in engineering andcomputer science courses. Written solutions document students’ thought processes, but theremay be other thinking and reasoning that the instructor cannot observe from a solution alone.The pedagogical technique reported in this paper is the use of video reflections of solutions toexam problems. Students created one short video explanation of their solution to a randomlyassigned exam problem for each exam. The educational objectives for the video included: 1)encourage reflection and meta-cognition about the creation and testing of a solution, 2) practiceoral communication of technical process.From 2021 to 2023, students in three different computer science courses took exams and createdvideo recordings of their solutions. The
?In particular, we first use answers to Questions 1 - 3 to address RQ1. Then, we use the results ofQuestions 4 - 6 and pre- and post-lab questionnaires to address RQ2. Finally, we use answers toQuestions 7 - 15 to address RQ3 because we think they reflect students’ needs, which will help usimprove the quality of lectures and hands-on labs.6 Results of Assessment (a) Question 1 (b) Satisfaction Trend in Institution 1Figure 6: Aggregated students’ responses to Questions 1 and the satisfaction itrend in Institution 16.1 Research FindingsTo demonstrate our findings and answer RQs without losing generality, we chose four labs weconstantly offered students. To answer RQ1, we conducted the
recognized by two best paperProf. Matthew West, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Matthew West is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Prior to joining Illinois he was on the faculties of the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics at Stanfo ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Reflections on 10 years of operating a computer-based testing facility: Lessons learned, best practices1 IntroductionAssessment is an integral component of any educational experience, but it is also a practice thatbecomes increasingly difficult for faculty to implement well as class enrollments
Paper ID #42399Board 62: Work in progress: A Comparative Analysis of Large LanguageModels and NLP Algorithms to Enhance Student Reflection SummariesDr. Ahmed Ashraf Butt, Carnegie Mellon University Ahmed Ashraf Butt has recently completed his Ph.D. in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University, where he cultivated a multidisciplinary research portfolio bridging learning science, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), and engineering education. His primary research focuses on designing and developing educational technologies that facilitate different student learning aspects (e.g., engagement). Further, he is
another's work either synchronously or asynchronously.Using a qualitative thematic analysis of preservice teachers’ anonymous exit slips and coursereflections, we generated three overarching themes as our key findings. These themeshighlighted the growth and development of preservice teachers' technological, pedagogical, andcontent knowledge (TPACK), reflective practices as future K-12 STEM teachers, and thepromotion of access and equity of educational technology in STEM education. We suggest thatmore longitudinal case studies with quantitative and qualitative analyses are needed to furtherexplore what aspects of STEM preservice teachers’ subsequent teaching practicum might beenhanced by the use of collaborative technologies during the micro
conducted in2023 [8] offers a granular perspective on the implementation of these platforms in a traditionally non-digital sector.This work is seminal in discussing the operational efficiencies and innovative prospects afforded by low-codeplatforms, as well as addressing the potential drawbacks that may arise from an over-dependence on said platforms. At the same time, another work [9] that takes a multidisciplinary approach provides a retrospective view of theevolution of low-code platforms, elucidating their strategic integration with ERP systems. It reflects on thehistorical progression from model-driven development to the current state where low-code platforms are essentialin enhancing business processes, fostering agility, and enabling
phases: planning, monitoring, control, and reaction andreflection [3], [8]. The planning phase involves planning for the problem such as guidingquestions, making a concept map, or planning ahead as seen in [1, Tab. 1], [3]. The monitoringphase could have diagrams, prompts for self-explanation or reasoning, or cognitive feedbackdone by the student [3], [12]. In the control phase, there could be worked out examples,processing and reflective prompts, or guiding questions [3], [10]. Lastly, in the reflection phase,students reflect on the learning they’ve done [3], [13]. As previously mentioned, effectivescaffolds can be both domain-general and domain-specific in each phase. In the context ofcomputer-based learning environments, or CBLEs, prompts
aligns with the targeted age range, 11-18, i.e., middle and high school age, of our broadening education intervention. It is highly likely that these students either play or played Minecraft games. They may either be interested in Minecraft or have fond memories of it. Their positive experience with Minecraft could serve as a foundation for developing an interest in computer programming. 2) Minecraft allows us to create a virtual world that reflects reality: the identity of the players and the socio-cultural context. We want these students' identities to be represented to encourage engagement, particularly from underrepresented students. Minecraft allows us to create characters of different races, genders
. For instance: as a personal tutor, aSocratic opponent, a reflective study buddy and idea generator, or an explorer [9]. Moreover,Stanford’s Center for Human-centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI) purports benefits of ChatGPTsuch as allowing teachers and instructors to scale their learning, adapt to individual interests, andimprove learning accessibility—all without fear of peer judgment [10]. Of course, though,students can use ChatGPT to cheat. Whether writing essays or answering homework questions,students may be passing off generated text as their own [2], [8]. This requires caution, but thisdisruption can lead to an exciting foray into new skills, new domains, and new meaning behindlife, work, and education [11].3. Conceptual FrameworkThis
disposition towards command line programming, which wasalso reflected in their initial struggle to adjust to using a command line tool. On the other hand,the OOP students showed a better performance and disposition towards command lineprogramming, but this could have been influenced by acquired experiences both prior andexternal with using such tools.1. IntroductionDeveloping ways to effectively teach early computer science (CS) majors how to program hasbeen an important topic of interest for some time. When addressing student learning in earlyprogramming courses, there have been a variety of elements researched and observed, notableones being: 1) the type of paradigms that are ideal for introducing students to programming [1],[2], [3], [4], 2) the
engineering education broadly andpedagogy specifically.This study presents an overview of ongoing efforts to integrate GAI as a pedagogical tool at aLand Grant R1 University on the East Coast of the United States. Also, we are hoping to collect awithin-case study of instructors who have successfully implemented artificial intelligence in theirclassrooms and course design. Data will be collected from the instructors through classroomobservations and interviews on their classroom implementation. These will be thematicallyanalyzed. Also, a deep exploration of students' learning experiences using the GAI will beconducted using focus group discussions and end-of-the-semester reflection. Other data sourcesthat will be thematically analyzed include the
ConclusionsA. Student metacognitionMetacognition involves a person critically analyzing their own understanding. Within engineeringeducation, this reflective practice by the student enhances learning and problem solving. Thereare numerous classroom structures or techniques we can use to build these skills. ChatGPTprovides interesting ways for a student to engage with material, and may further a student’sunderstanding of their own learning processes, problem-solving strategies, and perhaps identifyknowledge gaps.The process of initially re-engaging with the test question without the assistance of AI, provided ameans to both reflect on their own work, as well as explore more traditional means of correctingor expanding their original code outside the
suffer from high attrition rates[2] [4] [5]. If factors that improve the chances of student success in this type of course could beidentified, they could be used to reduce attrition rates and improve educational outcomes in amore scalable fashion.The purpose of this research is to understand if identified student attributes and behaviors arerelated to higher levels of success in a free, online, voluntary, noncredit, introductory Pythonprogramming course. The course was developed by the authors and provided to over 900students in several cohorts, with the same general curriculum delivered online via GoogleClassroom over a period of 18 months. Students in these courses were evaluated using multiple-choice quizzes, participation in reflection
Literature Review of Empirical Research on ChatGPT in Education.” Rochester, NY, Sep. 06, 2023. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4562771.[18] C. K. Lo, “What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature,” Educ. Sci., vol. 13, no. 4, Art. no. 4, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.3390/educsci13040410.[19] C. M. L. Phillips, J. S. London, W. C. Lee, A. S. Van Epps, and B. A. Watford, “Reflections on the messiness of initiating a systematic literature review on broadening participation in engineering and computer science,” in 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Oct. 2017, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2017.8190482.[20] L. Krupp et al., “Unreflected Acceptance -- Investigating the Negative Consequences of ChatGPT
Paper ID #43097Student Preferences and Performance in Active Learning Online EnvironmentsMinkyung Lee, Pennsylvania State University Minkyung Lee is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Learning and Performance Systems at Penn State University and serves as a Graduate Assistant at the Leonhard Center, an engineering education center at Penn State. Her academic journey and professional contributions reflect her dedication to the field of educational technology and design.Dr. Stephanie Cutler, Pennsylvania State University Dr. Stephanie Cutler has degrees in Mechanical Engineering, Industrial and Systems Engineering
Python in the introductory computing course. The course topics and learning goalsfor the course were not changed, and course lectures were only changed to reflect the change inprogramming language.This paper compares student achievement between classes that took the MATLAB-based versionof the course and those who took the Python-based version. Students in the two versions weregiven very similar exams and final project problems so that their achievement of course goalscould be compared.This work is the first phase of a longer-term project intended to assess the digital literacy ofWestern Carolina Engineering graduates. Students’ programming skills will be assessed as theyprogress through the four-year engineering curricula. A particular focus of
to compare student preferences to outcomes. Theremaining students were randomly assigned to either longer lessons or shorter lessons. Studentperformance was evaluated through quizzes, assignments, reflection exercises, and a final exam.Other than the inclusion of more explanation and additional examples, the content in the twocourses was identical.In the second cohort, students were randomly assigned to one of three groups. All three groupsreceived ungraded exercises with each lesson in order to evaluate the effect of solutions to theseexercises. The first group did not receive solutions to these. The second group received solutionsto these exercises, but after a delay of more than 12 hours. The third group received solutions tothese
engagement, educational technologies, curriculum design which includes innovative and equitable pedagogical approaches, and support programs that boost the academic success of different groups of students. She teaches in active learning environments and strives to bring EE and CER into practice. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Equitable Computing Education Abstract The field of computing continues to struggle to increase participation that better reflects the domestic composition of the US society at large. Society could benefit from diversifying its workforce as broader participation would
. Pasricha, “Embedded systems education in the 2020s: Challenges, reflections, and future directions,” Proceedings of the Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI 2022, vol. Not available, p. Not available, JUN 2022.[12] “Iron coder repository.” https://github.com/shulltronics/iron-coder. Accessed: 2024-01-20.[13] Arduino, “Installing libraries.” https://docs.arduino.cc/software/ide-v1/tutorials/installing-libraries/. Accessed: 2024-01-20.[14] J. Blanchard, C. Gardner-McCune, and L. Anthony, “Effects of code representation on student perceptions and attitudes toward programming,” 2019 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), vol. Not available, p. Not available, OCT 2019.[15] Microsoft, “Language server
with numbers to find the hidden treasure. Additionally, an alternative encryption approachinvolved Secret Decoder Wheel created by INL, where letters were matched with symbols, allow-ing for encoding messages to describe the treasure locations in symbols for students to decode andfind.Similarly, in 14 was developed exclusively for grades third to eight where the students had to solveCaesar shift encryption algorithm. The author designed a worksheet and organized a scavengerhunt for an all-girls STEM-careers camp, catering to ages 6-12. They facilitated the completion ofthe worksheet collectively and split the participants into two age-based groups for the scavengerhunt. The author reflects that the activity effectively introduces children to
is occurringabout how to best utilize AI tools such as ChatGPT. For example, a recent Chronicle article [2]outlined one student’s positive experiences in leveraging ChatGPT to get some specific advicetowards an assignment. This work touches on a newly developing field called “promptengineering.” The reader is referred to the article by Lo [3] to provide additional guidance to usersof AI tools, pointing to the CLEAR Framework acronym (Concise, Logical, Explicit, Adaptiveand Reflective). These concepts have also been discussed in several forums, including the chemicalengineering division of ASEE at the 2023 meeting [4], and provide a framework for our modeldevelopment.Development of a college-level / university-specific chatbot would be
majorityof respondents rating it as "Very Well" or "Extremely Well." This reflects an elevated level ofsatisfaction with the AI’s ability to streamline and refine lecture content, removing unnecessaryelements such as pauses and distractions. However, a small group of the participants rated thisaspect as "Well," suggesting some room for improvement in content refinement.(c) Utility of Final Segmented Lecture ProductWe noticed a wide variation in the responses to the question of the utility of the final segmentedlecture which was one of the products of Transcriptto. One participant rated the product as notvery useful, but a majority of the respondents did find the product to the somewhat useful to veryuseful. The focus group data were used to
Exercise DescriptionThe robotic platforms were used in an operating systems and systems programming course at PennState Behrend as a part of a lab exercise to demonstrate concepts related to task design, timing,synchronization, and mutual exclusion mechanisms. The exercise was divided into sections:Introduction to the robotic platform operation, task design using timing and synchronizationmechanisms, and feedback and reflection on the lesson learned.The tudentts were first introduced to the basic operation of the robotic arm using manual controland Application Programming Interfaces (API) control through a Python control program. Thechallenges of moving the arm in space using different coordinates and keeping track of the arm’sposition were
tasksinto instructional activities, making the assessment process less intrusive and more reflective ofstudents' actual learning processes [23]. Assessment tasks are designed to be directly relevant tothe learning objectives and often require students to apply their knowledge and skills in authenticcontexts. This approach enables educators to assess not only the final product of learning but alsothe learning process itself, including students’ problem-solving strategies, critical thinking, andability to apply knowledge in real-world situations [24].Embedded assessment comes with many challenges. Teachers must be skilled in designingassessment tasks and in interpreting the evidence of learning these tasks provide [25]. Due toembedded assessment’s
variable student experiences thatmay not be represented within this work. Another limitation in the study can be found within thesurvey design. Initially, the project took a deficit framing and developed the survey instrument tocontain questions related to barriers rather than student experiences. In doing this, results may beskewed more towards sharing frustrations or negatively framed experiences in replacement ofauthentic positive experiences that may not have been elicited provided the question framing.Lastly, the students were asked to reflect on experiences at the end of the course, in which theexperience reflected in a student’s response may not be representative of their authentic as timeand other experiences may have skewed memory of
opportunity between engineering and the arts through thedevelopment of a “Special Topics: Interactive Fiction” course was developed and subsequentlyapproved by the curriculum committees of both colleges for the 2022-2023 academic year. Whilethe remainder of this paper focuses on this Interactive Fiction course, the authors want toacknowledge the key roles played by the instructors involved in these preceding courses.2023 - Interactive Fiction: Goals and LogisticsThe two primary goals for the Interactive Fiction course were (1) for students to learn how to usea natural language software platform, such as Inform [30], to design an interactive game in a waythat reflects the diversity of cultures and experiences encountered during the era of
ultimately impacts motivation and retention. According to the findings in this study, whenteaching programming to these students, there are teaching opportunities that can beimplemented to improve students’ problem-solving styles, such as Engineering Design Projects.These kinds of projects are effective for this purpose if they follow a Project-based BasedLearning approach, which is “characterized by students’ autonomy, constructive investigations,goal setting, collaboration, communication and reflection within real-world practices [3].” Theresults also show that the nurturing of problem-solving styles in engineering students can gohand-in-hand with the learning of technical Engineering skills. Including such opportunities forstudents to work on
, individuals have access toresources and tools to aid decision-making and problem-solving. Closed-note exams may notaccurately reflect the conditions and demands of these environments, limiting their relevance inpreparing students for future academic and professional endeavors.This study explores the design, implementation, and evaluation of computer-based examinationmethods within the context of the System Programming course. We implement a BYODapproach similar to those found in the literature, combining web-based IDEs with LearningManagement Systems (LMS) and web-based proctoring software. From the literature, weunderstand that open-note and close-note are somehow different from each other and there are noenough studies on comparing of these two
video game modifies visual selective attention," Nature, Article vol. 423, no. 6939, p. 534, May 2003, doi: 10.1038/nature01647.[13] P. Wang, H.-H. Liu, X.-T. Zhu, T. Meng, H.-J. Li, and X.-N. Zuo, "Action video game training for healthy adults: A meta-analytic study," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 7, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00907.[14] S. Kühn, J. Gallinat, and A. Mascherek, "Effects of computer gaming on cognition, brain structure, and function: a critical reflection on existing literature," Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, Periodical vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 319-330, 2019, doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2019.21.3/skuehn.[15] A. J. Toth, N. Ramsbottom, M. Kowal, and M. J. Campbell, "Converging evidence
19.3% Nursing 12.5% Psychology 11.9% Psychology 8.8% Nursing 10.4%Programming experience Programming experience No prior prog course 78.5% No prior prog course 80.0% No/very little Python 74.1% No/very little Python 88.0%Note: NB: Non-binary, SD: Self-described, PNR: Prefer not to respond, HI: Hawaiian, PacIsland: Pacific Islander, prog: ProgrammingDemographic data for student participants can be found in Table 1. The race and ethnicity profileof the sample broadly reflects that of the California community colleges from which studentswere recruited. We next evaluated