Paper ID #17746Self-Reflection Assignments for Evaluating Non-Technical Skills and SettingGoals for Professional DevelopmentDr. Ashlee Nicole Ford Versypt, Oklahoma State University Dr. Ashlee N. Ford Versypt is an assistant professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University. She earned her Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in ChE at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign and her B.S. at the University of Oklahoma. She also conducted postdoctoral research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her research focuses on developing computational models for systems biomedicine & pharmaceutics and
Paper ID #20531Can structured reflection enhance learning in a heat and mass transfer course?Dr. Heather Chenette, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Heather Chenette is an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Tech- nology. Her professional interests include enhancing student learning in the classroom and creating op- portunities for students to learn about membrane materials and bioseparation processes through research experiences. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Can structured reflection enhance learning in a heat and mass
feel solely through written communication so their team could correctlyidentify the liquid without ever seeing it.Reflection-based homework assignments were developed to obtain students’ perception of thesegame-based communication activities as prior research showed that use of these game-basedcommunication activities resulted in positive improvement in both students’ oral and writtencommunication skills. The coding scheme for the reflections was developed using a grounded,emergent qualitative analysis. The reflections were then content analyzed by two analysts. Aninter-rater reliability measure based on Cohen’s Kappa was calculated for each game-basedactivity. The inter-rater reliability for the “Professional Slide,” “ROYGBIV,” and
immediate feedback on their numerical work,and encourage them to think about what they are learning through instructor graded metacognitive andreflection questions. These metacognitive questions are normally absent in other systems.The time investment to use the problems from the repository is minimal, and these problems can be usedin any desired quantity to supplement or replace the instructor’s current homework problems. For theinstructors using the computer-based option, the numerical parts of the problems are “machine graded”thus saving the grader time and allowing the grader to spend a larger percentage of their time assessingthe students’ higher level thinking skills demonstrated in the reflection questions. In addition, studentrating of the
sameexperiments as demonstrations. Both treatments were accompanied with the same pre-labprediction questions and post-lab assessment and reflection questions, which kept student timedevoted to each activity similar. Students performing the experiment in small groups scoredhigher on the concept inventory than did students who watched a demonstration (24.7-percentagepoint increase relative to 16.9-percentage point increase) although both groups improvedsignificantly relative to their pre-test scores. Analysis of the student reflection questions mirroredthis trend, with students performing experiments answering the reflection questions more fullyand more correctly than students who watched the demonstration.Introduction and BackgroundIn the past five years
usage, e.g., video views, onlinehomework responses, course management system’s file downloads, reflective textbookcommenting, etc. [7-15]. Student engagement with new technologies does not seems to be adetractor; one recent study found a growing majority of current engineering students, sometimescalled digital natives, prefer interactive or electronic textbooks [16, 17]. With detailed data nowavailable, new research questions related to textbook usage can be formulated and tested.While portable electronics became relatively inexpensive and multifunctional, the price oftextbooks rose to more than $200 for a traditional hardcover engineering textbook. Some studentsopt to use the Internet for free rather than add hundreds of dollars of books to
, skills, and ability to solve complexproblems and to produce excellent solution(s) within the structure of the team. This concept wasfurther developed to include defining team and task, team climate, communication, and reflection(for a detailed description, please see Table 1)23-26.Design competence focused on finding and evaluating variants and recognizing and solvingcomplex design problems. These were further defined as having the ability to discover and designmultiple solutions to a given problem and to effectively evaluate those solutions to determine thebest solution, and having the ability to see the overall picture of a complex design problem, thenbreaking it into smaller, more manageable parts to solve while keeping the overall problem
, group C was assigned paper homework and group D wasassigned WeBWorK.On the day of the quiz, homework was collected at the start of the class period. To ensure thatquiz score would reflect the student’s understanding gained from the homework, both instructorsrefrained from answering any questions prior to and during the short 10-20 minute quiz(instructors could clarify problem statements but refrained from giving hints during the quiz).The quizzes were graded by a common third-party (neither instructor) grader under a specificcommon rubric. The grader had no previous knowledge of which test groups students belongedto during the grading of the quizzes. To verify the effects of either homework format on quizgrades, any quiz grades belonging to
about harvesting Ex: "Harvest" Ex: "Ease of harvesting"Extract not mentioned without mentioned with specific or technical mentioned elaboration details about harvesting Ex: "Extraction" Ex: "ease of extracting"Table 2. Scheme used to code student reflections on the jigsaw activity. Students were given ascore of 1 if the idea was present and a score of 0 if the idea was absent.Code Description and examplesPerspective They got to understand a different perspective or point of viewtaking Ex: “It is helpful to get different perspectives and clear up misunderstandings”Peer They learned
in the ways hands-on activities such as making, technology, and games can be used to improve student engagement.Dr. Kevin D. Dahm, Rowan University Kevin Dahm is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. He earned his BS from Worces- ter Polytechnic Institute (92) and his PhD from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (98). He has pub- lished two books, ”Fundamentals of Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics” and ”Interpreting Diffuse Reflectance and Transmittance.” He has also published papers on effective use of simulation in engineer- ing, teaching design and engineering economics, and assessment of student learning.Dr. David L. Silverstein P.E., University of Kentucky David L. Silverstein is a
to bring more faculty andstudents together to develop novel therapeutics that can be translated to the clinic. To trainstudents on current methods and research in drug delivery for academic or industrial careers, wehave developed a new course on drug delivery systems (DDS) for juniors, seniors and graduatestudents at the University of Pennsylvania.The course is taught by engineering and medical school faculty for students in engineering,chemistry, pharmacology and other biomedical science programs. The students enrolled in theclass reflect the range of expertise of engineers and scientists working on drug delivery projectsin academia and industry. Faculty and industrial speakers involved in drug delivery researchpresent lectures in their
foreach user’s account (Figure 2). Although this is an imperfect metric since students often watchvideos together and this is logged only in one student’s account, students who benefit from theability to re-watch lecture material would presumably have a large number of video watchesand/or a large cumulative duration of video watching. Figure 2 shows that contrary to ourhypothesis, students who spend the most time watching videos do not perform better thanstudents who watch the assigned videos only once (59 videos, 17.6 hours). It is, however,important to note that the number of videos watched probably only reflects video loads, andwould not capture multiple watches of the same segment, so there could still be a hiddencorrelation, but this data
. Anecdotally, the instructor notesthat during the lab activities, the students would attempt to complete the instructions as quicklyas possible, spending little time analyzing and reflecting on the unit operation or the meaning oftheir own actions. For the demonstrations, students merely watched a TA point out importantparts of the equipment. The equipment was not always even turned on. In these situations, thestudents did not interact personally with the equipment in any way.The course revisions utilized a more project-based learning approach. For each of three unitoperations, students were given a semi-ambiguous set of goals (e.g., find the column efficiencyrelative to flowrates) and three four-hour lab sessions with which to find the necessary data
rigorous, time-consuming endeavor. The intimateinvolvement of both instructors and mentors is absolutely essential during this phase to reassurestudents of their capabilities, to assuage worries about grading versus learning, and to encouragepersistence. Thus the vital role of healthy-functioning teams is clearly evidenced in promotingstudent success.Managing Large EnrollmentsOur chemical engineering undergraduate enrollment has continued to grow unrelentingly from alow of 175 in 2005 to repeated historic records each of the past five years with a currentenrollment of almost 450 undergraduates. This growth has expectedly been reflected in a surgein freshman enrollment (from 30-40 students in 2005) to an enrollment of 175 in the fall 2015semester
GROUP LEADER’S REPORT (Confidential) Today's Date: This report is to be turned in to the TA personally the day the report for the experiment is due. All the information in this report must be completed as accurately as possible, failure to do so will reflect on the Group Leader's performance and appraisal. Group Number: Experiment Number: Title: Lab Session No.: Group Leader's Name: Teaching Associate's Name: I. Time Report Group Members Time in Laboratory Time in Calculations If absent from lab or
the Manufacturing Excellence group as a Process Engineer for the Paper Machines.Dr. Ashlee Nicole Ford Versypt, Oklahoma State University Dr. Ashlee N. Ford Versypt is an assistant professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University. She earned her Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in ChE at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign and her B.S. at the University of Oklahoma. She also conducted postdoctoral research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Her research focuses on developing computational models for systems biomedicine & pharmaceutics and using computing and reflection in the classroom. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017
based on research demonstrating that students gain more from testing than from the equal amount of time re-studying (Roediger and Karpicke, 2006; Karpicke and Roediger; 2008); this is often referred to as the “testing effect”. • Reflection: The students have time to think about the new material and can raise questions via email or a course LMS, at the beginning of the subsequent class, or during office hours. As stated previously, the class activities must be coordinated with the prior preparationusing e-Lessons. Therefore, let’s proceed to the next section on class activities.Figure 5. Typical e-Lesson Organization3.4 Class ActivitiesThe complementary classes are designed to provide an active learning
.” Chemical Engineering Education 46 (4), 251–259 (2012).18. K. Mineart and M. Cooper, “Evaluation of Student Reflection as a Route to Improve Oral Communication.” Chemical Engineering Education 50 (3), 177–185 (2016).19. Millennial Marketing, “Do Millennials Read? Yes, But They Read Differently,” from http://www.millennialmarketing.com/2010/05/do-millennials-read-yes-but-they-read-differently/, last accessed Feb 6 2017.AppendixRubrics used by the author during this study are given in Figures A1 – A4.Figure A1. Instructor grading rubric for individual student (as oral presenter).Figure A2. Instructor grading rubric for individual student (as question answerer).Figure A3. Instructor grading rubric for group presentation slides (DBP format