services we provide these students.At the very least, this justifies why we should ask the questions in a guided, open-ended format.This project builds upon two predominant concepts in adult learning literature; self-directedlearning and experiential learning. One of the fundamental concepts of andragogy is the conceptthat adult learners are more inclined towards self-directed learning than their youngercounterparts.12 Dating back to the 1930’s, education pioneers such as John Dewey recognizedthat ‘all genuine education comes about through experience’ and this is echoed by modernliterature that emphasizes the need for adult education programs to capitalize on this lifeexperience that adult students bring to the classroom (p.162). It is important
. Haller, C. R.; Gallagher, V. J.; Weldon, T. L.; Felder, R. M., Dynamics of peer education in cooperativelearning workgroups. Journal of Engineering Education 2000, 89, 285-293.6. Demetry, C.; Groccia, J. E., A comparative assessment of students' experiences in two instructional formatsof an introductory materials science course. Journal of Engineering Education 1997, 86, 203-210.7. Terenzini, P. T.; Cabrera, A. F.; Colbeck, C. L.; Parente, J. M.; Bjorklund, S. A., Collaborative learning vs.Lecture/discussion: Students' reported learning gains. Journal of Engineering Education 2001, 90, 123-130.8. Woods, D. R.; Hrymak, A. N.; Marshall, R. R.; Wood, P. E.; Crowe, C. M.; Hoffman, T. W.; Wright, J. D.;Taylor, P. A.; Woodhouse, K
Faculty Emailed6. Have you increased or added the use of any of the six recommendations? If Yes,please indicate which one(s).Share an encouraging or Share an encouraging orinformative message with informative message withstudents 6 86% students 2 100%Take a minute to give Take a minute to giveconstructive feedback 4 57% constructive feedback 0 0%Show that you are Show that you areapproachable 4 57% approachable 1 50%Encourage students to meet Encourage students to meetwith you during office hours 6 86% with you during office hours
United States. The Bridge, 39(3), 5-10.2. Goodland, S. (1997). Responding to perceived training needs for graduate teaching assistants. Studies in Higher Education, 22(1), 83-92.3. Salinas, M.F., Kozuh, G., & Seraphine, A. (1999). I think I can: Improving teaching self-confidence of international teaching assistants. Journal of Graduate Teaching Assistant Development, 6(3), 149-156.4. Fink, L.D. & Ambrose, S. (2005). Becoming a professional engineering educator: A new role for a new era. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 185-194.5. Shulman, L. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching; A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Witrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Teaching, 3rd ed
the curricular components: a. Primary Parallel: Key phrases regarding the project particulars were underlined and classified along one of the parallels. Then the paper was looked at as a whole: The primary parallel was determined by the most frequently occurring parallel. b. Secondary Parallel(s): The secondary parallels were then identified and their relationships to the other parallels were determined.These curricular design components were then considered as a whole, using the PCM. In design,each curricular component seeks to motivate, instruct, or assess students in the content areas. Byusing the PCM “lens,” the relationships of curricular components to the parallels
, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA, June 26-29, 2016.[6] M. Lovett, “Make Exams Worth More Than the Grade: Using Exam Wrappers to Promote Metacognition,” Using Reflection and Metacognition to Improve Student Learning: Across the Disciplines, Across the Academy, ed. M. Kaplan et al., Stylus, Sterling, VA, USA, 2013, pp. 18-52.[7] K.J. Chew, H.L. Chen, B. Rieken, A. Turpin, and S. Sheppard, Improving Students’ Learning in Statics Skills: Using Homework and Exam Wrappers to Strengthen Self-regulated Learning, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, USA, Jun 26-29, 2016.[8] M. Craig, D. Horton, D. Zingaro, and D. Heap
chemical engineering Safety engineering& Armament technology Automation3.5 CheckingThe three authors exchanged the new coding results, from which each authorrandomly selected 10 items for "triangulation", that is, author 1 checked author 2'scoding work, author 2 checked author 3's coding work, and author 3 checked author1's coding work. Author 1 calculated and reviewed the consistency level, which wasat 92.5% agreement at this stage. At last, the authors discussed the codingcontroversy at the next meeting, reached a consensus and revised the original code.3.6 QuantizingThe initial secondary question addressed is, “what has been the construction
Graduate Students (n = 200) (n = 52) (n = 90) *Significant difference between groupsFigure 7 – Group Comparisons of Median Current and Expected GPA for Engineering Students References[1] “National Center for Educational Statistics: Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions Fall2011 and graduation rates, selected cohorts 2003-2008. Retrieved fromhttps://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_200.asp.”[2] A. Brown, J. Bimrose, S.-A. Barnes, and D. Hughes, “The role of career adaptabilities formid-career changers,” J. Vocat. Behav., vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 754–761, Jun. 2012.[3] Help Wanted: Projections of Job and Education
experiments. One of the important features of the rectifier is its low-pass filter to produce a relativelysmooth DC output. In traditional electronics courses, teaching low-pass filters at this point do nottypically use the concept of transfer function and convolution to derive the low-pass relationshipbetween the input and the output of the filter. By incorporating Signals and Systems into the KImodule, we were able to allow the students to systematically and rigorously derive the input-output relationship of the low-pass filter using the concepts of impulse response and convolutionto gain a better understanding of its circuit behavior. Table 2 lists a number of key concepts used in the first KI and the course(s) the key conceptsare taught
/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (2001).7. Bjorklund, S. and Fortenberry, N., “Measuring Student and Faculty Engagement in Engineering Education,” CASEE REPORT 5902001-20050705, Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education (CASEE), National Academy of Engineering (2005)8. Mwavita, M., “Self-Regulated Learning and Classroom Engagement in Calculus Achievement Among Freshmen Engineering Student,” Proceedings of the 2006 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference (2006). Page 12.280.8 Table 2: Comparison of concept inventory results for subsequent course offerings
variety of observable events and the certainty of events observed multipletimes. Second, analyzing each session more carefully would refine the understanding of howsession design affects the learning environment. Since analyzing more session and analyzingthem more carefully both increase the analysis time, a more efficient analysis method is needed.Analysis based on multiple reviews of the video recording may provide just such an analysismethod.8. References1. Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). “Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices,” Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 87-100.2. Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (2000). Models of Teaching (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.3. Prince, M
landscape of howdesign has been experienced across disciplines and not restricted to a single field, whichwould reduce the opportunity to fully understand the variation.Participants. Participant selection is guided by an attempt to gain the largest diversity inexperiences possible within the aims of the study4. Phenomenographic studies do not aimto generalize, thus the sample is not statistically representative, but rather chosen toobtain diversity. The sample size of a phenomenographic study is traditionally small, inthe range of fifteen to twenty participants5.In this study, twenty professional designers served as participants. Participant diversitywas based on three criteria: gender, years of experience, and disciplinary association(s).After
framework grounding this effort, and theresearch questions.The theoretical framework guiding our current effort is based on constructivist learning theory 8,including communities of practice 9, 10. Constructivist learning theory is a framework of learninginvolving a process of integrating new knowledge with prior knowledge such that knowledge iscontinually constructed and reconstructed by the individual. Communities of practice refer tocommunities of practitioners into which newcomers would enter and attempt to acquire thesociocultural practices of the community 9, 10. So, in a Community of Practice (CoP), newcomersare socialized into the practice of the community through mutual engagement with, and directionand support from an old-timer(s
. Wankat, P.C. and F.S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993.2. Koretsky, M.D., D. Amatore, C. Barnes, and S. Kimura (2008). Enhancement of Student Learning in Experimental Design using a Virtual Laboratory. IEEE Trans. Ed., 51, 76.3. Mosterman, P.J., M.A.M. Dorlandt, J.O. Campbell, C. Burow, R. Bouw, A.J. Brodersen, and J. Bourne (1994). Virtual Engineering Laboratories: Design and Experiments. Journal of Engineering Education, 83, 279.4. Kemeny, J. and B. Zeitler (2001). An online geomechanics course with a virtual rock lab based on streaming audio and vector graphics. Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.5. Hodge, H., H.S. Hinton, and M. Lightner
. Page 14.1009.15Software. The column and bar graphs in this paper were made with Microsoft Excel 2007.However, dot plots and multiway plots are not in Excel’s native vocabulary. The options forcreating dot plots and multiway plots include: 1. Excel Add-Ins. Robbins2 points readers to an Excel macro written by Kenneth Klein for making individual dot plots and Vidmar7 shows how to use Excel for both dot plots and multiway plots. We have not tested these add-ins and so offer no opinion on their utility. 2. SAS: This popular commercial package for statistical analysis has a “multivariate” toolkit that includes multiway plots. 3. R: an open source software version of the commercial package called S. Both the R and S
gauge student progress relative tothe program objectives.As illustrated by column three in Table 2, data collected by the measurement tools do notnecessarily reflect a single program objective. Indeed, a single assessment activity may helpevaluate student academic progress in more than one area. Table 2. Relationship between Program Questions and Measurement Tools. Objectives are referred to with their numbers as listed in Table 1 of this paper. Evaluation Questions Measurement Tool Objective(s) Addressed by Data Obtained via Measurement Tool(s)Are mentees
jobmentoring programs (54%) versus Cohort 2 participants (24%). Job mentoring has the effect ofestablishing an employee into the company culture and helps when it comes to advance in theirjobs.To determine the effects of the Never Stop Learning module, we asked participants whichcomponents of the module they had achieved since graduation. Six months is fairly early toevaluate the total effects of continuous learning on a person, but there were some distinctivedifferences between the cohorts when it came to the components and the proportion of thecohorts that obtained a certificate and completed online courses. For these components, Cohort1’s participation was 73% & 27%, respectively compared with Cohort 2 that was 29% & 19%,respectively. When
of STEM innovators. Routledge.Jordan, S., & Lande, M. (2013) Should Makers be the engineers of the future? Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference (pp. 815-817), Oklahoma City, OK.Jordan, S., & Lande, M. (2014). Might Young Makers be the engineers of the future? In Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference. Madrid, Spain. http://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2014.7044218Kalil, T. (2012, June 13). Extreme marshmallow cannons! How the government and private sector can turn American kids on to science through “Making” [Blog post].Kalil, T., & Garg, K. (2012, May 17). Responding to the president’s call, a new effort to help more students be makers [Blog
Columbia University and the Cooper Union in New York City. She received her PhD from Columbia University in 2006, where her research focused on the mechanical and frictional properties of articular cartilage. Dr. Basalo ’s teaching experience includes Thermodynamics, Computer Graphics, Materials Science and laboratory courses. Since 2015 she has been actively involved in the University of Miami College of Engineering’s ”Redefining Engineering Education” strategic plan on educational innovation. As part of this plan, Dr. Basalo worked with 2 other faculty members to organize inaugural Senior Design Expo in May 2017, an exposition where over 200 senior students showcased their Capstone projects to the University of Miami
scholar with signature work in self-study research methodology including co-editor of Polyvocal Professional Learn- ing through Self-Study Research (2015) and author of Self-Study Teacher Research (2011) and lead editor of Learning Communities In Practice (2008). She is recipient of the Dissertation Research Award, Uni- versity of Virginia, the Outstanding Scholar Award, University of Maryland, a Fulbright Scholar, and a Visiting Self-study Scholar. She served as chair of S-STEP from 2013-2015 and is a current Co-PI of two National Science Foundation (NSF) funded grants: Designing Teaching: Scaling up the SIMPLE Design Framework for Interactive Teaching Development and a research initiation grant: Student-directed
, Bloom's Taxonomy, Cooperative Learning, and so on." in Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.[8] Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., and Nevgi, A. 2007. "The effect of pedagogical training on teaching in higher education." Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 23, pp. 557-571.[9] Van Der Vleuten, C.P.M., Dolmans, D.H.J.M., and Scherpbier, A.J.J.A. 2000. "The need for evidence in education." Medical Teacher, vol. 22, pp. 246-250.[10] Candy, P.C., Crebert, G., and O'Leary, J. 1994. Developing Lifelong Learners through Undergraduate Education." National Board of Employment, Education and Training (NBEET).[11] Biggs, J. and Tang, C. 2010. "Applying
project.References1. Sweeney, L. B. & Sterman, J. D. Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 16, 249–286 (2000).2. Sweeney, L. B. & Sterman, J. D. Thinking about systems: student and teacher conceptions of natural and social systems. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 23, 285–311 (2007).3. Thompson, P. W. in Learning Mathematics 125–170 (Springer, 1994).4. Lobato, J., Ellis, A. B. & Munoz, R. How ‘Focusing Phenomena’ in the Instructional Environment Support Individual Students’ Generalizations. Math. Think. Learn. 5, 1–36 (2003).5. Flynn, C. D., Davidson, C. I. & Dotger, S. Engineering Student Misconceptions about Rate and Accumulation Processes. ASEE Zone I Conference Proceedings (2014). at 6. Gray, G. L. et
, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering.” 2014.[5] A. Bandura, Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.[6] J. Lave and E. Wenger, Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1991.[7] R. Mislevy, “Evidence and inference in educational assessment,” CSE Technical Report 414. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Los Angeles, 1996.[8] R. J. Mislevy, L. S. Steinberg, and R. G. Almond, “On the Structure of Educational Assessments,” Meas. Interdiscip. Res. Perspect., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 92–101, 2003.[9] R. Mislevy and M. M. Riconscente, “Evidence-centered
in engineering education”. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. Ed. Johri, Aditya, and Barbara M. Olds. Cambridge University Press, 2014.7. Lesser, Eric L., and John Storck. "Communities of practice and organizational performance." IBM systems journal 40.4 (2001): 831-841.8. Cook, Karen S., et al. Social exchange theory. Springer Netherlands, 2013. Page 26.1051.159. Li, Linda C., et al. "Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice." Implementation Science 4.1 (2009): 11.10. Sharratt, Mark, and Abel Usoro. "Understanding knowledge-sharing in online communities of practice." Electronic Journal on
During Class After Class Preparation activity: Short lecture Finish application Reading, video, or assignments, open lab problem(s) Activities Prepare for next class Evaluation: online quiz Application or turned in solution assignments or labMethodsThis study was conducted under Institutional Review Board exempt protocol #2013E0570 inaccordance with the Office of Responsible Research Practices.We have collected data through online surveys and daily preparatory work quizzes given via theonline
, though, our ability to facilitate a community of practice is weakened, since the classbecomes less of a laboratory, and more of a classroom. Our job as professors of communicationis not simply to share information; it is to help students develop an identity of competentpractice, to promote citizenship in the broadest sense of the term.REFERENCES1. Johnson, I. J. (2010). Class size and student performance at a public research university: A Cross-Classified Model. Research in Higher Education 51: 701-723.2. Williams, D. D., Cook, P. F., Quinn, B., and Jensen, R. P. (1985). University class size: is smallerbetter? Research in Higher Education 23: 307-318.3. Kopeika, N. S. (1992). On the relationship of number of students to academic level
Technology Creates the Reality”. In: The Nature of Technology: Implications for Learning and Teaching. Ed. by Michael P. Clough, Joanne K. Olson, and Dale S. Niederhauser. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013, pp. 101–110. [4] Aditya Johri and Barbara M Olds. “Situated Engineering Learning: Bridging Engineering Education Research and the Learning Sciences”. In: Journal of Engineering Education 100.1 (2011), pp. 151–185. [5] Herbert A. Simon and Allen Newell. “Human Problem Solving: The State of the Theory in 1970.” In: American Psychologist 26.2 (1971), p. 145. [6] Elliot P. Douglas et al. “Moving beyond Formulas and Fixations: Solving Open-Ended Engineering Problems”. In: European Journal of Engineering
: Insights from Undergraduates.”[2] J. Dewey, Experience And Education. Simon and Schuster, 2007.[3] D. A. Schön, The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books, 1983.[4] A. R. Carberry, T. S. Harding, P. J. Cunningham, K. R. Csavina, M. C. Ausman, and D. Lau, “Professional and personal use of reflection by engineering faculty, students, and practitioners,” presented at the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2018, vol. 2018-June.[5] L. Boswell, “The structure trap: students’ perceptions of reflection on a co-curricular immersion service-learning trip,” Thesis, Humboldt State University, 2010.[6] G.-D. Chen, C.-C. Liu, K.-L. Ou, and M.-S. Lin