, 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
Paper ID #29578Cognitive skill development among undergraduate engineering studentsMiss Hannah Smith, Queen’s University Hannah Smith is an educational researcher, supporting projects in cognitive skills assessment and profes- sional skills development in engineering. Hannah completed a Master’s degree in Engineering Education, investigating engineering students’ creative confidence and internal motivation for creativity.Dr. Brian M Frank, Queen’s University Brian Frank is the DuPont Canada Chair in Engineering Education Research and Development, and the Associate Dean (Teaching and Learning) in the Faculty of Engineering
Paper ID #34073Student Motivation and Engagement Across Time and Context Through theCOVID-19 PandemicDr. Matthew J. Ford, 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
educators and students. Student familiarity with laboratory practices andequipment came only from the occasional in-lecture demonstrations. It was not until the 1880sthat students and educators started to use physical laboratories to augmented theory taught inlecture settings [3]. In 1910, Dewey weight into the debate on the usefulness of laboratoryexperiments. Dewey was not convinced that adding laboratory exercises to the curriculum wasan added benefit [4]. Over time, the: approach of integrating laboratory experiences represented a marked change from earlier science education. In contrast to earlier curricula, which included laboratory experiences as secondary applications of concepts previously addressed by the teacher, the
ABET assessment purposes. Specifically, we consider the question:To what degree can MEAs and E-MEAs impact the professional skills? Page 22.836.3MethodologyWe have conducted a series of experiments in the industrial engineering curriculum at a largepublic university. First, in the fall of 2009, two sections of an introductory EngineeringEconomy course were taught by the same instructor. The instructor incorporated three E-MEAsthroughout the semester in one section that consisted primarily of industrial engineering studentsand had a total enrollment of 49 students (experimental group). The second section consistedprimarily of civil engineering
are identified and corrected. Using procedures such as informalcooperative learning guarantees that students have been exposed to some active and interactive Page 15.919.6methods prior to engaging in PBL.B. Infusing PBL in the Curriculum: There are several strategies that may be utilized to infusePBL in an engineering curriculum. The selected strategy depends upon: 1) the commitment ofthe institution, as a whole, to the process of deploying active learning schemes in general, andPBL in particular, 2) the readiness of the teaching staff, and 3) available recourses, facilities, andsupport services. Table 1 illustrates three approaches to
Paper ID #17865Establishing the Impact that Gamified Homework Portals Can Have on Stu-dents’ Academic MotivationBrittany Lynn ButlerDr. Cheryl A. Bodnar, Rowan University Cheryl A. Bodnar, Ph.D., CTDP is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Experiential Engineering Education at Rowan University. Dr. Bodnar’s research interests relate to the incorporation of active learn- ing techniques in undergraduate classes as well as integration of innovation and entrepreneurship into the engineering curriculum. In particular, she is interested in the impact that these tools can have on student perception of the classroom
Engineering and Technology. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: 2015- 16. (ABET, Inc., 2016).7. Bailey, R., Dugan, J.B., Coso, A. & McFarland, M. ECE/SYS Integration: A Strategy for Evaluating Graduates from a Multi-year Curriculum focused on Technology Systems Integration. in American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference (ASEE, San Antonio, TX, 2012).8. Cardella, M. et al. Special Session - Assessing student learning of engineering design in Frontiers in Education (ASEE/IEEE, Rapid City, South Dakota, 2011).9. Vinck, D. Everyday Engineering: An Ethnography of Design and Innovation, (MIT Press, 2009).10. Newstetter, W.C. Of green monkeys and failed affordances: A case study of a mechanical
States of America 111, 8410–5 (2014).4. Daniel, K. L. Impacts of Active Learning on Student Outcomes in Large-Lecture Biology Courses. The American Biology Teacher 78, 651–655 (2016).5. Elgin, G. et al. Insights from a Convocation: Integrating Discovery-Based Research into the Undergraduate Curriculum. Cell Biology Education 15, (2016).6. President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Engage To Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates With Degrees In Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.7. Marra, R., Rodgers, K., Shen, D. & Bogue, B. Leaving Engineering: A Multi-Year Single Institution Study. Journal of Engineering Education 101, 6–27 (2012).8. Tajfel, H
Computer Science Department at Forman Christian College (A Chartered University) at Pakistan for eight years and was recognized for outstanding teaching with the year 2013 teaching award. Saira was also the recipient of the ”President of Pakistan Merit and Talent Scholarship” for her undergraduate studies.Dr. Muhsin Menekse, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Muhsin Menekse is an Assistant Professor at Purdue University with a joint appointment in the School of Engineering Education and the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. Dr. Menekse’s primary research focus is on exploring K-16 students’ engagement and learning of engineering and science con- cepts by creating innovative
learning scientists in twouniversities has been working on a collaborative grant project funded by the Department ofEducation for the purpose to enhance the student diversity in STEM fields. In this project, weaimed at (1) contextualizing the student learning experience in STEM fields, and (2)implementing an integrated STEM education approach to teach the skills and knowledge that arenecessary to be competent in engineering and technology careers in 21st century. The researchobjective of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of evidence-based instructionalstrategies and the integration of the maker culture on students’ problem solving and life-longlearning skills. Specifically, we introduce evidence based pedagogy together with
Edward Berger is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education and Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University, joining Purdue in August 2014. He has been teaching mechanics for over 20 years, and has worked extensively on the integration and assessment of specific technology interventions in mechanics classes. He was one of the co-leaders in 2013-2014 of the ASEE Virtual Community of Practice (VCP) for mechanics educators across the country. His current research focuses on student problem-solving pro- cesses and use of worked examples, change models and evidence-based teaching practices in engineering curricula, and the role of non-cognitive and affective factors in student academic outcomes and overall success.Dr
received a Ph.D. and a M.A in Science Education, Department of Curriculum and Instruction from Arizona State University. Her creative research focuses on collaborative learning, design & decision-making, and the role of engineering self-efficacy on student achievement. Page 15.200.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Development of an Instrument to Assess Elementary Teachers’ Design Process Knowledge: Findings from a Pilot TestAbstractAs more states are adding engineering to their teaching and learning standards, teacherprofessional development activities are necessary to foster
physicsdepartment and other participating institutions are serving as comparison and control groups dueto similarities in incoming student characteristics and/or learning environment.In this study, the MEA-integrated curriculum is an independent variable (or intervention);students’ critical thinking ability is a dependent variable. The entire first year student body (approximately 650 students) participated in an MEA-integrated curriculum, and were invited to participate in the broad study, which allowed theresearchers to use the scores from their MEAs and critical thinking tests. Stratified sampling wasused to assign various pre and post instruments. These assessments were part of the courserequirements, so the participation rate was close to 100
fallsophomore course presents Rowan engineering students with their first exposure to open-endeddesign problems in a team setting. The current course features a four-week introductory projecton bottle rocket design, completed in teams of 3-4, and a 10-week main project on crane design,completed in teams of 4-5. The teaming aspect of the course is a challenge to engineeringstudents, particularly in that many of them are naturally pre-disposed to prefer working alone.The Let Me Learn (LML) Process is an integrated approach to teaching and learning that startswith administration of the Learning Connections Inventory (LCI), a survey instrument thatassesses individual learning patterns. All Rowan Students now take the LCI as enteringfreshmen. In this study
, Dr. Spiegel also directed an award winning teacher enhancement program for middle grades science teachers, entitled Science For Early Adolescence Teachers (Science FEAT). His extensive background in science education includes experiences as both a middle school and high school science teacher, teaching science at elementary through graduate level, developing formative as- sessment instruments, teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in science and science education, working with high-risk youth in alternative education centers, working in science museums, designing and facilitating online courses, multimedia curriculum development, and leading and researching profes- sional learning for educators. The
of problem- solving skills they will need later in their program or in practice. They do not lead to the habits of mind that, whether the students become engineers or not, are such valuable contributors to work and citizenship. (p. 48) Engineering educators have recognized the importance of developing open-endedproblem solving skills and efforts to integrate open-ended problem solving experiences acrossthe engineering curriculum are not new (Incropera & Fox, 1996; Mourtos, Okamoto, & Rhee,2004; Woods et al., 1997). Woods (2000) notes that the literature is full of problem solvingstrategies, but that few have been supported by research evidence. Several studies of engineeringdesign have found that experienced
Gill, M. J. The possibilities of phenomenology for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 1094428113518348 (2014). 11 Kupers, W. Embodied “inter‐learning”‐an integral phenomenology of learning in and by organizations. The Learning Organization 15, 388‐408 (2008). 12 MacQueen, K. M., McLellan, E., Kay, K. & Milstein, B. Codebook development for team‐based qualitative analysis. Cultural Anthropology Methods 10, 31‐36 (1998). 13 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. (2006). 14 Creswell, J. W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. (Sage Publications, Inc., 2009). 15
involved in several research projects focusing on competencies- based curriculum redesign and implementation aimed to integration across curricula; increasing the re- tention rate of early engineering students; providing opportunities for STEM graduate students to have mentored teaching experiences.Mr. Michael Cavanaugh, Michigan State UniversityDr. Subashini Nagendran Sivakumar, Michigan State University Suba Nagendran Sivakumar is a Research Scientist in The Center for Engineering Education Research (CEER). She received her PhD in Plant Pathology from Michigan State University. Her scholarly inter- ests include: research and teaching in Plant Pathology, Molecular Biology and improvement of STEM teaching and learning
. Oakes, Purdue University, West Lafayette William Oakes is the Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue University, one of the founding faculty members of the School of Engineering Education and a courtesy faculty member in Mechanical Engi- neering and Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education. He is an fellow of the ASEE and NSPE. .He was the first engineer to win the Campus Compact Thomas Ehrlich Faculty Award for Service- Learning. He was a co-recipient of the 2005 National Academy of Engineering’s Bernard Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education for his work in EPICS
research interests include integrating creativity into the engineering curriculum, development in- struments to measure the engineering professional skills, and using qualitative data to enhance response process validity of tests and instruments.Dr. Thomas A. Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Page 25.1062.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Preparing the Engineer of 2020: Analysis of Alumni DataThe College of Engineering at the Pennsylvania State University aspires to educate engineers of2020: engineers who are innovative, ethical, and good
. Similarly, Olds & Miller [18] examined thecumulative GPAs of multiple student cohorts, but the analysis compared students across groups (thosewho participated in an integrated curriculum intervention and a control) rather than studying the shifts andtrajectories of students’ GPAs without intervention.In this work, we seek to fill this gap by studying students’ GPA over time. By doing so, we may betterunderstand how GPA functions more generally before attempting to pinpoint specific factors thatinfluence GPA positively or negatively. Based on the evidence emphasizing the importance of grades andGPA as a research tool and as an influential aspect of students’ academic lives and overall wellbeing, wealso seek to share the tools of our analysis
University. She focused on integrated STEM curriculum development as part of an NSF STEM+C grant as a Postdoctoral Research Assistant through INSPIRE in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University Her current research interests focus on early P-12 engineering education and identity development.Jacqueline Gartner, Campbell University Jacqueline Gartner is an Assistant Professor at Campbell University in the School of Engineering, which offers a broad BS in engineering with concentrations in chemical and mechanical.Dr. Michele Miller, Campbell University Dr. Michele Miller is a Professor and Associate Dean at Campbell University. Prior to joining Campbell in 2017, she was a professor of mechanical engineering
Education, 2015 Exploring the Relationship between Empathy and Innovation amongst Engineering StudentsIntroductionInnovation has been described as an important and even essential skill for an individual tosucceed as a practicing engineer in today’s ever-growing, competitive, and global economy.1,2The United States’ Council on Competitiveness wrote in 2005, “Innovation will be the singlemost important factor in determining America’s success through the 21st century”.3, (p. 7) Theword “innovation” has become a buzz-word of sorts throughout the engineering educationresearch community, where the foci ranges from reshaping the engineering curriculum itself 4 tolooking at the diffusion of innovative course offerings5.What
the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) database.Dr. Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University, West Lafayette Matthew W. Ohland is Professor of engineering education at Purdue University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineering students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods has been supported by more than $12.4 million from the National Science Foundation and the Sloan Foundation and his team received the William Elgin Wickenden Award for the Best Paper in the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008 and 2011. Ohland is Past Chair of ASEE’s
) resources do not always allow for TA’s to serve as collaborative assistants in theclassroom, which could alleviate faculty personality or language issues. Nevertheless, the authorsfervently wanted to expose their colleagues to best practices in active learning that couldtranscend the curriculum. Our belief is that unique contextual research performed at ouruniversity would present persuasive evidence that would encourage broad implementation ofactive learning methods. In an attempt to answer valuable questions posed by faculty, theresearch team (the authors) decided to investigate the following: • What level of instructional interactivity in the classroom most effectively promotes student learning: high-level interactivity, mid-level
better poised to identify specific sites of interest that may lead to further study, such as thecomplex process involved in making since of social knowledge repositories in the context ofspecific problems.We hope building on this framework and method will help educators identify aspects of computeruse as part of problem solving activities that may need special instructional attention, as well ashelp students better manage cognitive load (e.g. by isolating certain computer skills andencouraging practice until they become automated). This will become increasingly necessary ascomplex computer tools continue to be integrated into engineering practice and subsequentlyincluded in the engineering curriculum. Rather than present the tools to students as
hard. This could be particularly relevant forfreshmen and sophomore students who may struggle with relating the course content with theirproject. It is expected that students find involvement with undergraduate research as one possiblemeans of developing analytical and professional skills that they can use in a rapidly changingenvironment where employers are seeking a very diverse set of skills from graduating students.13Survey results indirectly indicate that the scaffolding approach used in introducing students toundergraduate research has been useful. However, further development of the framework used tointroduce undergraduates to research is needed. In the long term, undergraduate research couldbe integrated into curriculum through a
Paper ID #28821Development and Insights from the Measure of Framing AgencyDr. Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico Dr. Vanessa Svihla is a learning scientist and associate professor at the University of New Mexico in the Organization, Information and Learning Sciences program and in the Chemical and Biological Engineer- ing Department. She served as Co-PI on an NSF RET Grant and a USDA NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revo- lutionizing Engineering Departments project. She was selected as a National Academy of Education
of the discipline that can guide engineering educators who want to learn about the best practices in formative assessment.I. IntroductionA. What is Assessment? Why Assess? “Educational assessment seeks to determine how well students are learning and is an integral part of the quest for improved education. It provides feedback to students, educators, parents, policy makers, and the public about the effectiveness of educational services.” (excerpt from Pellegrino et al. [1]).Assessment, evaluation, and measurement are important facets of university education. Marzanopresented the following definitions of important assessment-related terms by synthesizing theworks of various classroom assessment experts [2