students to address the realities ofthe post-academic world and work-space. Many novel approaches have been developed toaddress these challenges, including problem- and project-based learning [1], entrepreneurship[2], and flipped classrooms [3].First-year engineering students face many unique challenges, including a heavy academic load ofprimarily technical courses. Engineering student success has been shown to be helped byincreasing students’ peer-to-peer instruction [4], and increased efficacy [5] and increasingstudents’ personal
Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, ICER ’18, pages 60–68, New York, NY, USA, 2018. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-5628-2. doi: 10.1145/3230977.3231000. [7] Briana B. Morrison, Lauren E. Margulieux, Barbara Ericson, and Mark Guzdial. Subgoals help students solve parsons problems. In Proceedings of the 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, SIGCSE ’16, pages 42–47, New York, NY, USA, 2016. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-3685-7. doi: 10.1145/2839509.2844617. [8] Barbara J. Ericson, Lauren E. Margulieux, and Jochen Rick. Solving parsons problems versus fixing and writing code. In Proceedings of the 17th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research
involve their experience with writing and programming, as well astheir university schedule and location. Based on the responses from these questions, each pair ofstudents are matched with another pair of students with complementary skills. Another uniquecharacteristic of this course involves students having the ability to change teams after the firstdesign project. Students may desire to change teams if they feel that the rest of their team isunderperforming, or if they feel that the other students on their team are overly demanding.These practices are informed by the above studies to encourage students to develop moredependent learning styles.A self-reporting measure of team performance was given to first-year engineering students toexamine
attend graduate school after degree completion. REU participants werematched with a Principal Investigator (PI), Graduate Mentor, and a project. The Graduate Mentorworked closely with the student by providing deadlines and expectations from the researchproject.The Education and Workforce team led students in weekly sessions, such as technical writing,conducting a perfect pitch, writing a literature review, and presenting a research poster. Inaddition, two electrical engineering Ph.D. students led weekly technical labs and seminars onskills needed in engineering, such as SolidWorks, systems-level electronics, and Arduino. Thisenabled equal opportunity for students to develop their background knowledge to be successfulin research and be prepared
is founded in knowledge and experience and gained over time without regard to aspecific domain [10] while the second believes creativity is domain specific and may beunrelated across domains [11, 12]. That creativity requires expertise in a field lends itself todomain being relevant in the creative process; for example, a poet of renown is not necessarilygoing to produce an innovative engineering design nor is an engineer going to write an award-winning poem. It is not impossible, but it is not predicted by any known assessments.An alternative to defining creativity as domain-general or domain-specific is to recognizecreativity as a habit that can be developed and applied to a variety of situations or domains [13]while creative products and
in Solid Mechanics, Plasticity and Sheet Metal Forming. Dr. Matin has published more than 25 peer-reviewed journal and conference papers. Dr. Matin is the recipient of NSF MRI award as a Co-PI. Dr. Matin worked in Automotive industry for Chrysler Corporation from 2005 to 2007. He Joined UMES in August 2007. He is affiliated with ASME and ASEE professional societiesMr. Lukman G. Bolahan Anidu c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Design of an Automatic Class Attendance System as an Undergraduate Senior Design ProjectAbstractOne of the goals of senior design courses in undergraduate engineering programs is to involvestudents in a meaningful project so
comprehensive series of interventions at three points instudents’ career at the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State)—entering first-year students(Engineering Ahead), rising second-year students (Jump Start), and a transition program forrising juniors changing from a Penn State regional campus to the Penn State University Parkflagship campus. As of this writing, we are beginning Year 4 of the 5-year project. Previouspapers described outcomes for the Engineering Ahead first-year bridge program. This paper is aninterim report that describes outcomes for two cohorts of students who participated in the JumpStart second-year summer bridge intervention.Method: The Jump Start summer bridge is a 4-week residential program on the Penn StateUniversity Park
school teachers andcommunity college faculty who will develop skills in manufacturing research, technical writing,curriculum development, and conference presentation. The goals of the proposed program are to:1) provide a STEM-based platform to engage high school teachers and community collegeinstructors in state-of-the-art manufacturing research, 2) explore a sustainable educational modelthat connects high schools, community colleges, university, and industry to instill futuregenerations with greater awareness and interest in manufacturing, 3) facilitate the developmentof curricular modules, classroom activities, and other instructional materials that will beimplemented in the participating schools and colleges eventually to be disseminated to a
– Method of assigning teams: by instructor based on students availability and preferenceDeliverables and student assessment – Deliverables: • Individual - 2 memos • Team – poster, presentation, and a written tech brief (2 pages) – Student assessment: • Memos – graded according to level of engagement • Poster and presentation – group vote (most votes earn bonus) • Tech Brief – graded according to rubric • Teamwork Evaluation (rubric, peer evaluation)Deployment and staging schedule – Three stages to deploy the module for a duration of 1.5 week, spread out in 3 in-class sessions (55 min) and 3 out-of-class assignments (6 to 8 hours) – Stage I: Pre-assignment (‘hook’) • Select a
Pune University, India (1985). He has worked as a post-doctoral fellow at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (2001 – 2003) and BHP Institute for Steel Processing and Products, Australia (1998 – 2001). Dr. Manohar held the position of Chief Materials Scientist at Modern Industries, Pittsburgh (2003 – 2004) and Assistant Manager (Metallurgy Group), Engineering Research Center, Telco, India (1985 – 1993). He has published over 80 papers in peer-reviewed journals and conferences including a 2007 Best Paper Award by the Manufacturing Division of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), three review papers and three book chapters. He has participated in numerous national and international conferences. He is
, 2019 Work In Progress: Best Practices in Teaching a Chemical Process Design Two-course Sequence at a Minority Serving UniversityIntroductionStudents complete their capstone design experience in the Chemical Process Design II and IIIsequence of courses in chemical engineering at Texas A&M University-Kingsville (TAMUK), aHispanic-serving institution (HSI). Three principle objectives of this process design coursesequence are to instruct students in the development of a complete chemical process usingprocess simulators as a primary tool, to complete this project in a team-oriented environment,and to communicate effectively with their peers and instructors. These three principle objectivesare directly related to the ABET student
useful todiscern how well our students could learn to reflect and think critically during their first year ofcollege, even with minimal guidance in reflection.Two theoretical models are useful when evaluating student performance on reflective learningtasks. The Perry Model of intellectual development [4], as interpreted by Pavelich and Moore[5] suggests that students with extensive practice in open-ended problem solving involvingreflection will be more successful than their peers. Similarly, the King and Kitchener ReflectiveJudgment Stages model [6] contains a scale which is useful for measuring increased complexityof reflective thinking over time, another indicator of future success. Both models emphasize thatknowledge is largely contextual
], but they are certainly more so than students have seen in classroom or lab settings. Students workingin teams of 4-5 must manage team interactions and project planning on an ongoing, iterative basis [5].Finally, students must document and present their work, requiring several different communication skills,and creating at least one round of reflective learning by requiring students to re-tell their story to peer,mentor, and sponsor audiences.Best PracticesAligning with ABET is good practice. The Program Objectives and Student Outcomes set out by ABETserve as a sound standard by which to calibrate engineering curricula and capstone is no exception [6].Table 1 shows the current ABET Student Outcomes mapped to the Senior Capstone Design
Virginia Tech university library portalpowered by Discovery Search using the keywords: “evidence-based”, AND instructionalpractices, AND “engineering OR physics OR sciences” AND “electrical OR circuits”, ANDundergraduate. The use of boolean operators in the keywords was based upon the steps inundertaking a literature review by Cronin et al. [16]. Google Scholar was also used to comparethe search results using the keywords set with Discovery Search and the search results turned outto be comparable. However, refining the search via Google Scholar was difficult, for instance,when showing the peer-reviewed articles only. So, to capture the most related and recent works,Discovery Advanced Search filter was used to refine the search based on
part of the course, students formed groups to lead specific HODA forthe other students. The HODA are peer-to-peer interactions where the roles of specific studentschange between participant and leader throughout the semester. To lead the discovery activitiesin class, the student teams were instructed to follow the five steps shown in Figure 1. In addition,the students developed and agreed to a simple list of rules for participating in all the HODA; theprimary rule is to listen to the leaders and play the game. Each of the five steps is expanded inthe next sections of the paper. Assessment of student learning was primarily through the studentreflections presented in the student written feedback and student leader report
students still do not yet experience full access to information inpostsecondary education that is equal to that of their hearing peers. Many existing anddeveloping technologies have significant potential to serve as effective “access technologies” forDHH people.Access technologies refer to technologies or devices that can be utilized by DHH students toassist them in acquiring or sharing information, communicating, or otherwise participating ineducational opportunities, including classroom, online learning, and laboratory experiences, aswell as educational experiences taking place outside of the classroom. To address the uniquechallenges of utilizing or adapting new technologies for use in postsecondary educationalsettings, Rochester Institute of
funding participation from external sources. He has been directing/co-directing an NSF/Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Site on interdisciplinary water sciences and engineering at VT since 2007. This site has 95 alumni to date. He also leads an NSF/Research Experiences for Teachers (RET) site on interdisciplinary water research and have 10 alumni. He also leads an NSF-funded cybersecurity education project and serves as a co-PI on two International Research Experiences for Students (IRES) projects funded by the NSF. He has published over 90 papers in peer-reviewed journals and conferences. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 An Interdisciplinary RET Program
multiple choice style questions. Most clicker systems alsorequire additional technology to be purchased. Of the systems mentioned in this paper, clickerquestions are perhaps the most useful for students to see how they are performing in relation totheir peers as frequency of collected responses is often revealed to the class.While there are many options available to aid professors in simplifying grading assessments, mostsystems are limited to one style of question (multiple choice) and are not in the naturalpaper-based format of traditional assessments and problem solving exercises. Most attempts tocreate paper-based automated grading systems work effectively, but tend to be tightly customizedto a single professor’s preference or for single
. Another video type called “What I struggled with” was created based on results fromonline learning platforms such as a popular UCSD Coursera specialization on data structures andalgorithms [6]. This format type allows students to hear about specific challenges and highlightsfrom peers who have taken the same course in the past.Online content is recorded and integrated using a variety of materials and equipment, including awebcam, a high-quality microphone, screen recording software, PowerPoint, Storyline 360 byArticulate, and LMS-compatible quiz assessments. Each week, lectures build on the courseconcepts from previous videos while introducing new content and terminology. Activeparticipation and accountability are integrated through short
done ingroups during lab sessions and it is the writing of the lab reports that is done outside of the lab.However, in lecture courses, which constitute the vast majority of credit hours (about 95% in thefour ABET accredited engineering programs in our college), students are not ordinarily requiredto work in groups. In the case of commuter students, where other life commitments are such thatthey must spend limited time on campus outside of scheduled classes, using lecture assignmentsas a means to give students an opportunity to work together presents a good opportunity forcommunity building. Our experience is that, if the groups are small, three to four members, andample time is allowed between the date when work is assigned and the date when
helping to make the positivechange we want to actually happen. Further, using stories to make this connection also createsan organizational legitimacy for the new practice, identity, or other innovation.When we systemically storymake with intention, we can, as Sunstein and Thaler [8] put it,“influence behavior while also respecting the freedom of choice”. We see the use of stories todrive behavioral change in many fields. Pennebaker [9] has done extensive work on usingguided writing – or telling one’s own story to one’s self – to help individuals who haveexperienced trauma find resolution. Wilson [10, 11] used stories from students whosuccessfully navigated a difficult course to create a 30-minute intervention that significantlyimproved the
their own with little parental guidance. Orientationprograms at most universities have grown, specifically to help students cope with these newexperiences and expectations.Gunn [1] reports on the value of scavenger hunts at the University of Michigan. Their studentshave opportunities for campus-wide scavenger hunts as well as in-building College ofEngineering scavenger hunts. The latter provide an opportunity for new students to feel part oftheir new environment, overcome isolation, and begin interacting with peers and faculty.Grey et al [2] describe the development and implementation of a scavenger hunt for First YearEngineering Orientation. Lindsay et al [3] follow this up with an evaluation of student exitsurvey responses after participating
participants use their work for the Solar House as their capstone project. His research interests are in the area of optoelectronic devices, based on wide bandgap semiconductors and organic materials with an emphasis on nanostructures and nanoscale architecture. He has about 100 peer-reviewed publications.Terence C. Ahern, West Virginia University Terence C. Ahern is an Associate Professor Instructional Design and Technology at West Virginia Univer- sity and coordinates the program in Instructional Design and Technology in the Department of Learning Sciences and Human Development. His research interests are in the use of instructional technology on- line. Dr. Ahern has published extensively in the areas of distance education
of therequired criteria for accreditation of engineering colleges [2]. Micheaelsen et al. [3] argued thatteam-based learning transforms the classroom experience into one that is enjoyable for bothinstructors and students.At the core of this pedagogy is the creation of effective teams to exploit the benefits of peer-to-peer interaction and instruction. Team formation is a complex task that has been extensivelystudied in psychology [4], management [5], and related fields [6]. In these studies, severalcharacteristics including prior knowledge, student’s skills, motivation, competence, homophily[4], diversity, familiarity with other students, personality, and scheduling, have been suggested tosignificantly influence the effectiveness of the team