, formal instruction on teamwork may be limited.As part of a curriculum improvement process within the Mechanical Engineering department atRose-Hulman Institute of Technology, we are working to coordinate “threads” that cut acrosscourses in the curriculum, e.g., student teaming, technical communication, business acumen,ethics, and ill-structured problems. Each active thread is championed by a small facultycommittee, charged with prompting and analyzing department reflections, moderating anddocumenting departmental discussions of results, and collecting and sharing evidence-basedpractices relevant to the thread. Each thread is following coordinated change processes acrossdimensions presented by Borrego and Henderson [2] in order to have a greater
that was required to correctly assemble a cookiesandwich that would meet all of the quality control requirements. In other cases, the approachesused to teach the volunteers (lecture v. demonstration) during the training period would cause thevolunteers to be confused or forget information about each person’s role. Throughout the project,communication topics such as learning styles and intercultural communication were discussed inclass to prepare students for the training period and assembly test. The goal of this project wasfor students to experience the importance of effective communication. A final presentation andreport provided an opportunity for the teams to reflect what went differently than they hadanticipated in the Cookie Sandwich
. Then for each factor participants will be asked how theyhave been influenced by their experiences in the ECE department. At this point, participants mayspeak on recent diversity and inclusion initiatives in the department, including the tip sheet anddiversity and inclusion design sessions put on by our larger NSF-funded study. Finally,participants will be asked how each factor could be improved for themselves or other ECEfaculty.It is possible that reflection during the interview itself will have some effect on participants’intention toward inclusive teaching. To observe this effect, participants will be asked to completean open-ended electronic survey question once before and once after the interview. Before theinterview, we will ask directly
documented stressors for engineering undergraduates [8, 18], theassociation of stress as part of engineering culture and how stress becomes normalized inengineering programs is understudied.The preliminary interview results suggest that engineering students are undereducated in terms ofmental health and available individual and institutional resources. Specifically, some participantscould not identify mental health and academic counseling resources readily available in theirengineering programs, suggesting a lack of accessibility. Participant responses also suggeststudents possess broad conceptualizations of stress, anxiety, and depression, as well as the effectsof each. Conceptualizations were nuanced and reflective of clinical definitions of these
students (92.8%). Persistence for years two and threeis also high, but indices beyond the 3rd year deteriorate. Institutional data shows an on-timegraduation rate of less than 10% and a graduation rate of roughly 50%. At UPRM, graduationrates show a decline of more than fifteen perceptual points across the years as denoted in Figure1. A snapshot of similar indicators in function of family income reveals that trends are markedlylower for students from low-income families, as seen in Figure 2 for data from 2016. AcknowledgmentThis research was supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. 1833869.Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the
the impact ofthe makerspace training and course integration. The responses reflect the familiarity withmakerspace equipment and learning process allowing completion of both coursework andextracurricular and personal projects.BackgroundProject-based courses and learning continue to increase in engineering programs and degrees, asuniversities seek to overhaul their curriculum, support different methods of teaching andlearning, and satisfy new ABET criteria [2]. To support these courses, new curricular programshave been developed such as the service design program, EPICS, at Purdue, and the VerticallyIntegrated Projects (VIP) program, started at Georgia Tech [3, 4]. These programs seek tosupport project-based learning from the cornerstone, first
leadersin the tech industry such as Samsung, LG, and Hyundai and engage in cultural experiences.IRiKA includes a series of professional development sessions on research mentorship andscience communication for both US participants and Korean partners.In this Work-in-Progress paper, the three US-based lead investigators report and reflect on thefirst year of the IRiKA program, which ran from June 2019 to August 2019. The investigatorsare currently analyzing data collected from the Summer 2019 cohort. In response to thepreliminary findings, adjustments have been made for the Summer 2020 program. Summer 2020applicant data collection has been completed. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, Summer 2020program was cancelled.IRiKA ProgramThe objectives of this
goals, and the academic work they will accomplish during their timeat Tufts. They have the opportunity to reflect and discuss topics including, but not limited todiscerning their major, exploring Study Abroad program options and applying for internships.They also spend time discovering different forms of research and talking with faculty about theirexperiences with research. Additionally, the scholars hone their writing, producing a personalstatement, updating & polishing their resume and cover letters, as well as perfecting the mannerin which they verbally express their goals and accomplishments.Since its inception, the RISE cohort has grown as the Center for STEM Diversity works withAdmissions to determine which students will be invited
process that begins with concrete experience to reflective observation, then toabstract conceptualization to active experimentation [8]. More simply, the learner experiences,reflects on the experience, learns from the experience, and finally has the opportunity to directlytest the new skills and/or knowledge firsthand. The summer camp activity model provides manyopportunities for facilitated experiential education activities in an informal and fun environmentwith a peer group which shares the experience together.Project-based learning is a model that organizes learning around complex tasks based onchallenging problems or questions that directly involve learners in problem-solving, decision-making, investigation, and design and culminating in
. call uncertainty. More generally,ambiguity by the students over the desired outcome reflects the ill-structuredness of theproblems.However, students also perceived a number of contextual factors as contributing to ambiguity. Ageneral lack of knowledge on their part was seen as creating ambiguity as to how to solve theproblem. From this perspective, ambiguity would decrease with experience, as noted by Dave. Ifgeneral knowledge is an aspect of ambiguity, then the differences between novices and expertsnoted in the literature could be taken as indications of more or less ambiguity in the problem-solving process. Another contextual factor was group problem-solving. The dynamics of groupinteractions can lead to ambiguity, when group members are
here and you just like push it until it forms to the shape of whatever you're molding. Um so the like thicker ones would slip out of the seal. So they weren't like sealing fully, they weren't making this like cone shape. Um and then the fitter- thinner ones were ripping before it got there. Um, so the polypropylene was actually the only one that created the shape that I was looking for.”Category 2. Practical knowledge. Below we describe three aspects of the ways students gainedpractical knowledge about equipment and experimentation.Engineering experimentation. Coming into the project, the students were unfamiliar withdesigning their own experiments. For example, in his interview Noah reflected on the challengeof
]). TABLE I. LITERATURE DEFINITIONS OF MENTORING Definition Source “a collaborative process in which mentees and mentors take part in reciprocal and dynamic activities [7, p. 35] such as planning, acting, reflecting, questioning, and problem-solving” “a form of teaching where faculty members provide advice, guidance, and counsel in the areas of academic, career, and personal (psycho-social) development, which can occur either individually or [11, p. 48] in small groups” “a dyadic, hierarchical
also reported that they wanted to see more time in the professionaldevelopment course focused on the professional side of engineering and integrating theseprofessional skills and reflections with the industry trips.Program feedback from the eighteen scholarship recipients in 2017 led to significant changes inthe professional development course in 2018. We selected industry trips with the mostengineering emphasis, increased emphasis on professional identity development, replacedLandis’ Studying Engineering [2] content with career development topics guided byCliftonStrengths assessment [3], added a hands-on team-building activity, increased mentoringopportunities between the project faculty and students, and increased integration of the
experiences was collected from intervention students and shadowed employees aftereach experience using a Qualtrics (online survey tool) questionnaire. Intervention students wereasked to list the activities they completed during shadowing. Common tasks (company tour,hands-on experience, reflection with co-op) were provided in a selection list and students couldinclude details about additional activities in an open-ended text box. Students were asked to ratehow they felt about the shadowing experience and how they felt about their interactions withtheir mentor (the shadowed employee). A text box was also provided for them to share othercomments about the shadowing experience.Shadowed employees were asked to list the activities completed during
understanding of empathy has also been pursued in the fields ofengineering and technology for purposes relating to the ability of robotic technologies to imitatehuman abilities [8]–[10]. In our study, we focus on the aspect of empathy research concernedwith the ability of people to consider how their decisions affect others.Service learning (S-L) is a well-studied approach to teaching and learning [11]–[16]. It is one ofseveral pedagogies for engaging students in learning. In this study, by service learning we meana learning environment where students are taking a course for credit, serving a community aspart of the course and reflecting on their experience also as a component of the course [12], [17].S-L has been identified as a helpful pedagogy for
Cycle”wherein multiple stages of learning are introduced. These stages are Concrete Experience,Reflective Observation, Abstract Conceptualization and Active Experimentation. According tothe theory, they create the “learning experience”. Armed with this information, the studyintroduces the concept of an E-Portfolio. This E-Portfolio provides users of remote labs with theability to record the work they performed and document their findings. The concept of thisportfolio does not stop at being a simple digital notebook, however. The study asserts that thisportfolio can be used by professors to check on students’ work or be opened to the public inorder to add a social dynamic. The study calls the social aspect a “community” and says that itcan
researchers observed that improving 3-Dvisualization leads to better performance in engineering graphics and in most other engineeringcoursework resulting in improved retention and graduation rates. The majority of the 3-Dvisualization exercises currently being used by students in Design and Graphics classes presentthe objects in isometric views already in 3-D, asking the viewer to create multiple views, foldpatterns, manipulate, reflect, or rotate them. Other exercises present the objects in incompletemulti-view projections and ask the students to add missing lines. The newly proposed methoduses a different approach. It uses the standard multi-view projections to show a number ofrectangular bricks arranged in various patterns. The viewer must count
assessed via observation during the simulation and others via evaluation of post-simulationreflective statements. Table 3 contains the parameters, their assessment area, and assessmentmethod.The ethical parameters assess each students ability to recognize the potential impacts of theirdecisions on society and their ability to identify a framework to ethically resolve the conundrum.Both were evaluated via student comments in a reflective exercise and are rated on a Likert scaleusing the guidelines in Table 4. The ethic assessment criteria (Criteria 1) was taken directly fromthe ethics assessment criteria used at our university assessment of student outcomes. The ethicalframework (Criteria 2) is a modified version of ethical frameworks from
%)represented at the workshop. The gender statistics reflect the gender breakdown at 2-yearcolleges generally.2018 Workshop evaluationA Post-Workshop survey was developed using the workshop survey instrument createdfor the prior PSE-2YC project and was administered immediately after the workshop tocollect faculty feedback on four different aspects of the workshop: ParticipantBackground and Attitude, Pre-workshop Preparation, Workshop Content (materials,presentations and other activities), and Workshop Outcomes. Participants were asked torate (from 1 to 5) various aspects of the workshop. The specific descriptive ratings thatcorrespond to the numeric ratings for each question are shown in the table.Participants rated the workshop, materials, and
of completingassignments and homework. Passive learners had characteristics of viewing coursecontent, but they expressed limited participation on course forum and assignmentcompletion. Community contributors also actively participated in course, but theirinterest was more inclined towards forum discussions.Chang (2015) focused on student learning styles. They found out that students who wereless interested in using technology were afraid of learning in technology environmentsand were at risk of discontinuing their involvement in the course. They named thesestudents low reflective learners and suggested to engage these students in group activitiesto enhance their participation in the course.The second emergent theme was factors which affect
observations of the instructor in class and the reflection reportswritten by the students that the Arch E students were working in teams more effectively than thestudents in the other programs. As reported in their reflection reports, the Arch E already knewhow to work well together and resolve conflicts, as they have been doing this since Day 1 withtheir studio course and the Arch E Design Days event they all undertake in the first week of class(Mui et al., 2019). Teamwork being one of the twelve outcomes that need to be addressed foraccreditation of an engineering program according to the Canadian engineering accreditationboard (CEAB, 2018), it is important to identify that this outcome is being addressed in theprogram. As the first years of all
material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. References[1] M. F. Fox, “Women and men faculty in academic science and engineering: Social- organizational indicators and implications,” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 997–101, 2010.[2] M. Sabharwal and E. A. Corley, "Faculty job satisfaction across gender and discipline," The Social Science Journal vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 539-556, September, 2009.[3] Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Postsecondary Teachers, on the Internet at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-training-and- library/postsecondary-teachers.htm
-indonesia-shares-experiences/article_a141ee08-66de-11e9-a6a0-5b654463377e.html[4] Thomas, D. Six Weeks in Kathmandu: Reflections of a Fulbright Specialist.https://amte.net/connections/2017/09/six-weeks-kathmandu-reflections-fulbright-specialist[5] F. Ortega, A. Leyton, F. Casanova. Design And Evaluation Of A Rail Made Of Carbon FiberReinforced Material For An External Fixation System, Dyna rev.fac.nac.minas vol.79 no.174.Medellín July/Aug. 2012.[6] A. F. Carrera. Desarrollo de un dispositivo de fijación externa para transporte yalargamiento óseo. School of Mechanical Engineering - College of Engineering.Universidad del Valle, Cali - Colombia 2016.[7] J. F. García. Desarrollo de un sistema de fijación externa en materiales compuestospara transporte
the The generator rotor needs to rotate to Turns Generator rotating blades will be transferred to convert mechanical energy into Rotor the generator by the gears. electrical energy. O.1.4 Generate The spinning turbine powers a robust The VAWT needs to have a practical Electricity generator, generating electricity for a use, and this reflects the primary useful purpose. purpose of the system. O.1.5 Light Emits The turbine will use the generated The generated electricity needs to be Through Bulb electricity to power a
Proximity SensorThe AutomationDirect CK2-CP-1H capacitive proximity sensor [8] has an 8 mm sensingdistance and consumes 530 mW (see Figure 5).Figure 5: Capacitive Proximity Sensor (AutomationDirect)A capacitive proximity sensor senses metals and non-metals [7]. This sensor has a normallyclosed output, so the output is off when it senses metal. Thus, the sensor output will be on whenthe hole in the disk is in line with the sensor.5.2.3 Photoelectric Retroreflective SensorThe AutomationDirect FBP-DP-0E retroreflective sensor [9] has a 2.5 m sensing distance andconsumes 480 mW (see Figure 6).Figure 6: Retroreflective Sensor and Retroreflector (AutomationDirect)A retroreflective sensor emits light that is reflected back to it by a retroreflector [7
think they are smart enough to be an engineer or not). To help the research teamnavigate this complex issue during the interviews, we added several follow-up questions to theinterview protocol (e.g., Earlier you said you believe “xxx” about your own smartness and “xxx’about you as an engineer (or engineering students); how are these two things related?).Furthermore, it seemed difficult for some of the participants to reflect upon and articulate howthey identify with engineering since as first-year students, they may in the very earliest stages oftheir engineering identity development. Further, some of the participants had yet to pick anengineering discipline, which is related to engineering identity. Therefore, we also added severalfollow-up
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Work in Progress: Impacting Students from Economically Disadvantaged Groups in an Engineering Career PathwayAbstractThis work in progress describes the overall initiative in the program for engineering access,retention, and low-income-student success. It discusses the program structure, implementationof activities, outcomes for the first of five years of project, and reflections on our initial findings.IntroductionThe Program for Engineering Access, Retention, and LIATS Success (PEARLS) was establishedwith the objective of increasing success statistics of low-income, academically talented students(LIATS) in the College of Engineering (CoE) of the University of Puerto
learning, and collaborative learning [3]. The skills gained by incorporatingthese approaches are critical for students looking to pursue a career in the construction industry.Felder et al. reinforced the notion that active learning is more effective than lecturing as studentscan gain a deeper understanding of the material [4]. They also stressed the importance of practiceand reflection in the learning process. Freeman et al. compared studies focused on undergraduatestudents in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) that used active learningtechniques and those that used traditional approaches [5]. Average examination scores increasedby 6% in the active learning sections, thus highlighting the importance of active learning inSTEM
Hat)Fig 3: Instructor Encouraged Student Participation (Fall 2018 without Top Hat)One of the primary expectations of this research was that if students participated in classmore, their learning would increase and this would be reflected in their final grades. Ananalysis of the class average grades before and during the Phase I pilot did not reflect anincrease in student’s average grades. (Fig 4)Fig 4: Average Grades (In Percent)7. Summary of Key Findings and Future ResearchSince the deployment, there have not been any significant quantitative impact achievedby using Top Hat. Student participation in the end of semester surveys is not mandatory.Even though students were strongly encouraged to participate. The participation duringthe Phase I
—engineeringfaculty, leadership faculty, and industry practitioners—brought their respective experiencetogether to determine the learning outcomes. The practitioners then developed teaching materialsusing their experience designing curriculum to help new college hires and interns succeed in theworkplace.This content was delivered by the practitioners, who were paid as adjunct instructors, in Fall2018 and Spring 2019. There were seven modules, described below, each of which consisted of atwo-hour lesson scheduled during the regular senior capstone lab period. Each module consistedof mini-lectures, applied learning activities, discussion and written reflection. During this year-long course, the 16 students were assigned to applied project teams and thus had