levels at the beginning of the proposed experiment. The instructors ensured that the subject matter covered in both learning methods was identical. The online and classroom section of all courses had the same syllabus, textbook, instructor, homework assignments, exams and week by week schedule. Online learning modules for each chapter were made available to the students in-sync with the weekly material prescribed in the syllabus for each course. In the onsite version of each course, the instructor assured keeping pace with the syllabus. The pre-recorded online lectures were not made available to the students in the on-site sections of the courses. Thus the students had the same amount of time to work on homework and
students took ownership over the course syllabus and explored,debated, and defined which topics should be covered, while examining their own assumptions,background, and culture [14]. To this day, the experience in the Rhetoric course is oftendescribed as a moment of true co-design.In the engineering realm, a group of students took part in a course called Creating & Making. Inthe course, students worked in small groups throughout the term to build toys to teach eight-year-olds about a topic of their choice [15]–[17]. Students learned about the user-centered designprocess, ideation techniques, modern fabrication technologies (including CAD), and scrummethodology. Importantly, these kinds of project-based experiences are a part of the
student artifacts used in the assessment, courseinformation such as syllabus and course grades, and the instructor’s assessment of thecompetencies being measured in that course, including a discussion of any in which targets arenot met. An example of the reports produced, which also include a file listing of relevant artifactsand course information, is given in the appendix. These files were stored on CDs, and wereevaluated by the computer engineering assessment committee at the beginning of the followingsemester. Any recommendations for improvement, either from the course instructor or from thecommittee, were documented in the meeting minutes, which were stored with the other ABETassessment files.This process was developed and some assessment
report the results oflaboratory activities and projects in various formats that require strong communication skills.Much of the knowledge, skills, and abilities students gain in this class is used during the yearlongcapstone course the following year in the recommended curriculum.IntroductionThe stated purpose of the Thermal Fluid Science lecture and lab course is for students to learnskills and gain a level of knowledge that will allow them to be successful in laboratory and testsettings in industry and academia. The learning outcomes stated in the course syllabus are: - Students will: 1. Be able to design experiments to characterize a temperature, pressure, mass flow rate within a region of fluid, system or subsystem
certain assignments weren't always specified” Category of Investigation: Team Teaching Increase coordination between instructors and among modules; share content; Construct consider one overarching syllabus “Sharing materials and assignment information between modules” Example Excerpts “Having the previous module instructor provide a brief outline of assignments and major takeaways from the course to the upcoming instructor” Category of Investigation: Thematic Approach Construct Increase clarity in connection between modules “Some modules were in continuity others weren't” Example Excerpts
081 was that the instructor, who read and replied to the extra credit journal entries, addedtokens to the students stash (a column in the online grade center) whenever they earned a newtoken. The teaching assistant removed tokens whenever the students requested to use them, as wellas took care of all report grading. Without a trusted, well-organized and consistent teachingassistant who understands the educational value of this grading system with whom communicationis open and honest, this system will become difficult.IV. Implementation Changes in Future Course OfferingsEven though specs grading was positively received and succeeded in achieving the hoped outcome,some students (three) raised the issue of perceived performance pressure and
Paper ID #29904Improving student accessibility, equity, course performance, and labskills: How introduction of ClassTranscribe is changing engineeringeducation at the University of IllinoisProf. Lawrence Angrave, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Lawrence Angrave is an award winning Fellow and Teaching Professor at the department of computer sci- ence at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). His interests include (but are not limited to) joyful teaching, empirically-sound educational research, campus and online courses, computer sci- ence, unlocking the potential of underrepresented minorities
focuses on model-based reasoning and conservation principles (mass, energy, etc.). An NSF grant funded courserelease time for instructors and support from learning scientists in order to integrate inclusiveengineering skills into the course design.The course redesign team chose to focus on the awareness of bias and its effects on technicalmodeling. An additional goal was building interpersonal skills at the dyad and team (2-4 people)level, although this second goal is not the focus of this paper. Both goals were incorporated intothe formal syllabus and course objectives. The new learning objectives are addressed not inseparate lectures about inclusivity, etc. but via changes to the context of the analytical problemsbeing solved. For instance, a
more severe. Onecurrent type of violation is contract cheating, first coined by Lancaster and Clarke in 2006, whichinvolves paying a third-party to complete an assignment instead of the student enrolled in theclass [4]. Some researchers have even discovered “ghost students,” in which a fee is paid foranother person or company to enroll in an online course for an entire semester on behalf ofsomeone else [5]. Even though contract cheating and ghost-students are extremely severeviolations because of the awareness of the deviousness of the act, the underlying motivations forthese types of violations often reflect the same causes as other forms of academic integrityviolations [4].Students have cited a variety of motivations for engaging in academic
Senior Design project model, it was an elective for the architecturestudents, and the civil engineering students enrolled in a separate Civil Engineering SeniorDesign course with a separate syllabus. The faculty leader had to navigate the varyingrequirements, values, and deliverables of each course. It was intended that each discipline withinthe team would have a faculty mentor within their department to answer more detailed questionsand to receive critiques, but for many teams that did not happen. To further complicate theprocess, due to students’ varying schedules, meeting times were set by the students just once aweek for one hour. Larger teams were not able to establish an overlapping hour within the week,so they were divided into sub-teams
, students are expected to create a display (poster, brochure, animations, or video)that visually communicates how an engineered system of their choice works. While the studentswork individually on the displays for each unit, they collaborate with peers in the class tobrainstorm ideas, improve drafts and evaluate the final projects. Engineered systems that studentshave selected to explain include clocks, LED lights, bicycle gears, stethoscopes, games,thermometers, wind turbines, photovoltaics, and more. The course syllabus is provided inAppendix A.In addition to the projects, each unit includes introductory lectures related to engineering,sketching lessons and exercises, hands-on building projects, and reverse engineering activities.The following
used toengage underprepared students while creating an inclusive whole-group discussion. Theassessment of the pre-class preparation on student engagement and learning has been shown tobe impactful [34]. This course included a total of eight assignments over the course of thesemester. Three assignments required students to work with peer-reviewed scientific articles onair pollution health impacts, hazardous waste, and ethical case studies. Two assignments taskedstudents to do mini research: personal water footprint and waste analysis of a fast foodrestaurant. In addition, three purely pedagogical homework tasks were assigned to develop self-regulation of learning, such as syllabus review, letter to future self, and mid semester evaluation[32
Computing in Engineering is a course required for all 200 engineering students ata research university in Massachusetts. In the last few years, the course underwent a transitionfrom a large, lecture-based course taught by one professor to several smaller sections taught bydifferent professors, each using their own instructional technique. In the spring of 2019, fourprofessors taught the Introduction to Computing Course using three different instructionalmethods. All courses had the same syllabus goals, outlined in Table 1 below. Table 1. Course Goals (as defined in the 2019 syllabi) Overall Goal Key ComponentsFluency in a Master basic Know common Use good code Plan
designing it to be suitable for online instruction. The course was designedin a modular construction, with each unit paired with an experiment focusing on a set ofexperimental design concepts, enabling the course to be studied online and asynchronously. Eachof the four modules focuses on learning objectives grouped around a subset of key experimentaldesign concepts, shown in Table 2.Table 2: Example of Mechanical Engineering SEEF work to support active learning in ME2 Learning Objective Experimental Problem Experiment Connection Solving Concept FocusUnderstand frameworks and systemicapproaches to the design and Goal, Hypothesis, Variables, All
format. For example, in a face-to-face format, collaboration and pairprogramming works well. Some instructors have even been successful implementing distributedpair programming in an online course [5]. However, in a flexible schedule, online format (Flex),the implementation of these activities is particularly challenging. In the Flex format, studentsstart the course at different points in the semester, work at their own pace and may not beworking on the same module at the same time. The asynchronous nature of the class makes itparticularly difficult for students to interact with each other. We propose the use of discussionboards within the learning management system to help create peer-to-peer code sharingexperiences in a Flex class. In this
model”, Engineering Design GraphicsJournal, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 5-14, Fall 1991.[10] Engage. (2009-2019). “Spatial visualization skills,” [Online] Available: Engage,https://www.engageengineering.org . [Accessed Jan 29, 2020].[11] A. Friess, E. L. Martin, I. E. Esparragoza and O. Lawanto, “Improvements in student spatial visualization in anintroductory engineering graphics course using open-ended design projects supported by 3-D printedmanipulatives,” In Proceedings of the 2016 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, NewOrleans, LA, USA, June 26-29, 2016. USA: American Society of Engineering Education, 2016.[12] D. I. Miller and D. F. Halpern, “Spatial thinking in Physics: Longitudinal impacts of 3-D spatial training
confronting issues related to inclusion. The department undergoes annual review byexternal evaluators Inverness Research. The 2019 review revealed instances where students didnot feel included. These situations involved faculty, staff, and students. Since becoming aware ofthe situations, the department has spent considerable time addressing inclusivity. All facultyattended microaggression and inclusion training (see below). Inclusion training has been addedto the new vertically integrated design project courses (see below) that will be required of allstudents. One faculty piloted a syllabus that includes a policy on microaggressions andharassment. The Department has prompted University’s Center for Teaching and Learning tolead the establishment of a
structures and the people who use them.The idea is summarized in a graphic syllabus (see Figure 1), as well as the standard courseoutline provided to the students (see Figure 2). Figure 1: Graphic SyllabusFigure 2: Standard Course OutlineIn order to make the tour more authentic, country themes were added to the handouts used by theinstructor and where possible, real-world examples were mimicked so students could readily seethe applications of the different analysis techniques being learned. In addition, the pictures ofstructures selected not only were there to inspire the students, but could act as talking points todiscuss the country’s culture during class and to maybe highlight key societal differences or inthe
Mathematical Sciences reviewed andrefined three mathematics gateway courses offered at the State Colleges (Trigonometry, Pre-Calculus, Calculus I). Note: The mathematics faculty decided to leave College Algebra for aseparate discussion which is currently taking place. The course refinement process consisted of acritical review of the different course syllabi used at the State Colleges followed by consensus ona common refined syllabus for each course that emphasized the core mathematical concepts andtheir sequencing so as to provide a well-thought-out conceptual instructional framework for eachcourse. The general framework for the course refinement process can be found in Appendix A.Using the refined course syllabi completed in year 2, State College
complete several data collectionand analysis activities including:1. Content analysis of AM course syllabi will be used to develop lists of skills gained by students who successfully complete AM coursework. The unit of analysis is a syllabus from an individual course. All occupational completion points, student performance outcomes, or standards and/or certifications covered in the material will be analyzed through an iterative process using the codebook derived from relevant national, state, and professional standards and industry certifications. Researchers will also use established instruments to measure the extent to which the new professionals report entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial intentions [27-29]. In addition to
anddepartments as well; recent non-engineering participants have included pharmacy, animalsciences, and exercise physiology students. The course has also recently expanded to includestudents from a second university as well as online distance students that span four time-zones.Adding students from a variety of locations and disciplines has increased diversity among thestudents’ educational backgrounds and interests (both as undergraduates and graduates). Thediversity of the students’ skills and knowledge fosters multidisciplinary collaboration within thecourse itself and enhances innovative problem solving as each student can offer their ownresources and expertise to the class.In this model, each student is responsible for proposing a potential team
Immerwahr at Villanova University [36] andshown in Table 5 [40]. A copy of this rubric was included in the course syllabus to communicatediscussion expectations to students.All FYS courses at Lafayette College are writing courses, and the St. Martin’s Handbook [41] isused as a secondary text for students learning academic writing skills. They employ a process-writing approach in which students submit first drafts which they then revise after feedback froma peer Writing Associate and the instructor.The first writing assignment, which is given out during the first week of class, asks students toreflect on their own lived experience with semiconductor technology in terms of how they learnand work, communicate with friends and family, and seek
reveals that students were very positive aboutthe focus on a real-life engineering design project. As institutions of higher education considermethods of engaging typically under-represented youth in engineering, this project provides auseful model as to what can be achieved by students.Appendix A - Grant Logic ModelAppendix B-- Details about Each Cohort Cohort 1 OverviewThe first cohort met at the university from mid-fall of 2013 to April of 2014. This cohort wasenrolled for transferable credit in the College of Engineering freshman design course taught by auniversity instructor who also taught this course concurrently with university freshman. Theprogram course used the same syllabus, projects and metrics as the college level course, but
Paper ID #28865 education (OBE) workshop. He manages the PhD in Computing programme and has been implementing OBE to design curriculum and courses, contributing to its successful accreditation. He serves as a pan- ellist in the accreditation of various programmes and courses. He publishes research works in the areas of applied artificial intelligence, networking, as well as information and communications technology in education.Dr. Ing. Joao Ponciano P.E., University of Glasgow Eur. Ing. Dr. Jo˜ao Ponciano (CPE, LLB (Hons), M.Eng (Hons) , M.A. (Distinction), PhD, FIET, C.Eng, MBCS, CITP, SFHEA, MIEEE, FinstLM) started his career as a researcher for the International Or- ganisation for Nuclear Research (CERN) in
teaching. • Design of an effective class: students will be able to establish learning outcomes, align assessments with course outcomes, align activities and assignments with course outcomes, and prepare an effective syllabus. • Creation of a productive learning environment: students will be able to promote a civil and engaging learning environment and embrace diversity in course planning and activities, use concept maps and other visualization tools, and develop self-directed learners. • Active learning techniques: students will be able to implement flipped classroom approach and create active learning opportunities in lecture courses. • Technology in teaching: students will be able to understand the
. Thegoal of the lecture was to reinforce topics already outlined in the course syllabus while onlypresenting additional information, if it was absolutely necessary for students to understandaspects of the modules. Some of the topics already incorporated into the course curriculuminclude linear equations and matrices, eigenvalues, eigenvectors, and singular valuedecomposition. The lecture focused on methods for gathering data and representing such data inthe form of matrices and the utilization of basic applications of linear algebra on said matrices.The primary source for such data was www.data.gov and similar sites. In addition, students werepresented with the PageRank algorithm and a scenario utilizing it. Lastly, the lecture introducedthe topic
department also emphasizes service in the formof providing the materials necessary for everyday life.The statistically significant changes consistently noted in the Marietta classes deserve specialattention. While it could be partially due to the relatively lower scores with which studentsbegan, the course was different from the others in the study in substantive ways. It serves as aFirst Year Seminar (FYS), and the 2019 syllabus describes the course to students as encouraging“self-discovery and an awareness of your strengths and interests. It provides opportunities foryou to reflect on and make connections between your General Education classes, coursework inyour major(s) and minor(s), and your lives beyond the classroom. The FYS challenges you
; ● Outcome 5: An ability to function effectively as a member of a technical team.Project Specifications: In addition to a course syllabus, a detailed document specifying theproject requirements is provided to the students in the first semester of the project. The projectchallenges have gradually increased over the past three years and are described in the followingparagraphs.In spring 2018, as a pilot project, three teams consisting of EET and MET students were formed.The teams were assigned to procure an off-the-shelf RC car and integrate autonomous navigationcapability with obstacle avoidance as part of the capstone project. The duration of the projectwas for one semester. The design challenge was to include “high speed” as the main
contribute tothe development of self-efficacy, CS/M identity, and sense of belonging?" As discussed below,current research efforts are focusing on the effects of the seminars and the mentoring aspect ofthe program.The second main research theme of the project is the effect of early CS exposure (courseworkand career awareness in freshman year) on computer science and math majors. For CS/MScholars, the early exposure to CS consists of the first-quarter CS seminar, a first course inprogramming the following quarter, and program events where career opportunities in CS arediscussed. Because many incoming freshmen have limited knowledge of CS, early CS exposuremay attract such students to CS. Evidence from our previous S-STEM project indicates that