were recruited from the pool of faculty members teachingthe courses whose exams were processed in phase one. As instructors, these faculty membersare very familiar with the language that ought to be discipline-specific for the courses that theyteach. This aspect of the research has passed the ethics review at the institution where this studywas conducted.The methodology of this phase of the research involves training, calibration, quantitative datacollection, and debriefing of each participant. A condensed methodology is described below:1. Participants were recruited using a standardized email request. In some cases, participants were asked in-person as a follow-up to the email, to ensure that the email was read.2. A Doodle.com account was
University after 32 years. For the last 12 years there, she was the Vice Provost for Education and Professor in the Department of Engineering and Public Policy. She has designed and taught several interdisciplinary courses including ethics of science and technology, environmental science, technology and decision-making and radiation, health and policy. Her research has ranged over: risk assessment and communication, green design, bioelectromagnetics, education in general and pedagogies for the modern-day literacies such as scientific, environmental and global literacy. Dr. Nair chaired the national Global Learning Leadership Council of the American Association of Col- leges & Universities (AAC&U) from 2010 to 2013
ways that preserve and enhance foundations of culture, rather thansimply colonize them into a single homogeneity. Hence, an education that is shaped withphilosophy based on global approaches and ethics, rather than a single worldview, isnecessary for a genuinely intercultural electronic global village, to produce self-capable,self-determined, competent learners. The products of Western educational approaches,although valuable, should be examined carefully through a cultural lense, as well as withan open mind about their utility in a variety of disciplines, educational platforms andcontexts.Bibliography[1] Adams, G. & Markus, H. R. (2004). Epilogue: Toward a Conception of Culture Suitable for a Social Psychology of Culture. In M
primary strategies researchers used to identify collaborators5 andtheir behavioral changes after collaboration8. However, few efforts have investigated the overallcollaboration pattern and why some scholars tend to collaborate.There are many factors that influence a researcher's collaboration decisions such as fields ofstudy, awareness of other academic work, levels of competition, perceived usefulness ofcollaboration, and work ethics. Among these possible factors, fields of study have beenrecognized as the most significant characteristic in determining researchers’ collaborationdecisions9. Even though there are increasing amounts of co-authored publications, suchcollaborative research varies radically in discipline10,11.In this study, we focus
AC 2012-4913: THE LONG-TERM OUTCOMES OF AN ENGINEERINGCOURSE FOR STUDENTS OUTSIDE ENGINEERINGRenata A. Revelo Alonso, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Renata Revelo Alonso is a doctoral student in higher education in the Department of Education Policy, Organization, and Leadership at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Her B.S. and M.S. are in electrical engineering from the same institution.Prof. Michael C. Loui, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Michael C. Loui is professor of electrical and computer engineering and University Distinguished Teacher- Scholar at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. His interests include computational complexity theory, professional ethics, and the
., gender, age, classification, and ethnic origin), the NEO–FF21 forthe five factor evaluation, and the ND–LOC19 for the LOC evaluation. Administration of theassessment battery took approximately 60 minutes. Appropriate institutional review approvalswere obtained and American Psychological Association (APA) ethical guidelines for researchwith human participants were followed.InstrumentsThis section briefly summarizes the measurement instruments employed in this study:Assessment and Learning in Knowledge Spaces (ALEKS).20 The focus of the ALEKS testemployed was calculus readiness exam used by the engineering program as a means ofmeasuring students' mathematical readiness for college level calculus. Scores from the ALEKSare used to determine if a
3 103 toronto 3 26 other 6 65 correction 3 104 university 3 27 total 6 66 costs 3 105 while 3 28 will 6 67 current 3 106 widgets 3 29 with 6 68 driving 3 107 actions 2 30 would 6 69 example 3 108 agency 2 31 all 5 70 first 3 109 allowed 2 32 alternative 5 71 flaps 3 110 analysis 2 33 decision 5 72 following 3 111 axes 2 34 ethics 5 73 give 3 112 back 2
of information needed Access the needed information effectively and efficiently Evaluate information and its sources critically Incorporate selected information into one‟s knowledge base Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose Understand the economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information, and access and use information ethically and legally.3Despite the growing importance of lifelong learning skills in our rapidly evolving work Page 22.237.2environment, where technical knowledge has a half life of less than five years, Lattuca,Terenzini, and Volkwein reports that
to theories of personal epistemologydevelopment throughout a Civil Engineering program. Page 23.963.10Acknowledgements This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. 1025205. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References1. Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.2. Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986
problems. The average coefficient of determination is 0.161. (The first problem of the final exam concernedprofessional ethics question and thus was excluded from the analysis.)DiscussionIt is important to note that our effort features capture only a portion of the effort expended bystudents on studying. Other elements of studying, such as the amount of time spent reading thetextbook or working on scratch paper, are not captured by the digital pens we use. However, webelieve that the amount of time spent problem solving on homework provides a useful measureof a student’s effort in a course.The results of the linear regression analysis of the overall-effort features indicate that students’effort does account for a considerable portion of the
situations that were not the specific ones studied? What is involved in making an SOI effort significant? Did it involve contradicting something considered “true”? What is involved in making an SOI effort ethical (e.g., being mindful of how other work is represented, being mindful of inclusion/exclusion)? Challenges and What kinds of challenges did you experience? Did an SOI framing help or hinder you? advice What kinds of challenges did you experience regarding publishing or communicating your work? What help do you wish you had? What advice would you offer to others? Outcomes What was
are strong analyticalskills, practical ingenuity, creativity, communication competencies, lifelong learning, agility,flexibility, resilience, high ethical standards, professionalism, business and management skills,and leadership skills. Discussions of these attributes strongly suggest that the engineer of thefuture must be able to work effectively with others on projects that require interdisciplinarythinking and skills.The goal of the P360 study is to identify and analyze the curricular, pedagogical, cultural, andorganizational features that support engineering education that appear to be aligned with thegoals of the Engineer of 2020. The study concentrates on three attributes that appear to becentral to the goals of the engineer of 2020
State University- San Luis Obispo.Emily Flores Emily Flores is an undergraduate student studying Liberal Arts and Engineering Studies concentrating in Computer Science and Interdisciplinary Studies at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She believes in coding ethically and ensuring that the products of our knowledge create a positive impact for all communities.Dr. Jane L. Lehr, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Jane Lehr is a Professor in Ethnic Studies and Women’s & Gender Studies and Director of Student Re- search at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She is affiliated faculty in Computer Science and Software Engineering and Science
one sability to contribute to the level of their talent is an ethical and professional responsibility to thefield.This paper shares some early results from our broader NSF-funded project, titled Identif ingMarginalization and Allying Tendencies to Transform Engineering Relationships, or I-MATTER. The project s research questions are: 1. What does marginalization look like within engineering classrooms where teamwork is a primary feature? 2. How is marginalization legible (or not) to instructors at the classroom level? 3. What are the different ways that instructors respond to incidents of peer-to-peer marginalization? 4. How might the lessons of this work be implemented to systematically alert instructors when
be compared to the pre- and post-data from priorsemesters, in a disaggregated fashion, to gain insight into the efficacy of pedagogicalshifts, content substitutions, and other deployed changes.Table 3: Engineering Design Ability Survey Category Survey Items Overall Design ● I can implement a design process to solve engineering problems. Process ● I can solve open-ended and ill-structured engineering problems. ● I can assess design decisions according to a code of ethics. ● I can recognize when it is necessary to revisit design activities to improve a solution. Design Phases ● Empathize: ○ I
grounded theory approach [17]. A key aspect of grounded theory for this study wasto conduct the literature review after defining the themes in order to remain true to the inductiveprocess of grounded theory without biasing our findings [17, 19].Data CollectionAs a data source, we accessed the publicly available interview transcripts from the CambridgeHandbook of Engineering Education Research: Updated Perspectives (CHEER-UP) 2020 virtualsummer seminar. Even though the seminars were recorded and are publicly available – thus notrequiring ethics approval – Dr. Johri and all authors were given the opportunity to opt-out andremove their presentation transcripts from this study. One author opted out, and thus a total of31 answers transcripts were
years and older [6, 7]. Despite the extended timeframe for degreecompletion, SCS students have shown a strong commitment to completing their degree withexceptionally strong work ethic and engagement [8], while prior work experience provides SCSstudents with a valuable perspective that the career switch allows to recover losses in theirprofessional development [9]. A number of critical environmental supports/resources and barriers/demands cansignificantly affect the academic success of engineering students [5, 10]. Traditional and SCSundergraduate students typically face different combination of environmental supports/resourcesand barriers/demands. This is due to the intrinsic differences in the professional development thatboth groups
theintersections of multiple underrepresented categories are small in number [30]. Small numbers ofstudents can be viewed as “anomalies” not representative of the whole and dismissed.Additionally, statistical power to detect differences or understand students at multiple intersectionsis impossible to obtain in smaller datasets. Finally, these small numbers of students can bedisaggregated from the larger dataset in ways that re-identify participants and make their responsesnon-anonymous, which have ethical implications [8].Qualitative research often focuses on rich and thick descriptions of students’ individualexperiences that can be used as powerful examples [8]. This approach has strengths, especially inunderstanding the experiences of a small number of
computer tools; andwork effectively and ethically as a member of a technical team. Students in ENGR 106 areexposed to problem solving mainly through the implementation of model-eliciting activities.The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology1 states in Criterion 3d that studentsmust demonstrate “an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams.” For this reason, ENGR106 is designed to use teams extensively throughout the course. Early in the semester, studentslearn about characteristics of effective teams such as interdependency, goal setting, roles andnorms, cohesiveness, and communication. The students participate in team and peer evaluationsof their teaming experiences and create team specific codes of cooperation that guide
, indicating that all students, regardless of their learning style, benefited frominteractions with the on-line module. In particular, working with the module seems to havebenefited the Sensing students, who not only had higher gain improvements overall, but actuallyhad higher post-test scores in several categories.Study Design and HypothesesThe research protocol for the study was approved by the Ryerson Research Ethics Board. Studentparticipation was voluntary, and all participating students were asked to sign an informed consentletter. Fifteen recent graduates, five from a Mechanical Engineering program, and ten from anElectrical Engineering program participated in this project. For the first part of the study, aspreviously reported14, all students
research on technical, social, and ethical aspects of their project,produce drawings and prototypes, and justify their decisions using statistical or experimentaldata. We facilitate the technical development of the course by teaching the effective use ofsoftware suites such as Mathworks Matlab for numerical analysis and Alias Maya for two- andthree-dimensional modeling and design work. Throughout the design process, teams mustcommunicate their problems, ideas, and designs effectively to the client, peers, advisors, andinstructors. Students are required to produce final reports, which summarize their projects’problem statements, functional requirements, constraints, and solutions. While teams must alsoinclude their views on team development, it is
of NSET education in secondary science, and extend this approach to newinitiatives in science, engineering, and technology curricula.References1. Sweeney, A. E.; Seal, S.; Vaidyanathan, P., The promises and perils of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Exploring emerging social and ethical issues. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 2003, 23, (4), 236- 245.2. Foley, E. T.; Hersam, M. C., Assessing the need for nanotechnology education reform in the United States. Nanotechnology Law & Business 2006, 3, (4), 467-484.3. Merkle, R. C., It's a small, small, small, small world. Technology Review 1997.4. Chang, C.-Y., The highlights in the nano world. Proceedings of the IEEE 2003, 91, (11), 1756-1764.5
the local community. They describe the benefits of their program as22:As a result of this program, UC Merced engineering students gain long-term define-design-build-test-deploy-support experience, communication skills, experience onmultidisciplinary teams, and leadership and project management skills. They gain anawareness of professional ethics, the role of the customer in engineering design, the rolethat engineering can play in the community, and the importance community service andvolunteerism. Community organizations gain access to technology and expertise thatwould normally be prohibitively expensive, giving them the opportunity to improve theirquality of service and provide new services.University of Auckland, New ZealandThe University
within the ABETEngineering Criteria 2000.• an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering• an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams• an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems• an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility• an ability to communicate effectively• the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context• a knowledge of contemporary issues• an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.Including all of these criterions as course outcomes is very difficult in the typical disciplinespecific topic course, however, we found that
.” The perception that MT is an extremely difficult learning environment existsapart from notions about the institution’s rigor. Students are proud that MT is rigorous and thatthey have the skills, work ethic, and intelligence to be successful in an environment of highexpectations. However, MT’s difficulty is not a source of pride, but rather of anxiety, defeat,depression, and hopelessness. Difficulty is an enemy of balance, and all MT’s students feel theeffect. Page 11.573.5Research into learning indicates that learners perform best in conditions in which difficulty canbe managed; new information and/or tasks should be presented just beyond a
of Chicago Press.Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis (Second ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Gonzalez, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Halverson, E. R., & Sheridan, K. (2014). The maker movement in education. Harvard Educational Review, 84(4), 495-504.Hernández, M. G., Nguyen, J., Saetermoe, C. L., & Suárez-Orozco, C. (Eds.). (2013). Frameworks and Ethics for Research with Immigrants: New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, Number 141. John Wiley & Sons.Honey, M., & Kanter, D. (2013). Design, make, play: Growing the next generation
Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Dr. Trevor S. Harding is Professor of Materials Engineering at California Polytechnic State University where he teaches courses in materials design, sustainable materials, and polymeric materials. Dr. Harding is PI on several educational research projects including the psychology of ethical decision making and promoting the use of reflection in engineering education. He serves as Associate Editor of the journals Advances in Engineering Education and International Journal of Service Learning in Engineering. Dr. Harding has served numerous leadership positions in ASEE including division chair for the Materials Division and the Community Engagement Division. Dr. Harding received
classroom why the activities integrated into the gamificationplatform are important to their personal and professional growth.Our study investigated whether student academic motivation towards homework in a freshmanengineering design course was influenced by the integration of a gamification platform. In thiscourse, engineering students of all disciplines learn about fundamentals of engineering such asstatistics, economics, ethics, etc. It is important for students to master these basic engineeringprinciples early in their curriculum in order to succeed in future classes within their degreeprograms. The gamification platform 3D GameLab was implemented in a semester long study inthe Spring semester of 2016.This study addressed the following research