engineering problems” 1.While many courses in different engineering curriculums have a focus on problem solving,statics is typically the first course in many students’ undergraduate engineering coursework thatrequires them to use an engineering problem solving process. Many researchers have spentsignificant resources investigating how students learn in statics and how to effectively teachproblem solving in statics courses. For instance, Steif, Lobue, Kara, and Fay developed anintervention where students where engaging in talk about salient features of the statics problem2.Steif and team found that students that were engaged in body centered talk were better atrepresenting unknown forces on free body diagrams than students that did not participate in
previously, but also, because “they get to apply their knowledge to aninteresting project, launch a satellite to the upper reaches of the atmosphere and recover it. Thisis how the HARP program revolutionizes education: by providing classroom knowledge, andsimultaneously integrating it with real experience. This kind of experience is not as costly asmight first be expected: after an initial expense of $9,000 for a complete system, each missioncosts less than $300 total in consumables (balloon, helium, recovery vehicle operation, etc). In Taylor University implementation of the HARP program into its curriculum, studentsare enabled to experience every part of a truly professional research project. Once a specificproblem is identified, the
-alone course,12,13 or integrated withinexisting courses or programs, with special modules.4 There is no compelling evidence aboutwhich of these strategies is more effective.PROJECT PLAN Page 13.544.3On the basis of such prior research, we have begun pilot-testing a strategy for developing anawareness of ethical issues by having students create a Code of Ethics for a project in which theyare engaged for a semester (or more). Our strategy involves integrating ethics materials into anexisting course structure, relying on the “regular” faculty with outside expert consultants.Wehave implemented versions of an intervention in three universities, with
outcomes than any other factorexamined, including the curriculum content factors. The paper focuses on implementation ofproblem–based learning (PBL) in an engineering program, examines different variations of PBLdiscussed in the literature, selects suitable versions for potential adoption at the start, andidentifies and illustrates faculty role in implementing PBL. It also includes a brief history ofPBL, selected strategies to infuse PBL in an engineering program, and suggestions forredesigning courses to catalyze change in the classroom environment through studentengagement. The paper, also, addresses the potential difficulties that could arise duringimplementation of PBL, particularly when instructors are new to this instructional method
effort asserts that having even greater support—and a clearer “vision for a new curriculum” inplace at the beginning—would have helped push success further. He and his peers are helpingbuild such a vision for others.In closing, we offer some thoughts on relative levels of formality and informality that facilitatedsuccessful transformation at this institution. This project began with the intention of studying theformal learning group that lasted for one academic year. However, what became clear during thecourse of the project was that a much less formal and less defined group of staff met (and continuesto meet) on an ongoing basis in the staff cafeteria. We came to understand that this informalexchange of knowledge was at least as important as
undergraduate engineering curriculum.2. Critical ThinkingThe term “critical thinking” is familiar to most engineering educators, but it is difficult to defineeasily. Paul et al1 in one study found that 89% of teachers interviewed claimed critical thinkingto be an important education objective, but only 19% were able to give a clear explanation ofcritical thinking. Ennis2 defines critical thinking as: “Critical thinking is reasonable, reflectivethinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do.” Scriven and Paul3 give a moredetailed definition: “Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively andskillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating informationgathered from, or generated by
encounter in completing their design project. Troubleshooting skill is an importantand integral part of good engineering practice. This skill represents the ability to identify and fixa problem within an engineered system by strategizing the approach within a time-constrainedsetting. To address this weakness, our group of five Engineering faculty members formed alearning community to devise an initiative to better prepare students for troubleshooting tasks. Itis expected that this should help them not only achieve greater success in their senior designproject, but also better prepare them for the workforce. While several recent studies helpilluminate what types of short-term (within 1 course) interventions may be successful inimproving students
learning. Original PLTL workshops have six essential components26: (1) ThePLTL workshop is integral to the course; (2) faculty and peer leaders work together to prepareworkshops and train peer leaders; (3) peer leaders are well trained; (4) workshop materials arechallenging and at an appropriate level; (5) organizational arrangements promote learning; and(6) the department administration encourages innovative teaching. In the standard setting, a peerleader works with six to eight students during weekly workshop sessions. The peer leader meetswith the same students each week.Our approach to PLTL is modeled after a successful HP-funded project in the UTEP Departmentof Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) that targeted a gatekeeper course in the
started, I have reworked some of my teaching activities in this and otherclasses. Further, our department is holding one of our CPREE meeting/workshops specifically onissues related to group work in our engineering and pre-engineering classrooms. In our first plenarymeeting, we spent time talking about what our image of successful students is: what changes we wishto affect in them over the term. All of these were set off by the process of reflecting on reflecting. I do think this is actually connected to a fundamental issue in education - that the curriculum wegenerate for students is informed by an image of what sort of people we want to produce at the end ofthe educational or training process and that for instructors to take the time to
tools including the taxonomy, the CPI, and the assessment rubric. The paperoffers an integrated approach to develop and enhance the student’s concept and procedural skillsby utilizing the presented tools. The approach is iterative and requires flexibility and adjustmentwhile using these tools to best prepare and advance the classroom environment.I. IntroductionOne of the pressing challenges facing engineering educators is teaching students the engineeringconcepts while enhancing their problem-solving competencies. It has been observed thatstudents who are able to identify basic concepts and possess conceptual knowledge may stillstruggle to solve multi-concept or multi-disciplinary problems. In addition, professors mayunderestimate the
deliverables that do not address the problem.Design is inherently nonlinear, inefficient, and complex [4], [5]. Students often find thereality of engineering design overwhelming the first time they experience it. They beginundergraduate engineering programs learning science and math through formats steepedin a learning culture that is linear and process-oriented to identify the single answers tocarefully constructed problems. Consequently, students demonstrate significantdiscomfort or reticence when thrust into situations in which they are expected to embracea nonlinear, circuitous process to solve an ill-defined problem. In these circumstancesstudents employ their practiced, linear paradigms and struggle to engage in the requisitework of
Paper ID #26840Understanding Interrelated Growth Mind-set and Academic Participation &PerformanceZiang Xiao, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Ziang Xiao is a PhD student from the computer science department at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. His primary research interest is in human-computer interaction.Mr. Shiliang ZuoMr. Jinhao Zhao, Tsinghua UniversityProf. Wai-Tat Fu, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Wai-Tat Fu is an associate professor of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). His research focuses on applying theories of cognitive science and human
curriculum, it would be reasonable to expect to observedevelopment in information fluency in engineering students in their freshman to senior years.Measures of Information Fluency The processing of information is an intricate interplay between the person and theinformation source. On the one hand, there are strategies for negotiating the complexities ofinformation. These are termed metacognitive strategies because they relate to how a personmonitors and guides comprehension of information. On the other hand, individuals hold specificbeliefs about the nature and purpose of information. These are termed epistemic beliefs becausethey relate to individuals‟ beliefs about the nature of knowledge. Metacognitive strategy use and
practice5, as well as developing skills within the context of practice17.These combine to form a ‘professional way-of-being’.In the past, “changes in curricula initiated by educational institutions, have ranged from little, tocourse adaption, to a few bold efforts to equate education to the new situation [of sustainability]”19 (p90). Sustainable design education at university is often seen as an add-on to existingengineering courses and programs, rather than an integral part of the curriculum20-22. A reason forthis approach often cited is the belief that little could be left out of existing curricula to makeroom for new courses on sustainability and sustainable design19. While some universities inAustralia have made efforts at embedding
notcoincided with an increase in engineering graduates.3, 4 Therefore the departure of students fromthe discipline remains an issue. The primary focus in engineering education as well as other STEM fields has been toimprove the curriculum and pedagogy of faculty. STEM educators adopted this focus largely inresponse to Seymour and Hewitt’s seminal work studying students who depart from the STEMdisciplines. Noting that leavers do not differ significantly in terms of academic achievement orpreparedness, their findings indicate that students leave the STEM disciplines primarily due tothe content-laden curriculum, the inadequate and uninteresting instruction, and an overalldisinterest in STEM careers.5 As a result, engineering has invested
public has periodically engaged in these discussions, those who fundhigher education – state and federal government, business and industry, and philanthropicfoundations – have wielded the greatest influence.1 Financial accountability is a dimension ofthese concerns, but the evaluation and assessment of educational effectiveness has emerged overthe past two decades as an important corollary.The current period of emphasis on accountability in the U.S. began in the 1980s and is roughlycontemporaneous with expressions of heightened concern about the quality of engineeringeducation programs and practices. The pressure for greater accountability, and the nationalconversations about the appropriate metrics for judging and ensuring educational quality
, the need for change must be identified. Once identified, a formal introduction to thefundamentals of project management and team culture prior to a capstone experience may berequired. A number of programs have embedded a project management course within itsengineering curriculum to train students before undertaking a capstone project [5,9,11]. So howwell do students embed these skills within their projects? The integration of project and teammanagement can be studied by looking at the direct outcomes of projects and by capturing thestudent feedback on how well they utilized these skills within their projects.In this research, we studied student perceptions of their efforts in managing projects and teams.Two quantitative surveys focused on
definition of engineering...holds true. However, based on what I have learned in this class…, I would add some things to make a more expanded definition. Table 9 Exemplary student quotes from the Engineer as.. codes Discipline Quote Sociologist This experience completely transformed my perception of what an engineer does, from researchers working passively in a lab to teammates working dynamically to solve a problem. Scientist [E]ngineering is using problem-solving skills (typically math, science, and technology) Designer When one thinks critically, analyzes, and solves problems through an integration
c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 A Student-Centered Program to Increase STEM Interest through NASA-STEM ContentAbstractThis article is an evidence-based practice paper which is based on NASA Minority UniversityResearch and Education Project (MUREP) Aerospace Academy (AA) program implemented atFlorida Atlantic University (FAU). The program is focused on student-centered methodology forinfusion of NASA-STEM contents into the existing curriculum in middle and high schools. Thisnovel program aims to increase awareness and create interest in underserved minority students inGrades 6-12 for pursuing STEM fields. FAU has designed and embedded the NASA-STEMcontents into Florida’s existing Next
Industrial Technology with a focus on curriculum and instruction for industry from Purdue University in 1998, and a B.S. in Aeronautical Technology in 1997. He is an FAA certificated Airframe and Powerplant mechanic and Private Pilot.Stephen M Belt, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng. Stephen M. Belt is an assistant professor in the Aviation Science Department at Saint Louis University. He is a certified flight instructor and commercial pilot. He received a PhD in higher educational adminis- tration in 2012 from Saint Louis University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Individual resilience as a competency for aviation professionals
in-depth analyses of the tensions that emerged betweendifferent disciplinary goals in these STEM learning environments. These results point to the needfor increased attention on how teachers manage the different disciplinary practices and goals inSTEM activities, particularly when incorporating formative assessment strategies or adopting aresponsive teaching approach.IntroductionThere is widespread agreement among educators and researchers that assessment should be anongoing, integral part of teaching and learning 1,2. Formative assessment provides feedback toteachers about where students are in their learning so that they can make decisions about what todo next. As opposed to assessments that occur at the end of an activity or unit
been published to compare students’expected grades with actual results. Little was found that is relevant to engineering student andin particular to their assessment of professional skills.The work reported here relates to the assessment of ABET’s program outcome k: “an ability touse the techniques, skills and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.Methods of Engineering Analysis is a course taken by all engineering majors during their secondsemester at the University of New Haven. In this course, students are introduced to engineeringtopics and a variety of numerical methods for solving these problems. The current platform usedis a spreadsheet with Visual Basic for Applications programming. Students complete a 30-question
20, andstudent retention21. According to Tinto22, the classroom may be the only place where staff andstudents actually meet, therefore, if social and academic integration or involvement is to occur, itmust occur in the classroom, and the outcomes will have an effect on retention.Forming a sense of community, where people feel they will be treated sympathetically by theirfellows, seems to be a necessary first step for collaborative learning. Wegerif23 found thatwithout a feeling of community, people are on their own, likely to be anxious, defensive andunwilling to take the risks involved in learning (p. 48). However, according to Bess, Fisher,Sonn, and Bishop24 those researchers in the field of sense of community have found the construct
they bring.References[1] S. A. Ambrose, “Undergraduate engineering curriculum: The ultimate design challenge,” The Bridge, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 16–23, 2013.[2] J. Turns, B. Sattler, K. Yasuhara, J. Borgford-Parnell, and C. J. Atman, “Integrating reflection into engineering education,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2014, vol. 35, p. 64.[3] R. G. Bringle and J. A. Hatcher, “Reflection in service learning: Making meaning or experience,” Educ. Horiz., p. 179, 1999.[4] C. Rodgers, “Defining Reflection: Another Look at John Dewey and Reflective Thinking,” Teach. Coll. Rec., vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 842–866, Jun. 2002.[5] X. Lin, “Designing metacognitive activities,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 49, no
event techniques to compare Page 11.557.6the traits of superior and average performers and derive job-specific competency profiles22, 23.Due to the specific nature of those competency studies the degree to which they can betransferred into a general educational context is very limited. The approach of determiningcompetency requirements in education and curriculum design is best described as an expert’spanel method23, 26. Stakeholders from universities, the profession, industry and the largercommunity define competencies or attributes as desired educational outcomes1, 2. Thisprocedure poses two risks: Even though the participants might have
line-by-line reading ofparticipant comments, where each comment is compared to similar comments. This stage isexploratory and reflexive rather than linear. During open coding data are sorted (and resorted)and individual participants’ comments are contrasted against one another. Each author engagedin open coding independently to get a “feel” for the data, after which time we met to discusstentative themes observed in the transcripts. This process produced an initial set ofapproximately 10 codes or themes (Table 2).The second stage of our analysis involved axial coding.22 According to Ezzy (2002), “the aim ofaxial coding is to integrate codes around the axes of central categories” (p. 91).22 During axialcoding less-central codes are integrated
framework for the design ofassessment activities and the integration of assessment in courses. Assessment for learningsupports the adoption of evaluation and feedback practices that improve student learning goingforward, and assessment that is, in and of itself, a learning activity [10]. As one aspect of this“feed forward” approach [11], assessment for learning aims to not only produce a grade as aproduct of a summative evaluation, but also support improved performance in the future.Assessment becomes not just an add-on to the course design, but a central component of thedesign. This is aligned with a backward design method and Bigg’s constructive alignmentframework [12], [13].Conventionally, assessment is seen as a product of performance or
the four years of theirimmersion in the engineering curriculum. We provide an analysis of the origins of students’images of engineering and what causes them to change and suggest some ways in which thisimagery affects the engineering education experience. We also discuss dominant images acrossthe four schools, showing how some images of engineering are so dominant that students who donot fit within those images must perform what we refer to as reconciling work in order to repairthreats to their engineering identity.An important part of our study has been how do students develop an identity as engineers. Our Page 13.1113.2approach to identity has
when adoptingcurricular culture. Yet we do see a close approximation to cargo culting as an initial approach bymany faculty members. Comments such as “give me your curriculum,” “tell me what I need todo,” and “never mind the why; just tell me how” are commonplace in our experiences ofcurricular culture change [8]. These requests elide the necessity of context-appropriateadaptation, an integral part of curricular culture change.In contrast, our second frame acknowledges learning and culture transfer as a process ofsupported practice, sensemaking, and growth. Cognitive apprenticeship is scaffoldedparticipation in meaningful work embedded in authentic cultural practice alongside multipleseasoned mentors. Cognitive apprenticeship theory was
, Cornell University Matthew Ford received his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and materials science from the University of California, Berkeley, and went on to complete his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering at North- western University. After completing an internship in quantitative methods for education research with the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL), he joined the Cornell Active Learning Initiative as a postdoctoral associate. His teaching interests include solid mechanics, engineering design, and inquiry-guided learning.Dr. Hadas Ritz, Cornell University Hadas Ritz is a senior lecturer in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, and a Faculty Teaching Fellow at the