ofobjectives, CATME peer evaluationdata from both years was used toevaluate whether students believetheir team members i) possessedrelated knowledge, skills, andabilities and ii) contributed todeliverables (objective 1). CATMEalso rated how efficiently the Fig. 2: SPOC subteam communication dynamicsubteams communicated relative to 2018-2019 results with the embedded ID team structure.End-of-semester reflections for both years and a survey in the fall of 2019 (Appendix B)provided more data on task allocation and subteam communication.Results and Discussion:Objective 1: CATME peer evaluation data reported that engineers scored higher than IDs (bothyears) and point differentials were slightly but not statistically less (two-sided t-test, α
aspect of human dimension (both self and others) in a science/engineering course like MS can be a daunting task. Learning outcomes could be “activelyparticipate in class discussions; avoid plagiarism in report writing and properly cite publishedsources; work in teams on mini-project, swapping roles as team member and leader; andconduct peer assessment of project team members.” Learning activities could be lecture andclass discussion on team work, and professional and ethical responsibility (includingplagiarism, citation and referencing); and project presentations and discussions. Assessmentmethods could be keeping records of active class participation (individual and group); recordsof meetings with project teams for individual and team work
involvedin traditional lecture were found to be 1.5 times more likely to fail as compared to those in classes withsignificant active learning. Some of the active learning techniques are peer review, flipped classrooms,hands-on technology, and cooperative group problem solving. Here is a brief description of thesemethods [10].In “peer review”, students are asked to complete an individual homework assignment or short paper. Onthe day the assignment is due, students submit one copy to the instructor to be graded and one copy totheir partner. Each student then takes their partner's work and, depending on the nature of theassignment, gives critical feedback, and corrects mistakes in content and/or grammar.In the “flipped classroom”, class time is devoted
have long struggled to create inclusive and equitable learningenvironments, and many engineering administrators remain skeptical about the benefits of suchinitiatives [1]. Thus, most of such work has been spearheaded by administrative groups such asdepartments of Diversity and Inclusion and Gender Studies who typically seek to promote equitythrough changes to broader institutional culture [2-4]. Student classroom experiences, however,remain relatively neglected and thus such efforts rarely inspire STEM faculty buy-in.Consequently, students from historically underrepresented groups, especially students perceivedto have lower social capital than their peers, may still face disparities in their classroomexperiences, disparities that may include
undergraduate teaching assistantships in the flipped classroom, anenvironment in which TAs take on a more important role than in a traditional classroom. Flippedlearning builds upon active learning, a constructivist approach to learning that emphasizeslearning by doing [18-20]. Active learning is based on the principles that students are activelyresponsible for their own learning within a collaborative process with peers and tutors [21].Flipped learning takes this further by moving the passive and individual-focused parts of STEMlearning – the first introduction to the material – out of the classroom entirely. This frees classtime to be devoted to interactive activities, such as problem-based learning, that reinforce coursematerial without sacrificing
populations, i.e. students who tend to be first generation, minorities, and/orcommuters. These universities encounter similar challenges in first-year retention and graduationrates, especially in the STEM disciplines. As they strive to improve the first year engineeringand/or mathematics student experience at their campuses, they have engaged in differentapproaches; including Peer Led Team Learning (PLTL), formation of an Engineering LearningCommunity (ELC), and engaging students in outreach as STEM Ambassadors. Incorporatingthese individual strengths with new activities that will be shared across institutions, the team iscurrently embarking on a multi-year research project to uncover how students develop STEMidentity in an urban context, identify
approach to build competence. A workshop method was designed andused for the students to gain competence in more than ten conceptual design methods. Thestudents produced the designs in two steps: first as small groups producing the design andpresenting to the peers and a panel of judges for critiquing and in the second rectifying theshortcomings identified from the presentations and feedback from judges. In the subsequentexamination, majority of the students performed well in the question relating to the activitiessurrounding the workshop. The results obtained from this study suggest that Workshopmethod can be an effective method to teach large number of conceptual design methods to aheterogeneous group of students.Key words: Conceptual Design
underrepresented students develop the skills and writing habits to complete doctorate degrees in engineering. Across all of her research avenues, Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 12 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award with her share of funding be ingnearly $2.3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 21 journal publications and more than 70 conference papers. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty, an Outstanding Teacher Award and a Faculty Fellow Award. She holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Cornell University, an M.S. in Materials Science from the University of Connecticut and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue
and communication with technical and non-technical peers. Students worked in teamsof three and four to solve ill-defined problems presented by the instructor. Topics coveredConstruction Waste, Energy Efficiency in Buildings, Recycling Education, PublicTransportation, and Campus Transit. Deliverables, including a technical report, an oralpresentation, and an analytical reflection, were used as data for this project. Students weresurveyed to assess their perceptions of problem-based learning. There were seventy-twoparticipants over three semesters. One preliminary result from both the survey and qualitativedata is that students felt confident about working with others from different disciplines. Studentsmostly commented positively about their
andwith their faculty mentor, as this has been shown by prior works to be a good way to improvepersistence and success [7], [12], [16]. Faculty mentors also selected an upper-divisionundergraduate student to serve as a teaching assistant and peer mentor during the activity. Thefaculty mentor, peer mentor, and participants received a stipend for participating in the program.The last half-day of the program was a career skills workshop organized by CSUB’s careereducation center. Students learned skills related to resume writing, job searching, and interviewsfrom career counselors. Students were also introduced to CSUB’s job portal.Assessment ToolsAcademic progress of all participants was monitored through CSUB’s enrollment managementsystem. Grant
involving large datasets Writing First year • Receive writing feedback from peers and Community consultants • Develop writing skillsParticipants We conducted interviews with participants who were in the 2017 or 2018 cohorts duringsummer 2019, i.e., participants who recently completed two-year D3EM program trainingrequirements. All students in the 2017 and 2018 cohorts were invited to participate in aninterview. Three cohorts of students have completed at least one year in the program. Studentsmay still participate in D3EM activities after the two-year training. All participants werecurrently in their 3rd or 4th year in
of this NRT, the main goalof which is to generate an innovative model for STEM graduate student training by identifyingand implementing the most effective tools for the training of STEM professionals. In futurecontributions, we intend to showcase data from the NRT, focusing on the evaluation of itsconstituent parts.Briefly, this multi-year academy includes two required courses (one focused on research-relatedcontent and another on transferrable skills) and two elective courses, which together constitutethe basis of a graduate certification. Other features include two summer internships (one inter-departmental and one at an external institution), peer mentoring of subsequent trainee cohorts,and initiatives including collaborative research
quizzes. Activereadings serve as pre-work, as mentioned in section 3, to prepare students for completing in-classactivities by enhancing their foundational knowledge, especially the remembering andunderstanding levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (BT) [34, 35] for relevant concepts. Next, we have arange of in-class activities where students follow guided instructions and discuss with peers intheir small groups. During each of these in-class activities, students perform at least one of thefollowing tasks: code completion, code snippet debugging, answering multiple-choice questions,writing pseudocode, and drawing flowcharts. Each of these tasks falls under different BT’scategories, demands the use of different skills, and requires students to pay attention
has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert systems for space station, manufacturing equipment models, and architected complex IT systems for global collaboration that included engagement analytics. She holds a US Patent # 7904323, Multi-Team Immersive Integrated Collaboration Workspace awarded 3/8/2011. She also has twenty-five peer-reviewed publications. She has
approximately 700 grant proposals, including co-writing, editing and serving as the Program Manager for 9 awarded STEM educa- tion grants totaling more than $14M. She has collaborated with University offices, faculty and staff in the facilitation of recruitment strategies to increase the quality and quantity of undergraduate and graduate enrollment in STEM programs. Ms. Ward now manages the fundraising and grant writing for CAS- TLE and ExPERTS programs, including assisting with hiring and overseeing awarded projects as well as coordinating program evaluation.Dr. Adam K Fontecchio, Drexel University Dr. Adam Fontecchio is a Professor in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at Drexel University, and is the
assigned as her peer mentor. A shared workspace and regularone-on-one meetings between the two librarians facilitated greater collaboration in reference,instruction, and collection development. Both librarians learned more about specialized resourceswith which they had been less familiar. For instance, the engineering librarian gained newexpertise in market research and shared knowledge about patent searching with the businesslibrarian. Their closer working relationship led to a partnership in support of entrepreneurship oncampus. They developed and presented a faculty workshop on entrepreneurship research and arecurrently collaborating on a series of instructional videos on the subject.Literature ReviewA review of the literature found several
frequently usedskills such as technical writing, presentation of calculations, and creation and iteration of drawingusing CAD or 3D modeling packages. This cycle also challenges students in leadership positionsto design assignments for their peers on a variety of topics and for a variety of project phases.These students must critically assess the project’s scope and fit the work to be done into week-by-week assignments.Though the projects completed in Humanitarian Design Projects are community-basedinfrastructure in nature, the model described in this paper has significant potential forimplementation with other PBL opportunities that are typically excluded from the classroom, suchas extracurricular engineering project and competition clubs. The
, due before the accompanying lecture) allowed us to eliminate several lectures in the firstfew weeks of the course, as these were previously simply rehashing information in the textbook.In addition, the introduction of peer-grading of a follow-up assignment (after students havereceived feedback on the first assignment) has reduced the workload for the professors whilesimultaneously enriching the amount and quality of feedback most students receive.Students had long requested the addition of industrial or other externally sponsored projects.While this was relatively labor-intensive in the first year (making contacts, writing contracts), ithas been a highly rewarding exercise for everyone—nevertheless, the authors recommendkeeping a professor
, writing vsworked problems, etc.) has had mixed resulted in the literature[6], [7], [16], [17], [8]–[15]. Whenhomework has been used effectively, it typically required a grade[18], self or peer review[19] anduses metacognitive tools[1], [20]. Chickering and Gamson established seven principles for goodpractice in undergraduate education[21]. This study directly follows one (give prompt feedback)and indirectly supports three of the principles (develop cooperation among students, encouragesactive learning, and communicates high expectations).Homework facilitates learning and it can also be used to assess learning. Students can demonstratetheir mastery of concepts, while self-study allows them to apply knowledge in new ways onproblem sets. The
passenger.Students will need to collaborate on this challenge, follow Students will be able to...the steps in the engineering design process, and work Collaborate with peers to complete an engineeringunder real-world constraints of time, resources, and an challengeadditional element in order to complete this challenge. Employ the skills they have learned about engineering and other skills to complete the task Grade Level: Designed for 8th grade students. Goal: Apply what we have learned about Work under constraints and experience how constraints engineering and empathy into a real
solution card were available for each room; however, each hint added a time penalty (inminutes) equal to the total number of hints/solution cards used to the elapsed time. Additionally,a 30-second time penalty was assessed for each incorrect answer. Students were provided with aformula sheet, and were encouraged to use a calculator, blank paper, and writing utensils.The class consisted of 17 teams of 3-4 students. All teams successfully escaped all 6 rooms in anaverage (h:mm:ss) of 0:43:50 [range: 0:14:30-1:07:28]. Very few groups used hints, as moststudents did not want to be assessed a time penalty. None of the teams used a solution card toautomatically bypass a room without solving the puzzle.Our MATLAB-based escape room challenged students to
, and tools required for classes are provided. The following are key software and servicesprovided.Software § eBooks in one Platform – Vital Source § Microsoft Office 365 § Educational Apps § Productivity AppsServices § Video Production § Closed Captioning § Mobile Device Management § Help DeskAsynchronous LearningThe entire system is set up to be asynchronous learning. This means students can log-in anytime,plan class deadlines around business travel and office projects. Student peer learning experienceis enhanced through discussion boards and group projects, all of which can be accessedasynchronously. Students can also access the MID's course contents and dedicated student servicesusing the mobile platform. These includes
process in which faculty are engaged inongoing evaluation of what their students are supposed to learn, what they are actually learning,what evidence-based pedagogical approaches will help their students get to their goals, and howthese factors inform one another [6, 7]. To participate in the course transformation program,engineering faculty had to write a proposal for the courses they wanted to redesign, withendorsement from the department chair. Faculty who participated were expected to evaluate anddisseminate the outcomes of their course transformations to other faculty in their department,especially when other faculty were to teach these redesigned courses. Active learning approachessuch as student response systems, interactive digital
. The goal is to encourage students to step back, as it were, and reflect on things thatwent well and things that didn’t go so well; we also encourage them to consider ways to avoidsuch pitfalls in the future and build on what they’ve learned. For example, the portfolioassignment asks students (as part of the assignment) to provide thoughtful responses to whateach of them has learned about their strengths and weaknesses as a writer (such as their use oflanguage, organizing their writing effectively, and developing clarity in their writing), and whatareas each of them will continue to work on as they move forward. We also ask them to considerthe value of the two peer reviews we have conducted during two writing labs, where studentsboth give and
completed by both a testand control group. They found the faceted taxonomy was useful for categorizing the sourcesused for the assignment, understanding the assignment was geared toward online sources and hadno requirement to use scholarly sources. For this pilot study, 30 bibliographies were scored.Rosenzweig, Thill, and Lambert [7] adapted the same faceted taxonomy to assess researchpapers in an English writing course. Their goal was to better understand the sources selected bystudents and how they determined authority. They chose to use only the facets for authoridentity, editorial process, and publication purpose. They did not use the numerical scores usedby Leeder, Markey, and Yakel [6] instead taking a more descriptive approach. They scored
nanoscale surface corrugation for enhanced light trapping for pho- tovoltaic devices; and (4) microsphere-based manufacturable coatings for radiative cooling. He has close to 70 publications in peer-reviewed journals and over 200 invited/contributed papers at academic insti- tutions, national laboratories, and conferences. He received a UNM Junior Faculty Research Excellence Award in 2005 and an NSF Career Award in 2001. He is a recipient of STC.UNM Innovation Award consecutively from 2009 to 2018, and he was elected as the 2018 STC.UNM Innovation Fellow. Dr. Han holds 17 UNM-affiliated U.S. patents and 6 pending U.S. and PCT patent applications. He currently serves as the Chief Technical Officer of Osazda Energy LLC, a
SummariesModule 1 - research web jigsawBy the end of module 1, students should be able to examine and qualify facets of the designproblem through independent and collaborative research as well as explore and discussdissenting views.TeamingMaximum 25 students in the classTeams are formed in the beginning of class, through Purdue’s CATME tool4 to 5 students in the team, stays in the same team the whole semesterDeliverables and student assessmentTeams will write a Problem Definition Statement together, assessed through the class’ peerfeedback (formative)Final problem definitions will later have a summative grade in a deliverable separate to thesemodules, but related to the course, i.e. instructor check-inDeployment/resourcesJigsaw: students will be divided
an introductory course in engineering fundamentals atthe J. B. Speed School of Engineering (SSoE) at the University of Louisville (UofL). The course,titled Engineering Methods, Tools, and Practice II (ENGR 111), is the second component of atwo-course sequence and is primarily focused on application and integration of fundamentalengineering skills introduced and practiced in the first component of the sequence (ENGR 110).Fundamental skills integrated within ENGR 111 include 3D printing, basic research fundamentals,circuitry, communication, critical thinking, design, engineering ethics, hand tool usage, problemsolving, programming, project management, teamwork, and technical writing. The course isrequired for all first-year SSoE students (no
and with what levels of effectiveness. For that research, we will seekadditional funding to study how teachers use and apply these materials. References1. S. E. Lopez, W. H. Goodridge, M. Tajvidi, K. H. Becker, Assessing the Need for Professional Development in Engineering Among Ru-ral High School Science Teachers (Fundamental) (2017).2. T. Porter, M. E. West, R. L. Kajfez, K. L. Malone, K. E. Irving, The effect of teacher professional development on implementing engineering in elementary schools. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER) 9, 5 (2019).3. K. Eby, The Essential Guide to Writing S.M.A.R.T. Goals 2019 (2019).4. T. J. Moore, A. W. Glancy, K. M. Tank, J. A
with similarconcerns.Observation of an Excellent TeacherWhile the weekly sessions provide exposure to teaching theory, pedagogy, and research, it isalways beneficial to see good teaching practices implemented in a real classroom. We recruitexcellent teachers to open up their classrooms to the new instructors. Every year, we schedulevisits to about 15 engineering instructors who have been identified as excellent by their studentsand peers. The new faculty sign up, in small groups, to visit these role models. An instructionaldevelopment specialist accompanies them on the visits to help guide the observation and debriefafterward. Every semester, we also reserve time in the weekly seminar to further discuss theexcellent teacher visits and