, and this would not be reflected in the evaluation.Part III of the final project included the analyses of data collected as part of a full scaleinstrumentation program at an excavation site for a new 10 story hotel in downtown ColoradoSprings, CO. The data was obtained from a colleague specializing in excavation support andmicropile installation. The project involved a retention wall (soil nail wall) and foundationsupport for two buildings adjacent to the excavation. The owners of the property agreed toinstrument the excavation and support structures to ensure the adjacent buildings did not movemore than tolerable limits during the excavation. Students were given all pertinent informationfor the site and instrumentation plans as well as the
students have reported the greatestgrowths and appreciations for the opportunity. A number of success stories, as recounted by thescholars themselves, are reflected below:The NSF S-STEM Scholarship has been an unfamiliar, yet amazing opportunity and experiencelast semester. I say unfamiliar because I never imagined being part of scholarship program atsome point in my college life. The many workshops provided like graduate school speeches andspeeches from New York City College of Technology alumni were very inspiring. These speakersprovided me with an abundance of information about graduate school and in a way encouragedme to make the most out of my undergraduate studies by taking the opportunities that areoffered. Mandatory meetings and advisement
there were occasions when the forms did notwork as predicted due to some setting issues. The recommendations to use Google forms wouldbe to set up the forms so that the students can enter appropriate style of answers such as multiplechoice/short answer/paragraph or more. Also, the settings should reflect the ability of the studentto edit their answers and view the responses. If the correct format of the answer is not chosen,then the Google form will show not work as seen in Figure 6 below. Here the question shouldhave been set up as a multiple choice with specific options instead it was set up as short answerquestion. Here you can see that some of the responses although correct were not consideredcorrect due to the misalignment of the spaces
exit these models (p<0.001). Similarly,these students were over 70% less likely to exit the red classification (p<0.001). Studentsin soft applied fields were also less likely to exit the yellow classification (p<0.05), whileundeclared students were less likely to exit the red classification. The linear and non-linear predictors were significant for the yellow and red exit models, and like the yellowentry model, the coefficients suggest that the risk of exiting either model increases until amid-term point, tapers off, and then increases again towards the end of the semester. Thisfinding is likely explained by the weight of assignments during these periods of thesemester (midterm and final examinations), and thus, may simply reflect the
in a post-typographic world (pp. 283-301).[15] Maxwell, Joseph A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interpretative approach (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc.[16] Emerson, Robert M, Fretz, Rachel I, & Shaw, Linda L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes: University of Chicago Press.[17] Walther, Joachim, Sochacka, Nicola W, & Kellam, Nadia N. (2013). Quality in interpretive engineering education research: Reflections on an example study. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 626-659.[18] Stevens, Reed, O'connor, Kevin, Garrison, Lari, Jocuns, Andrew, & Amos, Daniel M. (2008). Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning. Journal of
. Holly Matusovich for contributing to this study. Also, this material isbased upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as a Graduate ResearchFellowship. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions in this material are those of the authors anddo not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science FoundationReferences:1. M.Gläser-ZikudaandS.Järvelä,Applicationofqualitativeandquantitativemethodstoenrich understandingofemotionalandmotivationalaspectsoflearning,Internationaljournalof educationalresearch,47(2),2008,pp.79-83.2. K.E.Winters,H.M.Matusovich,M.S.Brunhaver,H.L.Chen,K.YasuharaandS.Sheppard,From FreshmanEngineeringStudentstoPracticingProfessionals:ChangesinBeliefsaboutImportant
perceivethemselves to fit into a given group, in this case engineering,5 which in turn affects how theyprogress along the academic and career path in their field.6The engineering identity framework utilized in the study is partially based off a physics identitymodel composed of four basic factors: performance, competence, interest, and recognition.5,7Performance describes a student’s belief in their ability to perform in their classes or whenconducting engineering tasks.8 If a student performs poorly in class, they are less likely toidentify themselves as an engineer. Competence describes a student’s belief in their ability tounderstand engineering material, which is often similarly reflected in a student’s performance inclass.8 Interest describes how
. [4] Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). Definition and Selection of Competencies (DeSeCo) Project. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/41529556.pdf [5] Williams, J. (2002). The engineering portfolio: Communication, reflection, and student learning outcomes assessment. International Journal of Engineering Education, 18(2), 199–207. [6] Boiarsky, C. (2004). Teaching engineering students to communicate effectively: A metacognitive approach. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20 (2), 251–60. [7] Gömleksi˙ z, M. N. (2007). Effectiveness of cooperative learning (jigsaw II) method in teaching English as a foreign language to
inverted sections with those in control sections (i.e., traditional coursemodel). Treatment and control students completed the same measures (e.g., content assessmentsand student attitude surveys) and faculty members, who taught in both conditions, alsocompleted reflection papers related to their experiences. The guiding research questions for thestudy and an overview of the assessment measures are shown in Table 1 below (more details onassessment measures are included in a subsequent section of this paper). In the final year of thestudy, the researchers designed what they felt were “best practices” for the inverted model in allsections of their courses and the same outcome measures were used.Table1.EvaluationQuestionsandOutcomeMeasures
. Likewise, as the sample sizes inTable 4 and 82 and 65 for males and females, respectively, for the correlations below 0.30 thestatistical power of the t-tests comparing scales is well below 0.80. All of this is to say that byincreasing the sample size in future studies, it is possible we will detect relationships between thesurvey scales that we have perhaps failed to detect here by committing a Type II error.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under EEC1150874 and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. DGE-1333468.Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
studies among sections of a course.2 Page 26.795.3The final top level of the classification scheme is pictured in Figure 1 which shows the eightmain outcomes (or categories) where each of the more specific outcomes are cataloged. Thecomplete classification scheme in a table format can be found in Appendix A. Figure 1: Top Level of the Classification Scheme1Application 1: Application of the Scheme among Multiple Course SectionsTwo Midwest universities have extensively utilized the classification scheme to reflect uponcurrent practices and determine gaps in content.2 A self-study exercise was performed by oneMidwestern
” on their team mates’ work. Exam scores of these students reflect theirlack of participation in the team activities and are lower than their team mates’ scores.Instructor intervention was minimal in all courses. As discussed above the instructor onlyintervened one time to redistribute a team because the size of the team was too small, notbecause of any personality or working conflicts. In general, the instructor does not directly helpthe teams work together, and the instructor was not asked to intervene in any team disagreementsby the teams. The teams–as a result of the TBL structure–are self-regulating.ConclusionsTeams in Team-Based Learning courses learn quickly how to effectively work together. Theteams exhibited rare to no team conflict
, members of a culture are asked to list as many items or beliefs that they can recall aboutone or more dimensions of a cultural model identified by the researcher, usually from previousstudies and the literature. For example, a researcher can ask participants to list their beliefs about“how the teacher-student relationship should function,” a dimension within the cultural model ofeducation success. Free listing assumes that individuals 1) with extensive knowledge providemore responses than those with less knowledge, 2) list most familiar and meaningful responsesfirst, and 3) provide responses that reflect their local cultural knowledge. 3 Ultimately, free listingmeasures the strongest beliefs shared by participants about this dimension.Currently
. However, there were participants across a variety of ethnicities and from all studentclassifications, including graduate students. Other majors represented in the sample wereMechanical Engineering, Construction Science, Petroleum Engineering, and various otherEngineering programs. Data on handedness was also gathered and 12.9% (n=22) of theparticipants were left-handed which is reflective of the population as a whole. A summary of thedemographics of the participants is found in Table 3. Table 3: Demographic information Total Number of Participants: N = 170 Student Gender College Major Ethnicity
Feedback: A Learning Theory Perspective, Educational Research Review 9, 1-15.5. Quinton, S., and Smallbone, T. (2010) Feeding Forward: Using Feedback to Promote Student Reflection and Learning–A Teaching Model, Innovations in Education and Teaching International 47, 125-135.6. Narciss, S. (2008) Feedback Strategies for Interactive Learning Tasks, Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology 3, 125-144.7. Creasy, M. A. (2015) Data Extraction from Web-Based Learning Management Systems, In Illinois-Indiana ASEE Conference, Forty Wayne, Indiana.8. Creasy, M. A. (2014) Hybrid Class Experiences: Flipping Mechanics Courses and Homework Feedback, In ASEE Illinois/Indiana Section
. Describe future research directions 7A. Outline ‘next steps’ or future work 7B. Suggest methodological improvements 8. Engage in learning 8A. Appropriately connect/use course concepts in the investigation process 8B. Identify/reflect on “lessons learned” 8C. Manage time and resources effectively to complete the investigationIn problem analysis, the student displays the ability to: 1. Define the problem 1A. State the problem in their own words 1B. Identify primary problem goal(s) 1C. Characterize the type of problem and the type of solution sought 1D. Represent the problem visually (e.g., free body diagram, circuit schematic) 1E. Identify known information 1F. Recognize
(which changes semesterto-semester). Notably, both projects have a final event that is framed as a competition. Winningthat competition is worth a few extra credit points, as well as bragging rights. These elementsmight work to induce a performance orientation.MethodsWe will report on a subset of the results from a larger study investigating individual differenceson teams, collected in Spring 2017 (n=60), Fall 2017 (n=50), and Spring 2018 (n=60). Before theproject started, students completed a trait goal orientation instrument modified from [15] tomeasure their state achievement orientation. As part of a reflection on each project and their teamexperience, students completed a wrap-up survey with items addressing their individual
there are no failures in engineering, just opportunities for redesign. Engaging inthe engineering design process within education is intended as a way for youth to practiceencountering challenges and persevering through them to create a solution [4].Helping students learn about, and learn how to use, the engineering design process is a major aimof engineering education [5]. Engineering design is useful in practice because it allows studentsto make mental models concrete and offers time to make decisions, reflect, communicate, andcollaborate [6]. Additionally, understanding engineering design is important because the processis used by engineers in all professional fields [7]. Because of its prevalence among professionals,the process is key to
initiatives to address malleable traits in studentsthat might hinder their academic success.Acknowledgement This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNos. DUE-1626287, DUE-1626185, and DUE-1626148.). Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We would like to thank all thestudents who participated in this study. Without their time spent in thoughtful response, thiswork would not be possible.References1. Gordeeva, T.O. and Osin, E.N. (2011). Optimistic attributional style as a predictor of well- being and performance in different academic settings. Ch. 14
’ practices and values also alignedfor both factors indicating they did what they believed was best for their success. There was,however, no alignment between students’ prioritization and their values. Early interventions thathelp balance students’ priorities, supported with ongoing reflective practice, may help bringstudents’ priorities, practices and values into alignment.LimitationsWe believe that the participants in this study represent all Canadian undergraduate engineeringstudents, but recognize they are not statistically representative. The findings of this survey mayhave a bias associated with non-response. Students who chose to complete the survey may havedifferent views from those who did not. It is also not known what other factors may
approach of this research is to employ an outreach program as a non-classroom basedpedagogy of engagement. A number of non-outreach opportunities outside the classroom forengineering students have been studied to determine if they do indeed encourage intentionallearning goals and active reflection by the student on what he or she learns throughout theexperience.[22-25] These opportunities range from volunteer community service to field education,such as internships and co-ops.[26] Research has shown that these experiences not only allowstudents to gain a sense of civic responsibility, but that they also help students to developprofessional teamwork and communication skills, assist in identifying career paths, preparestudents for the demands of
Higher Education. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.4. Tinto, V. (1988) Stages of Student Departure: Reflections on the Longitudinal Character of Student Leaving The Journal of Higher Education: Ohio State University Press. Page 12.387.105. Rendon, L. I., Jalomo, R.E., and Nora, A. (2000). Theoretical considerations in the study of minority student retention in higher education: In Rethinking the Departure Puzzle: New Theory and Research on College Student Retention, edited by J. Braxton, 127-156. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.6. Kuh, G.D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning
more informed crystallizes over time consciousness Constructivism Realities are local and Findings are created Findings are elicited and specific, constructed by through transactions refined through further individuals and cultures between investigator interaction and respondentsThe authors believe that paradigms reflect such fundamental beliefs that it is often difficult for aperson to evaluate research from another paradigm18. As Elizabeth St. Pierre states the issue,“Unfortunately, it is often the case that those who work within one theoretical framework findothers
collecting dataabout actual students and model their educational outcomes within the larger system of theengineering program. Page 23.611.4The second goal is to share the results and methodology of creating these predictive models withengineering educators and university administrators for adaptation and adoption at otherinstitutions. The methodology will thus need to include reflections of which aspects are mostsensitive to differences in institutions or their academic policies. This goal will be met bysharing the results through scholarly publications and demonstrations at educational conferences.Ultimately, a tool adopted for university planning
process: ≠ Blue – Enablers ≠ Pink – Hinderers ≠ Yellow – Student Need Statements ≠ Green – Student Need Factors ≠ White – Pre-defined Student Need Factors (based on the student success theoretical perspectives)Step 2: Elicit Once participants had an understanding of the scope of the meeting, they were guidedthrough a brainstorming exercise by the facilitator. The discussion questions allowed the groupto reflect on their own experiences and provide their perception of those needs that facilitateengineering student success. To ensure that participants clearly understood what is expected ofthem, each discussion question was initially posed to the group to provide an example
Table 5 (Cont’d). Concept & Problem-solving InventoryIV. Assessment InstrumentThe goal of the instrument is to place students at their appropriate levels within the taxonomy.The students take a series of three tests starting with fundamental level problems as indicated inthe inventory. The assessment tool has been designed to be simple and easy to implement. It wasdesigned to focus on the student's conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills. Theassessment instrument provides an essential guide for the instructor to assess the student’sproblem-solving skills that also require covering the conceptual knowledge; this is reflected inthe distribution of the score weights among the competencies. The conceptual competencies ofthe
text books these days come up with new editions more often than before, this SCLactivity keeps the students informed about the latest happenings in the subject they are learning.Students’ feedback comments reflect that they are anxious to hear about the latest developments asthey come to each class – they have a different expectation at the beginning of each class.Learner-Centric SCLThe main learning base here is focused on learners becoming ‘creators’ with their own ideaswhich advances creativity/innovation and uses any and all prior knowledge the learners mightbring to the table. This is a team activity and involves the student-teams designing, creating
theywill encounter when they enter industry or pursue further academic study. This work focuses onthe development of an intervention meant to provide students with access to the honest problemsolving processes of experts when solving statics problems. Using cognitive apprenticeship as atheoretical framework, we seek to look at the impact that exposure to honest problem solvingstrategies has on novice problem solving skills.Literature Review and Theoretical FrameworkProblem Solving in StaticsThe ability to problem solve is a critical skill that is required of undergraduate engineeringstudents in the United States. The need for this skill is reflected in ABET Criterion 3. (e) thatstates that students must be able to “identify, formulate, and solve
of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.ReferencesBorden, V.M.H. (2005). Using alumni research to align program improvement with institutional accountability. NewDirections for Institutional Research, 126, 61-72.Buyer, L.S. & Miller, K.J. (n.d.) Increasing survey response rates: Combining experimental manipulations.Retrieved March 19, 2012, fromhttps://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:EgrP6237otUJ:www.govst.edu/uploadedFiles/Institutional_Research/Survey%2520Response%2520Rates%25206.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgXCHcRZHMa2HgJL6Im4E4LIArBAi6_qgOazdxPKNSRkSc0ANQFmVvWUbVFSAAwFZBPaQnH1qgipIPpGy2w4_Z_4JAZgdqnomSleN6jr2-nIEnVzValyb_mo9T2MhB-jnTj1TfW&sig=AHIEtbRh-5HOn7ezW8KpHVe6bnlTIVnD9A
students Page 25.508.3completed the written portion of the problem in class, they completed a subsequent activityinvolving verbal think-aloud reflection on their in-class work before submitting their assignment.As a result, the sample is not inclusive of all students in the class, as some students did notsubmit their assignment and some students did not turn in self-report surveys of mental workloadbut did turn in solutions. Students worked out problems just as they would using traditional penand paper so as not to artificially influence mental workload; however, they were encouraged touse planning techniques including restating the problem