collaborators attracted close to $1M in research grants to study writing transfer of engineering undergraduates. For technical research, he has a long-standing involvement in research concerned with the manufacturing of advanced composite materials (CFRP/titanium stack, GFRP, nanocomposites, etc.) for marine and aerospace applications. His recent research efforts have also included the fatigue behavior of manufactured products, with a focus on fatigue strength improvement of aerospace, automotive, and rail structures. He has been the author or co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed papers in these areas.Dr. Charles Riley P.E., Oregon Institute of Technology Dr. Riley has been teaching mechanics concepts for over 10 years and
communicate” as part of homework, laboratory section andcoursework with their peers as audience. In a sophomore level circuits course, as part of ahomework assignment students had to write a user’s manual for PSpice, a circuit simulation software. Writing a User’s Manual is a common task for those entering industry involvingproduct design. In a junior level electronics course lab section, students were required to write amemo to their classmates explaining the behavior of their circuit. This assignment provided anopportunity for the students to explain their circuit to their peers while learning how their peers’circuits worked without having to
Paper ID #36811Refining Instructional Modules for Engineering Lab Writing Using aCommunity of Practice ApproachDr. Charles Riley, Oregon Institute of Technology Dr. Riley has been teaching mechanics concepts for over 15 years and has been honored with both the ASCE ExCEEd New Faculty Excellence in Civil Engineering Education Award (2012) and the Beer and Johnston Outstanding New Mechanics Educator Award (2013). While he teaches freshman to graduate- level courses across the civil engineering curriculum, his focus is on engineering mechanics. He im- plements classroom demonstrations at every opportunity as part of a
, two near-peer mentoring programs are described and implemented in thecontext of a large (200+ students) project-based introduction civil and environmental engineering(CEE) course. They were developed to provide sustainable, effective methods for near-peermentoring that could be implemented on a larger scale. The two near-peer mentoringframeworks, targeted mentoring and general mentoring, were developed based on the followingobjectives: 1. Provide first-year mentees with additional project input and technical writing and presentation feedback. 2. Provide first-year mentees additional information about campus life, the curriculum, and professional opportunities based on the experience of current upper-level students. 3. Create
Paper ID #45661BOARD # 48: A Study in Rubric Design: De-Coupling Assessment Feedbackand Evaluation Scoring for a Technical Writing AssignmentDr. Jennifer Queen Retherford, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Dr. Retherford is an alumna of the University of Nebraska, Omaha, and received her graduate degrees from Vanderbilt University. She currently teaches a variety of courses supporting the department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.Dr. Sarah Mobley, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Sarah J. Mobley is an Associate Teaching Professor in Civil and Environmental
learners. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Syllabi Indicators of Learning Community Supports in Civil Engineering ClassroomsAbstractLearning communities in formal educational settings act as support systems for students,facilitating increased motivation, student success, and feelings of belonging. Learningcommunities can be compromised by instructional conditions due to institutional, national, orglobal disruptions, leaving students vulnerable to being disconnected from their peers andinstructors. This study explored the impact of a disruption on instructor facilitation of learningcommunities. The research question was: “How does a disruption impact instructor
assignments leading up to the technical report,students are asked to either write a draft section for the report and/or revise a previous draftbased on instructor feedback. With each draft section, students were also asked to select anexcerpt from their draft that showcased at least one of the techniques from the Civil EngineeringWriting Project [13] that were covered in class. When revising their drafts, students were askedto provide a statement describing how they addressed the feedback received on their draft. Thepurpose of these statements is to encourage students to reflect and intentionally consider howthey can implement good writing practices.For both the policy memo and Op-Ed assignments, students are assigned to peer review two oftheir
, energyefficiency, and other modern tools to improve the functionality, or other aspects of the project.Students had the opportunity to review actual construction drawings and work in inter-disciplinary teams to incorporate changes. Students presented their final project in front of amixed audience that included students, faculty, family, and professionals during the CapstoneDesign Conference. A team consisting of faculty and industrial advisory board membersevaluated the communication and technical skills of students during this conference. A rubricwith emphasis on incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple designconstraints was used to assess the group performance. Confidential peer-reviews were then usedto assess the performance and
project, anticipated capstone specific products and deliverables, design and testingapproaches, timelines, and plans for demonstrating each of the ABET Student Outcomes. EPICScourse standard assessment practices applied to capstone projects include notebook documentationof work and accomplishments, weekly and summative reflections, design review presentations,transition documents, and peer evaluations. The notebook is filled with data on all the project-related activities the students are actively involved in, often with links to specific work artifacts,explanations of them, and concise narratives explaining the student's specific individualcontribution to them. The weekly and summative semester reflections ask students to write brieflyabout
0.5 Engineering faculty connections I had an engineering faculty member who I consider a role model. 4 4.8 1.3 I was mentored by an engineering faculty member. 4 4.0 1.0 I had the opportunity to network with engineering faculty members. 4 4.5 1.3 I knew faculty members in my major who I would feel comfortable asking to write 4 4.5 1.3 a recommendation letter. I had engineering faculty members with whom I could relate. 4 4.8 1.3 Engineering peer connections I regularly socialized with engineering students outside of class
hourLearning Outcome AssessmentThe assessment methods for this comprehensive bridge project encompasses two primaryassessment methods: performance-based assessment and technical writing. The assessmentframework is structured to ensure a multifaceted analysis of each team's output, focusing on bothquantitative and qualitative metrics.The performance of the student-designed bridges is appraised according to two main criteria:data comparison, which accounts for 70% of the overall assessment, and peer reviews, whichcontribute the remaining 30%. The quantitative assessment hinges on the comparison of themaximum force sustained by structural members in both the original and the redesigned bridges.This comparison is determined by Equation (1), which
requires student teams to communicate their progressand findings in two written reports and an oral presentation. The first written report is focused ontheir mixture testing and their standard test development. This report is in the form of amemorandum where conciseness and precision are emphasized in the writing. The second reportis the culmination of the project with all of their testing, iterative design documentation, andcomparison of performance of the final products. In addition to the final report, students presentto the instructors and peers which allows them to ask questions and compare methodologiesbetween the groups as they prepare the final written report. The three report styles(memorandum, presentation, and comprehensive report
-of-class assignments and most involvereflective writing activities. Prior to submitting their essay, students exchanged papers andprovided one-another with a peer review. Essays were revised based on peer-feedback and thenwere turned-in for grading. Students were not aware that their essays would be analyzed relativeto the nine motivation areas.During a review of the essay produced by the first cohort of students, the grader generated a listof the most common motivations to the prompt. A total of ten different motivations wereidentified in the first administration. Those same ten motivations have been used in allsubsequent essay reviews. The ten response areas used were: Challenging, Family/mentor influence, Hands-on
pathway offers a lower-cost, quality education, allowing students of allmath levels access to an engineering degree with courses that transfer to a four-year institution.These students gained the skills necessary to be successful and were able to earn an engineeringdegree with little debt. Relationships with peers and authority figures were crucial to thestudents’ successful journey.Through collaboration, students learn more and gain a deeper understanding of the material.Students need multiple sources of encouragement, recognition, and successes to persist towardan engineering degree. Seeing themselves in a role model is beneficial. Engineering lifestyle,comfort, money, and making a positive difference were factors in choosing an
towards independent study through a questionnairesurvey via Qualtrics. The survey questions were strategically designed to explore the benefits oflearning, the long-term retention of acquired knowledge, and the overall learning processes.Analysis of the data demonstrated a positive student perception and attitude towards a fewcrucial skills, such as teamwork and time management, technical writing and subject matterproficiency, Excel uses, data analytics, communications, and organizational timeline skills.Students expressed a preference for the hands-on aspect and freedom associated with theundergraduate research. Furthermore, students acknowledged the significant influence ofundergraduate research on their academic careers, citing improved
) Geomatics for Civil Engineers (3) Writing (3) Chemistry 2 or 3 (17) Calculus 3 (4) Physics 2 (4) Statics (3) Fine arts (3) Dynamics (3) Communication Differential 4 (15) Skills (3) Equations (3) Mechanics of Introduction to Transportation Engineering (3
assigned teams at designated tables tocomplete teamwork activities, problem-solving exercises, peer assessments, and self-reflections.Seating assignments are randomized weekly, and the updated seating chart is uploaded byWednesday morning, allowing students to check their table assignment before Thursday’s session.Each team consists of three students, with two teams sharing a table. The weekly homeworkassignment is due on Friday night, reinforcing concepts covered throughout the week. Figure 2 Weekly Course Activity PlanFor each the Statics section of 180 students, 20 hours of graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) areallocated to assist with instruction, along with one undergraduate teaching assistant (UTA)working nine
-on learning strategies to improveretention and performance among civil engineering students. Additionally, incorporating 3structured activities that encourage student reflection and peer learning may further enhance theseoutcomes, contributing to a more student-centered and effective civil engineering education.Theoretical FrameworkSocial Cognitive TheoryBandura's Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) provides a foundational framework for understandinghow individuals acquire and regulate behaviors through the dynamic interaction of personal,behavioral, and environmental factors.[7]. This theory emphasizes the importance of observationallearning, self
mention programming 7out of 17 female students versus 2 out of 18 male students). One female student responded ““Theproject helped me improve my confidence in my ability to write computer programs and debugas even though there were lab codes…, there was no right way to code a solution to myproblem.”First-Generation Status Differences in ResponsesTen students identified as first-generation. Of these, 6 reported growth in interpersonal skills, andall 10 in job-related and course-based skills from the project and course. For interpersonal skills,compared to continuing generation peers, first generation students more frequently mentionedteamwork (4 of 10 first generation students vs 7 of 25 continuing generation students) and help-seeking (3 of 10 vs
), and he currently serves as a member of the ASEE Data Collections Advisory Board, as well as a Peer Reviewer for the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and for the OAAAQA Register of External Reviewers . Timothy has a PhD from Indiana State University in Technology Management with specialization in Quality Systems. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 A Flipped Classroom setting trial in GIS course.1 IntroductionFlipped classes have gained increasing popularity in undergraduate civil engineering courses [1, 2] This teaching approach allowsstudents to actively participate in the learning activities while the instructors serve as facilitator assisting and
density of concrete. 6. Describe the effect of pozzolans on the compressive strength of concrete. 7. Understand that different pozzolans have different effects on the properties of concrete. 8. Understand that the properties of concrete can vary based on the quantity of pozzolan added.Methodology The objective of the mini-project was to investigate how a supplementary cementitiousmaterial (SCM) affects the properties of fresh and hardened concrete. The students collaboratedwith their peers to generate different ideas, and based on classroom knowledge, they identifiedseveral potential SCMs. However, due to material availability in the lab, the groups were advisedto use fly ash and silica fume for their mini
of S&E bachelor’s degrees were awarded to women in 2018—women’srepresentation varies greatly by field and women are still underrepresented in S&E occupations”[1]. While representation of some student populations has seen an increase in the past decades(e.g., Latinx/Hispanic students have seen an increase in share of Science and EngineeringBachelor’s degrees awarded from 8% in 2008 to 12% in 2018 [1]), others have been stagnatingor declining (e.g., Black and African American students changing from 4.7% to 4.3% from 2008to 2018 [1]).Underrepresentation affects students’ ways of experiencing engineering education and practiceand creates unique sets of challenges compared to their majority-representing peers. Experiencessuch as “cold
content (e.g. economics, ethics) and skills (e.g. writing, oral presentations) that are usefuland necessary for both personal and professional development. However, students can often seethese courses as not useful or unrelated to their future careers. In this study, a first semestercourse in Civil Engineering was designed and delivered to make deliberate and clear theconnections between the general education portion of the curriculum and students’ future careersas civil engineers. An existing instrument was adapted to measure student aptitudes towardsdifferent skills and knowledge typically presented in general education courses and given to thestudent pre and post instruction, revealing statistically meaningful increases in the
aboutone month collaborating with one or two team members to further develop their thoughts on EJIin a team project. Thanks to its OpenRoads module, this course is assigned to a classroom withcomputers. Students are given about fifteen minutes at the end of the two case study lectures tosearch online, develop their short essay outlines, and ask any questions they may have. This firstEJI assignment is promptly graded and returned to students, offering plenty of time andnecessary feedback for students to work on their team projects. Students are encouraged tocollaborate with peers they know and are interested in similar topics. After teams are officiallyconfirmed, students work outside class while the course moves on to highway geometric designand
formationof the scientific image both within the scientific communities themselves and outside of them [10].Currently, social platforms have promoted the development of new media, increasing new andinnovative methods for reading and writing, allowing the audience to increase as compared totraditional media. This is how the information is transmitted immediately and interactively,making the communication process more effective [11]–[15]. According to Pantoja "socialnetworks provide new possibilities to compensate for the open imbalance between the needs ofsocial communication and the means necessary for that communication" [16].Since the inception of social media in the late 1990s, it has had an unprecedented influence on ourpersonal and professional
questions on homework assignmentsFigure 4: Weight of each type of question used in a typical homework assignment, based onaveragesProjects and reportsAs shown in Table 2, 50% of faculty indicated they used group projects or papers and 27%individual projects or papers in their courses. Faculty reported that roughly a quarter of the gradefor these deliverables was based on writing, formatting, mechanics, style, etc. The other threequarters of the grade was based on the technical content. There was no significant difference inthis breakdown between individual vs. group assignments.Exams and quizzesThe survey asked several questions about exams and quizzes. Among respondents, 5% reportednot using any exams or quizzes and instead used alternative
environmental engineering students. Major year-over-year changes made – against which experiences and outcomes were measured – includedthe instructors reducing group sizes and increasing the number of external mentors involved inthe class, altering project deliverable targets, and implementing more frequent external mentormeetings; the instructors doubling the frequency of peer evaluations and time sheet gradedfeedback to students and also setting aside dedicated in-class time for external mentors to marketthemselves and their companies; and the instructors adding general contractors (GCs) as externalmentors to the course, supplementing the civil and environmental designed-focused mentors inthe course.Measured outcomes from the changes in the senior
toinvestigate if the students in the experimental group benefited from completing the project.In Soil Mechanics, the term group project was used to assess the students' ability to apply theknowledge gained from the first seven of the eight course modules to solve a real-life problem.The CATME tool - developed and licensed by Purdue University, was used to form teams basedon different criteria such as GPA, preferred schedule, software skills, writing skills, leadershippreferences, commitment level, and big-picture/detail-oriented thought process. The project hadthree phases. In the last phase, the groups had the option to submit the final deliverable in theform of a written report or an oral video presentation.In Principles of Construction I, students
boundaries, and for their development as engineers? • How important is it, from an educational perspective, for educators and students to interact with and collaborate with peers in other countries?The Ethical Engineer WebsiteThe Petroleum Engineer website is being modeled on a highly successful global platform,https://ethicalengineer.ttu.edu, that was developed to teach engineering ethics [2, 3]. The EthicalEngineer website is a virtual context for ethical reflection and shared discourse. It provides aninteractive platform for college students to present their comments and reactions to ethicaldilemmas. That website, like Petroleum Engineer, arose from an undergraduate course inengineering at our institution that is required of engineering
instruction on AI, exploring its origins, benefits, andbasic principles of generative AI. Throughout the course, they participated in hands-on activities:analyzing and correcting errors in AI-generated solutions, creating practice problems andsolutions for exam preparation using AI, and employing AI for real-time problem-solvingguidance during lessons. Additionally, they used AI for note-taking (verified by instructors) andincorporated AI into technical writing assignments. In contrast, the control group receivedstandard course instruction without this structured AI intervention; AI use was neither encouragednor prohibited for them.Pre- and post-course surveys were administered including both quantitative components using a7-point Likert scale (Table