requiring a video term-paper project to address thedesired educational goals of increasing student ownership of learning, learning course-relatedconcepts, and providing evidence of communication skills and media literacy skills. Studyparticipants came from convenience samples drawn from a computer networking course andfrom a general education writing course offered on a small branch campus of a large researchuniversity. The participants were college students having varying levels of familiarity with theskills examined.The study design used mixed methodologies, including a quasi-experimental, two-groupcontrol/intervention, student surveys, and qualitative interviews. The quasi-experiment consistedof pre- and post-test measurements of media literacy
finalstage, these analyses will be processed to create a set of recommendations to reduce variability.Context. This study is contextualized in a first-year engineering program at a large publicuniversity. Analysis is centered in the second course of a two-semester sequence of courses.This course typically has over a dozen sections of over 100 students each spring semester. Eachsection usually employs an instructor, a graduate teaching assistant, four undergraduate peerteachers, and two undergraduate graders. For any given assessment, each grader typically gradesone-third of the section responses and the peer teachers split the remaining responses. All of thegrading is generally overseen by the graduate teaching assistant, though specifics vary
. The relationship between self-efficacy andachievement has also been studied in mathematics14,15 and writing16. For example, Pajares andMiller (1994)14 studied self-efficacy in the context of mathematical problem solving. They foundthat math self-efficacy was the most powerful predictor of math problem solving compared toother predictors including prior mathematics experience. Schunk and Swartz (1993)17 studied therelationship between writing self-efficacy and writing skills of fifth grade students. They found astrong correlation between self-efficacy, writing skills and strategy use. Students that receivedspecific progress feedback performed better than the control group that received only generalfeedback. One of our research goals is to
Innovations in Software Engineering Education: An Experimental Study of Integrating Active Learning and Design-based LearningABSTRACTSignificant advancements have been made in engineering education in recent years. An importantoutcome of these advancements is the integration and extension of fundamental pedagogies as part ofengineering curricula, as well as the need for continued research into the effectiveness of thesepedagogies on students’ learning within engineering knowledge domains. In this paper, we focus on anengineering educational research study in the domain of software engineering. This study considers theimportant research question of the efficacy of traditional lecture-homework-project teaching approachescompared to peer-to
- engineering-programs-2018-2019/#GC1[12] W. H. Guilford, “Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing,” Advances in Physiology Education, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 167-175, 2011. Appendix ARate how important the following skills are to your future career in engineering: Very Important Somewhat Not very Completely Important Important important unimportantMath skills 1 2 3 4 5Verbal Communication skills 1 2 3 4 5Writing skills 1
and reliable evaluation of student performance on open-ended problems is a challenge given that numerous reasonable responses are likely to exist for agiven problem and multiple instructors and peers may be evaluating student work. In previouswork, evaluation tools for open-ended problems, specifically Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs),were rigorously developed to ensure that the evaluation tools evolved with fidelity tocharacteristics of high performance and with increased reliability. As part of an on-goingprocess of tool development, this study presents an expert evaluation of student work using theSpring 2009 version of assessment tools. The Just-in-Time Manufacturing MEA wasimplemented in Spring 2009 in a large first-year engineering
, but the studies were based only on studentperspectives, whereas, student final grades were not included in the analysis to confirm studentsreport. Student classroom engagement greatly involves peer-to-peer interaction and not student-to-machine interaction. Nevertheless, student classroom engagement is complex and broad to behandled in one direction. Some researchers classified student behavior as a predictor of classroomengagement [11]. Likewise, Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong [12] classified factors thataffected student classroom engagement into two categories namely; the indicators and thefacilitators. The author further divided indicator factor into three categories namely: affective,behavioral, and cognitive and the facilitator
asfrequent interactions with faculty and peers and more participation in academic activities, is mostimportant for student persistence. Townsend and Wilson [4] concurred, identifying that theseinteractions contribute to a student sense of belonging at the institution. Rendón [18] found thatthe more students perceive an interaction as being positive, the more they view themselves as anintegral and valued member of their college, critical for an overall positive experience. A number of studies have identified academic integration in college as more importantthan social integration for transfer student persistence. For instance, Townsend and Wilson [4]found that community college transfers make their social connection in the classroom, and
Page 26.1149.2difficulties, the process of analyzing ethnographic data is often one of the most difficult steps forresearchers to navigate during the research process. Much of this confusion comes from attemptsto demonstrate an understanding of what was actually observed.In their seminal book, “Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes,” Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw2 discusstechniques for writing effective fieldnotes in a variety of observational settings. They state thatfieldnotes can often be written from multiple perspectives. Using a first-person point of view,researchers are able to describe specifically what they observe or experience during the datacollection process. This is particularly useful when the researcher is a member of the group s/heis
pedagogical aspects of writing computer games. John has held a variety of leadership positions, including currently serving as an ABET Commissioner and as Vice President of The Pledge of the Computing Professional; within ASEE, he previously served as Chair of the Computers in Education Division. He is a past recipient of Best Paper awards from the Computers in Education, First-Year Programs, and Design in Engineering Education Divisions, and has also been recognized for his contributions to the ABET Symposium. Dr. Estell is a Senior Member of IEEE, and a member of ACM, ASEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Phi Kappa Phi, and Upsilon Pi Epsilon.Ms. Heather Marie Sapp, Ohio Northern UniversityMr. David Reeping, Ohio Northern
39% 52% 6% 3% see what results I get)e. When grading MEA Team Final, I review my (or 45% 29% 19% 6% previous TA) feedback to the team on Draft 2f. I make a note of the mathematics that students are 29% 48% 19% 3% usingg. When grading MEA Draft 2, I review the peer 16% 35% 26% 23% feedback to the team on Draft 1h. I write down comments as I am reading the 16% 29
study was to understand reported motivation and learning strategies forstudents enrolled in an introductory computer science course (n = 111). Comparisons were madebetween freshman (n = 57) and other undergraduates (n = 54) [sophomores (n = 24) and juniors(n = 30)]. A commonly used instrument called the Motivational Strategies for LearningQuestionnaire (MSLQ) was used to assess motivations (value, expectancy, and affective) andlearning strategies (cognitive/metacognitive and resource management strategies) of thesestudents. Results showed variations in both motivation and learning strategies between the twogroups with freshman reporting a greater task value in the course, while other undergraduatesreported a greater reliance on peer learning
the classroom learning environment itself.While the activities themselves would inform the design of the learning environment, Page 24.135.4engineering faculty could basically adjust their mode of course delivery through the inclusion oflearning activities without having to feel like they have to do a complete overhaul of theirclasses. Common of these activities requires students to talk, discuss, write and apply what theyare learning outside the scope of rote learning such as memorization and application. In a follow-up study to Chi’s work, it was discussed that broad cover which is applied to all the classroomactivities used to engage
doing.” Additionally,sharing her portfolio with peers contributed to her sense of discomfort because she oftencompared herself to others and felt as though others would judge her engineering preparedness.She described this discomfort as feeling “awkward,” “anxious,” and “embarrassed,” and being“self-conscious about my writing.” In the end, sharing her portfolio content actually contributedto a sense of her validation of past experiences.Crystal: Uncomfortable sharing, validated by sharing portfolio, gained confidence in distinctbackground. Crystal recognized and acknowledged others’ perspectives and how these views aresignificant to her personal validation. She identified and accepted perspectives of others whowere both in authority positions
: Implementation of ProjectAbstractThe objectives of our educational research are as follows: 1) Faculty from engineering andfaculty from the social sciences and humanities shall develop strong working relationships andtogether implement and evaluate strategies for working across disciplines. 2) Students ofengineering and their counterparts in the liberal arts and humanities shall engage in peer-to-peerlearning and work together to solve problems. 3) Liberal arts and humanities content will bebetter integrated into the engineering curriculum. 4) Engineering students will understand thevalue and relevance of their General Education. 5) The engineering programs will be betterpositioned to assess their performances on the “soft skills” ABET outcomes (above
Computer Lab Activity Education Learning Assessment to Learning Assessment -- Close the Loop Case Studies and Mentoring and Individual reflection and Solutions Counselling sharing followed by peer review Faculty Presentations -- Educational Research Educational Paper Reviews and Paper Reviews Research Presentation in Small Groups Educational Research Educational Individual reflection and Paper – Abstract Research sharing followed by peer Writing reviewTable 3. Topics Covered in the Level 2 WorkshopIn this
fit, drawing on best practices and published research [22,23]. After a presentation and facilitated discussion, the eleven summer REU students were askedto “write a paragraph about how you are uniquely well-suited for success in materials science. Itcan be about your skills, interest, experience, perspective, values, or anything else.” Individualinterviews followed the subsequent week, between the developmental, research preparation andconceptualization period and the latter half of the summer, focused on execution. From weeks five through ten, students were tasked with executing their projects, underthe hierarchical mentoring teams of their graduate student and faculty mentor teams, which attimes included postdocs and additional, peer
peers.Five FG engineering students with high quantitative belongingness were selected for aninterview. A semi-structured interview protocol based in interpretive phenomenological analysiswas used to elucidate the students’ experiences that fostered belongingness. Separate themesfrom each student were created from coding and then overarching themes unified a sharedexperience.The following overarching themes were prevalent among the participants: similarity toclassmates, recognition as an engineer by peers, limited questioning of belongingness, andbelongingness is a state of mind. The results depict that elements of engineering identity play apart in making students feel they belong (e.g., recognition), but in some cases, belongingness isdistinct from
Involvement9, and and the institutional conditions that are related toEngagement Student Engagement10 student success.Perspective These perspectives provide insight into those factors that foster student success, whichinclude academic preparation and the student experiences while in college11. Studentexperiences emphasize both student characteristics/behaviors and institutional conditions thatimpact student success. Student behaviors include involvement in extracurricular activities,interaction with faculty and peers, motivation, and commitment, while institutional conditionsinclude the resources and educational practices that facilitate positive student behavior11. Sincethis research is focused on providing the foundation
electrical engineering, computer science and mathematics byapplying evidence-based teaching strategies—student-centered problem-based teaching(SC-PBT), example-based teaching, and just-in-time teaching (JITT); (3) incorporating classroom andlaboratory activities that require active student engagement, conceptual understanding, criticalthinking, and problem-solving; and (4) Employing model students to lead SupplementaryInstruction (SI) courses with evidence-based peer-to-peer learning strategies. The studentassessment data indicated the effectiveness of the evidence-based instructional practices, the SIpeer-to-peer learning strategies, as well as existing engagement challenges. In addition, positivefeedback was obtained from the student survey data
; visualizing and assessingproblems and synthesizing decision strategies); (3) Self-directed/learning autonomy; (4) Changemanagement and innovation, and (5) Social connectivity (peer relationships). The paperconcludes with suggestions for next steps toward a practical teaching and learning resiliencemodel for educators.IntroductionGraduates must be prepared to enter the workforce with technical capabilities, but also withhigher level competencies. Writing on lean engineering education and the role of competencymastery, Flumerfelt et.al, refer to engineering problems learners face in the industry as “multi-disciplinary” requiring competencies like systems-thinking, innovation and adaptivecompetencies [1]. They emphasize the need for “the engineering
administrative policies, faculty interactions, curriculum andpedagogy, and peer relationships. Other factors included elements of the study environment,quality of effort on the part of both faculty and student, and integration of the student into theculture of the institution. The student outcomes are explained by Astin to encompass thoseaspects of student development that the university purposefully attempts to influence, thoughdefining the outputs of interest is “clearly the sine qua non of meaningful research on collegeimpact” (p. 224). Astin1 also explained the relationships between these three factors. The collegeenvironment was clearly affected by the kinds of students who enroll (shown in relationship A).The principal concern relating to
and making presentations at conferences and meetings. Evidence indicative ofresearch contributions may include but is not limited to the following: • Inventions and innovations that lead to patents, • Publication of research results in recognized professional journals, • Participation in writing textbooks or professional manuals and design guides, • Presentation of research results at professional meetings, particularly invited presentations at national or international meetings; • Receipt of research grants, • Receipt of research awards, and • Directing student research.Of the above mentioned evidences, some are considered more important than others. Forexample
learning occurs, such as peer to peer discussions, students are still sitting.Learning science has shown that the brain and physical activity are connected. An active body canlead to an active mind. Significant work has been done on how to create intentional movement inelementary and middle school classrooms, but it is limited in higher education settings.This paper discusses how an “escape room” learning activity has been implemented and assessedin two small-sized engineering programs, York College of Pennsylvania and Iron RangeEngineering. Escape rooms are a physical adventure game to challenge players, where they mustsolve a series of puzzles to escape the room in a given time limit. In this activity, using movementto review content in
. The learning communities mitigated risk for faculty.Across all of our programs, there were signs that learning community participation reduced the Page 26.1128.12risks that faculty associate with instructional change. Peer discussion and feedback helped earlyadopters of change to feel more secure; as one member of the University of WashingtonEngineering Writing Brown Bag remarked, “It was helpful just hearing some confirmation thatmy ideas for teaching weren’t crazy”. And the exchange of teaching narratives and resourcesamong the community helped all community members to see instructional change as worthwhile,and within faculty’s
and to introduce the next activity. The activitiesin the cross-curricular program included: a) learning about portfolios in general, b) evaluatingother portfolios, c) writing a professional statement, d) finding artifacts, e) deciding whichartifacts to include in the portfolio, f) writing annotations for the artifacts, g) getting peer andprofessional feedback, and h) presenting the portfolio to others. The interaction amongst peersand the teaching faculty member provided ample opportunity to deeply explore the issuesstudents faced, the component activities, and how those issues and activities interacted during theportfolio creation.Six students participated in this study. These students included two seniors on the verge ofgraduating, two
scale items from an end-of-semester course evaluationsurvey, and (3) observations conducted from two assessment specialist, serving as externalevaluators.At the end of the semester, students (N=64) were administered a project evaluationquestionnaire, which included several open-ended questions about the project and provided ussome useful insights about students’ perceptions, learning outcomes, and satisfaction with thisreal-world design experience.In the project evaluation questionnaire, students were asked: “In your own words, how wouldyou describe this project to your parents or peers?” Overall, in reviewing students’ responses, itwas evident that students highly valued the real-world nature of the project as they described thevalue of having
undergraduate teaching assistantships in the flipped classroom, anenvironment in which TAs take on a more important role than in a traditional classroom. Flippedlearning builds upon active learning, a constructivist approach to learning that emphasizeslearning by doing [18-20]. Active learning is based on the principles that students are activelyresponsible for their own learning within a collaborative process with peers and tutors [21].Flipped learning takes this further by moving the passive and individual-focused parts of STEMlearning – the first introduction to the material – out of the classroom entirely. This frees classtime to be devoted to interactive activities, such as problem-based learning, that reinforce coursematerial without sacrificing
increase the inclusiveness of our department, hypothesizing thatmarginalized students feel too much uniqueness and too little similarity with peers. ODT positsthat people prefer groups that provide sufficient inclusiveness within the group and sufficientdifferentiation between the in-group and the out-group. We wondered if ODT could also beapplied to individual identity, such that individuals seek out an identity that is neither too similarto nor too distinct from their peers. We conducted two studies in our R1 university department totest if high and low levels of uniqueness and similarity were indeed associated with negativefeelings. We found that the average student was not necessarily averse to high or low levels ofthese two factors. In Study
themselves enoughtime to write up all of their observations and conclusions. In addition, slightly loweraverage scores on “Proposing Methods of Solution” (average 2.2) and “Applying Methodto Generate Results” (average 2.2) reinforced observations from instructors of ourprogram’s Senior students that our students do not understand the process of writingrequirements and using them to guide the design and testing process. Both of theseweaknesses are being addressed in the Spring 2009 session of this course: students willgo through a separate exercise in requirements-writing before confronting thisassignment, and the assignment itself will be due earlier in the semester, with anopportunity for re-writing and re-submitting after peer feedback. The