Paper ID #23150Utilizing Reflective Practice to Develop Agency in Goal Setting and Achieve-ment in Workplace Learning EnvironmentsDr. Andrea Goncher, Charles Sturt University Andrea Goncher is a lecturer in Civil System Engineering at Charles Sturt University in Bathurst, Aus- tralia. Her research interests include text analytics, international higher education, and engineering design education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Utilizing Reflective Practice to Develop Agency in Goal Setting and Achievement in Workplace Learning EnvironmentsIntroductionMisalignment
, groupwork, reflective learning, and learning from failure. All of these pedagogical approaches promotea deeper level of learning for students and enhance knowledge retention inupper years. The event was not graded to allow students to experiment and learn in a stress-free environment. This provided a positive atmosphere where design creativity wasencouraged without fear of failure. The effectiveness of the CivE Days initiative was evaluatedthrough the final bridge project testing results, final bridge project report marks, and surveyssubmitted at the end of the CivE Days event. The bridge project grades and testing results forstudents who participated in CivE Days was compared to the bridge project grades and testingresults for a control class who
writing, exploratory writing,formal writing, informal writing and reflective writing exercises. This paper will present thetrends in student learning curves across two semesters. The evaluation criteria was based on thecomponents such as consideration of audience (15%), quality of solution (15%), rigor ofengineering analysis (25%), organization and focus (15%), clarity and coherence (15%), andprofessional appearance (15%). A comparison of student performance in terms of contentaccuracy, language issues and effect of writing expression between the three courses will bepresented. The relationship between the number of errors and the type of writing activity wasevaluated for the three semesters. The major differences in student performances among
also surveyedto determine their perception of the enhanced specification course versus that of other traditionalcourses they have taken in the past. Finally, this paper includes a reflection of theimplementation of specification grading, a reflection on the appropriate competencies forreinforced concrete design, and the potential benefits for use in broader civil engineeringeducation.Introduction and BackgroundA picture of traditional grading as providing constructive feedback and serving as an impactfullearning device sounds both noble and desirable. However, traditional grading, at least intraditional engineering courses, often falls short. Rather than profound guidance, grading oftenmanifests itself as a cutthroat point competition
dynamics, earthquake engineering, and engineering education.Dr. Debra Fowler, Texas A&M University Dr. Debra Fowler serves as the Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at Texas A&M University. Following 16 years working in industry she completed a Ph.D. is in Interdisciplinary Engineering with a specific focus on engineering education from Texas A&M University. Her research areas of focus are faculty perspectives and growth through curriculum design and redesign, interdisciplinary teaching and learning, reflective eportfolios and professional development of graduate students related to teaching.Dr. James Michael Kaihatu, Texas A&M University Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at Texas A&M
frustrated with the process, anddissatisfied with the end outcome and reflect about any heuristics used and how these might haveled to less than optimal decisions.Bounded rationality was the second behavioral decision science concept embedded within theHistoric Fourth Ward Park case study module. Bounded rationality means that the potential forrational or optimal decisions is limited by the decision maker’s cognitive capacity, availableinformation, and time [17]. Such limitations may be expected in complex decisions involvingtradeoffs, as are commonly found in sustainability problems. Bounded rationality relates to theHistoric Fourth Ward project through the stakeholder engagement meetings and public input,which were a major part of the process to
/board notes, demonstrations and visual components of concepts, and group hands-onactivities. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Developing/Using Learning Objectives Board Work/Color/Lecture Notes Group/Hand-on Activities (connecting to Concepts) Illustration of Concepts/Demos/Visual Incorporating Music Ongoing Instructor Reflection/Self-Assessment Instructor Movement Learning Names/Building Rapport Provide More Feedback/Peer Review Dynamic Classroom Spaces
. Moreover, knowledge of fundamental business functions is increasingly importantfor civil engineers.To address these needs, the authors developed a course, Leadership for Engineers, and usedan interactive and highly engaging business simulation, ScrimmageSimTM, to create anactive learning environment where students are placed in leadership positions and arerequired to develop basic business operating plans; execute these plans in the simulation;and reflect on their team’s successes, failures and missed opportunities. The authorspiloted the course during summer 2017 with students majoring in both engineering andbusiness.This paper addresses the development, execution and assessment of this course. Thedevelopment of the course included sequencing
Fall 2015 65.6 93.1 6.76 Spring 2016 87.6 100 13.0 Fall 2016 85.2 100 47.0ConclusionThere are experimental results noting the fact that many engineering students are visual (versusverbal), sensory (versus intuitive) and active (versus reflective) learners (Figure 8).6,7 Felder’sresearch notes the importance of ensuring all students study at least some time in a preferredlearning style. Using physical models and demonstrations are crucial to improve learning andunderstanding of concepts when students are visual, active, and sensory learners. Of course,many students have loaded structures before (intuitive), the content on
, and feedback from both students andfaculty reflected that this was a major limitation to the effectiveness of this initialimplementation. However, in the course that did share content (CE 562 shared with CE 461“Structural Analysis”), we collected feedback on effectiveness from CE 461 students whoengaged with the videos. Watching the videos was completely voluntary. The CE 461 instructorinformed students that the videos were available and how to access them, but did not requirestudents to watch the videos. 41% of respondents watched video(s) created by students in CE562, and of those who watched a video, 69% of them watched 2-3 different videos. The mostviewed topics were the Conjugate Beam Method (60% of viewers) and Influence Lines
, and feedback from both students andfaculty reflected that this was a major limitation to the effectiveness of this initialimplementation. However, in the course that did share content (CE 562 shared with CE 461“Structural Analysis”), we collected feedback on effectiveness from CE 461 students whoengaged with the videos. Watching the videos was completely voluntary. The CE 461 instructorinformed students that the videos were available and how to access them, but did not requirestudents to watch the videos. 41% of respondents watched video(s) created by students in CE562, and of those who watched a video, 69% of them watched 2-3 different videos. The mostviewed topics were the Conjugate Beam Method (60% of viewers) and Influence Lines
related to the bridge tour including a history of computational,mechanical and graphical methods of structural analysis, a survey of other bridge engineers inthe United States, and a comparison of the design philosophies of Conde McCullough and Swissengineer Robert Maillart [5]. The richness of the resulting discussions and the range of topicswere unlike anything the instructors had experienced before and were certainly the result of theunique format and rich field component of the class.The singular assignment for the course was a portfolio of the bridges that were visited includingfactual content about the bridges that included their condition ratings and structural assessments,but also a reflective component that requested that the students
outcomes, but thecriterion invites programs to develop its own in addition to those. Some programs chooseto alter the seven outcomes to reflect the strengths and uniqueness of their specificprogram. This was encouraged in the early years of EC2000, but it became clear to mostprograms that this provided little benefit and potentially caused problems.11 Today mostprograms use the ABET criterion 3 student outcomes verbatim. This example takes thatapproach.Identify where in the curriculum these outcomes are met. The student outcomes aregenerally attained through the curriculum, which for most programs means four years oftargeted coursework. It is therefore important to assess the degree to which any course inthe curriculum supports the attainment of
printer are that itprovides students with complete design freedom to create a variety of models on computersoftware in one afternoon, select the best designs, and create physical models for live testing.Over a period of three years, undergraduate engineering students in a structural materialslaboratory class, designed and 3D printed simple connections, lateral beams, and trusses; andthey conducted stress analyses. As part of the class assignment, students reflected on theirexperiences. Based on students' final written portfolios for the class, the majority indicated thatdesigning with computer software, combined with 3D printing, increased their creativity anddesign confidence, and enhanced their self-efficacy and identity as engineers who
of one or both of these documents.Although similar in intent and based on equivalent Bloom’s taxonomies for their construct, thereare significant differences between the two that reflect variations in knowledge base and skills,but also somewhat contrasting visions and overall work approaches by the two groups. It shouldbe stated that with the exception of the first author, there was no overlap in the composition ofthe two committees and relatively limited interaction. The purpose here is to provide a briefoverview of the outcomes for each body of knowledge and to compare and contrast how bothefforts have progressed with recommendations provided for a unified process when it comestime to update the two bodies again. This information may be of
, Studying Engineering: A Road Map to a RewardingCareer [7], has been used by over 100,000 students at more than 300 institutions [8]. Throughthis course, students gain a clear picture of what success in engineering study will bring to theirlives [6].The major goals of this course are to: (1) encourage students to develop the study skills neededto succeed in engineering and (2) guide them in becoming integrated into the engineeringcommunity on campus. To accomplish these goals, students participate in interactive classdiscussions and projects related to academic success and community building, as previouslyreported [5]. In addition, students are required to attend and submit a reflection on each of theacademic and community building resources
all licensedphysicians in the United States are Board Certified Medical Specialists [27].This high percentage reflects the medical profession’s collective commitment to providing thepublic with a high level of specialized expertise; however, it also reflects the system’s stronginternal incentives for board certification. Most hospitals require board certification to practicein a medical specialty area, and insurance fee reimbursement rates are typically tied to boardcertification. Furthermore, many hospitals have independently made the decision to requireboard certification for staff privileges [28]. Thus, from the physician’s perspective, certificationserves as both a carrot and a stick.In summary—and in sharp contrast with civil engineering
industry. Yet, key components of mentoring that havebeen identified in the literature are often unfamiliar at the level of practice. The intent ofmentoring is that mentees, in our case the engineering student, arrive at their own solutionsthrough a process of reflection facilitated by their mentor.In designing the mentoring trial, we used a five-factor mentoring framework, drawing on theeducation literature. 1. The first factor is building rapport. Rapport is at the heart of mentoring [18]. Rapport is when the student and their industry partner feel comfortable communicating. Mentors and students can build rapport by learning a little about the other; mentors can encourage rapport by being attentive to body language and adopting a
20258 which states that civil engineers are “Entrustedby society to create a sustainable world and enhance the global quality of life, civil engineersserve competently, collaboratively, and ethically…”9. The CIVIL Department adopted thefollowing Student Outcome in response:Student Outcome #15: Apply standard of professional and ethical responsibility to determine anappropriate course of action.With this student learning outcome in place, it was easy to incorporate the requirements of theQEP into the existing curricular design. The curriculum design is as follows: 1. Freshmen – describe the ASCE and the NSPE ethical canons and reflect on them using a vignette. 2. Sophomores – explain the ASCE and the NSPE ethical canons; description of
students and practitioners with regard to the benefits of the industryinvolvement. This paper also describes two successful capstone design projects and culminatessuccess drivers from the reflection of instructors teaching these courses.IntroductionThe profession of engineering takes the knowledge of mathematics and natural sciences gainedthrough study, experience, and practice and applies this knowledge with judgment to developways to utilize the materials and forces of nature for the benefit of all humans1. The engineerapplies his or her knowledge to design and develop usable devices, processes, and structures.The Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) formal definition ofengineering design states that it is “the process of
prerequisite knowledge whichis difficult to accommodate with the limited amount of class time.The advancement of technologies provides an opportunity to help on these challenges. It isestimated that there are over 7 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide [1]. Althoughmobile phone subscription doesn’t necessarily reflect the number of mobile phone owners sincethere are multiple mobile subscriptions for individual people and for businesses, it does reflectthe prevalent usage of mobile devices. These devices have prolific use in our everyday life forcommunication, access of information, and entertainment. Besides, mobile devices are beginningto be used in all levels of education because of their easy accessibility and increase incomputational power
specific analyses for passive voice are describedin the next section. In addition, civil engineering practitioners conduct holistic scorings ofsamples of student papers so we investigate whether there is overall improvement in addition toany specific language changes. Students' reactions to the materials are also gathered throughsurveys, reflective writing, and interviews.3. Practitioner and Student Use of Passive VoiceIn phase one of the Civil Engineering Writing Project, we investigated the use of passive voice in60 workplace reports, 60 student reports and 50 journal articles. The student reports mimickedthe workplace context: they were written to specific clients for specific projects (usually realpeople and real projects, such as in capstone
: Understand and interpret the organization and use of the AISC Manual of Steel Construction Identify and apply appropriate steel provisions (AISC) to elements and systems. Design steel members using the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach. Develop skills in completing and checking individual component and complete structural system designs. Due to the volume of possible topics that AISC incorporates within the Specification, thetopical list for AE 401 was selected to be reflected of most standard entry level undergraduate steeldesign classes. Due to our mandatory two steel classes in the undergraduate AE program, no lateralmembers or systems are discussed. Instead, AE 401 is gravity focused while the advanced
the deliberate effort of the committee to develop clearer and more concisecognitive domain outcome statements that better reflect the levels in Bloom’s Taxonomywith an appropriate verbs at each level. Another major consideration for the committee wasto be less prescriptive in the outcome statements.The committee first debated which educational taxonomy to use and considered the originalBloom’s Taxonomy, the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, and at least one other variation ofBloom’s Taxonomy. The committee concluded that the original Bloom’s Taxonomy wasthe most appropriate for BOK3 and discussion on this selection process will be presented.When critically reviewing the BOK2, the committee concluded that some of the outcomestatements only loosely
. Justin Salgado and Mingkun Yang are acknowledged forhelping participate and complete the laboratory design and demonstration activities. Thearticle is written with the purpose of emphasizing the critical importance of teaching soilmechanics lessons by involving students’ personal experience as students’ personalexperience may mean everything in their future professional career. The voice, opinionsand remarks conveyed in the paper does not reflect any organization’s endorsement butpurely the authors’ own observations and remarks.References1. Felder M., Richard & Silverman, Linda. (1988) “Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education.” Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-681.2. Nieves, Marie. (2017), “Soil Investigation-What is it and
self-reflect. Students are invited to complete the assignment more than one time if they wantto demonstrate knowledge gained in previous iterations or see a broader range of the possiblescenarios.Figure 1: Screen shot of Resultant Force & Moment GeoGebra interactive available athttps://ggbm.at/GqURw4N4. Students are able to manipulate all aspects of interactive and theinteractive provides a graphical solution as to the resultant force and moment of the givenapplied forces and couple moments about the designated ‘Point’Fall 2017 data (231 respondents across two on-campus sections and 1 online section) to thisassignment was analyzed. The feedback question yielded a median value of 7 and a mean of 7.3.Anecdotally, I find that anytime
and2016-2017 was that only 4% of the 2011 students rated experiments among the five leastimportant outcomes [12]. Three other outcomes were also very different in the extent to whichstudents rated them among the five least important outcomes: mechanics (35% in 2011), lifelonglearning (26% in 2011), and contemporary and historical issues (17% in 2011).RQ3. Outcome AdditionsSenior student feedback on ten potential additional BOK outcomes from the in-class exercise issummarized in Table 3. Key references that support the importance of these KSA outcomes arenoted. Only the potential outcomes assigned to the students during the in-class exercise areshown, and the list should not be considered exhaustive. The comments reflect the group of twoto three
education. In the hopes of filling the void, Gavin [11]suggests that “problem based learning should be used as a partial solution to developprofessional problem-solving skills through the application rather than the acquisition ofknowledge” and as such uses project-based learning in his capstone design course. Gavin’s [11]review of project-based learning was in context of a capstone design course that is focused onstructures engineering; however, the pedagogies described can be easily transferred totransportation engineering design. In the course, learning is directed by the problem itself andstudents are required to guide themselves toward a solution. Self-reflection through questionssuch as ‘What did I learn?’ and ‘What further knowledge do I
how these sustainability outcomeexpectations develop and change.AcknowledgementsThis work was funded by a collaborative National Science Foundation EEC grant (1635534 and1635204). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] J. Cook et al., “Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature,” Environ. Res. Lett., vol. 8, no. 2, p. 24024, Jun. 2013.[2] N. R. Council, Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010.[3] UN News. (2018). 'Journey towards bold climate action is at a critical moment
designpractices in their civil engineering careers.AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported by the National Science Foundation (DUE Grant #1612405). Anyopinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation.References[1] F. S. Crofton, “Educating for sustainability: opportunities in undergraduate engineering,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 397–405, 2000.[2] American Society of Civil Engineers, Ed., Civil engineering body of knowledge for the 21st century: preparing the civil engineer for the future, 2nd ed. Reston, Va: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2008.[3] “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2018 – 2019 | ABET.” [Online]. Available: http://www.abet.org