Senior or More n 5,819 1,722 4,097 807 932 2,714 2,384 721 % Total 100% 30% 70% 14% 16% 47% 41% 12%2 For the purposes of this study, underrepresented minority (URM) is defined as any respondent who indicated a Latino/a, African American, Native American or Pacific Islander race or ethnicity. First Generation College (FGC) is defined as any respondent whose parents(s)/guardian(s) had less post-secondary education than an Associate degree. There are many possible definitions of a first generation college student (see Choy 2001; Auclair et al. 2008; Toutkoushian, Stollberg, and Slaton 2015) and this
identifyingbarriers and facilitators to students’ motivation by focusing on the basic needs of autonomy,competence and relatedness. In addition SDT is also a useful framework for pedagogicalinnovation that curriculum developments can use for the development of motivating andstudents centered learning contexts.References[1] M. Baeten, E. Kyndt, K. Struyven, and F. Dochy, “Using Student-Centred Learning Environments to Stimulate Deep Approaches to Learning: Factors Encouraging or Discouraging Their Effectiveness,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 243–260, 2010.[2] L. Postareff, A. Parpala, and S. Lindblom-Ylänne, “Factors contributing to changes in a deep approach to learning in different learning environments,” Learn. Environ. Res., vol
: 10.1021/acs.est.6b06016 [12] Edwards, M., Roy, S. (2017) Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science in the 21st Century. Environmental Engineering Science, 34(1): 51-61. [13] Roy, S and Edwards, M. (2019) Citizen Science During the Flint, Michigan Federal Water Emergency: Ethical Dilemmas and Lessons Learned. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1): 12, pp. 1–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.154[14] United Nations (2017) The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2017. New York: UN. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/report/2017/TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport201
practitioners, to enrich the academic process by bringing the practice into the classroom. After Foundation Engineering was over, and the final course grade was out, a“questionnaire” was sent to those who enrolled in the class seeking their opinions, evaluations,and any comment(s) they may wish to offer. Twenty six out of a total of 30 students returned the“questionnaire” on time! The opinions expressed and comments made were, by and large,positive to say the least. After regrouping, and rephrasing to correct the English language; thecomments offered by the ex- students, could be summarized as follows: The adjunct was easy to approach every time and everywhere, and was always helpful, His input into the course has dramatically
solutions, 5) build/ program/complete a working model orprototype of the best solution or best two or three solutions, 6) test and validate the solution(s) toidentify problems, and 7) redesign and retest until a good working model of the solution isdeveloped. Included in the selection process (step 4) is a detailed engineering economics analysisand, if appropriate, statistical analysis. A compromise clearly must be struck between achievingas many of these objectives as possible and actually being able to secure projects. If cost, forexample is not an issue, then a class-wide, competitive project can be devised that accomplishesmost of these goals, although the time available for step 7 above is limited by the length of thesemester. A project idea
Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA), April 21-23, 2017, Nagoya, Japan, pp. 275-278.[4] O. Lawanto and A. Febrian, “Student self-regulation in Capstone design courses: A case study of two project teams,” in Proc. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Oct 12-15, 2016, Erie, PA, pp. 1-5.[5] W. Lee, “Assessment of self-regulated learning in senior capstone design,” in Proc. 8th Annual Process Education Conf., June 14-17, 2018, Erie, PA, pp. 1-8.[6] M.M. Vázquez, M.C. Rodríguez, and M.L. Nistal, “Analysis of Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Oriented to the Design of Software Support,” in Proc. 2014 Frontiers in Education Conf. (FIE), Oct. 22-25, 2014, Madrid, Spain, pp. 1-9.[7] K. Arnsdorff, A. Chen, R. McCord, and S
semester grades between classes that usedthe quiz approach and those that did not use it. The survey is presented in Appendix A, and thegrade comparison results are in Appendix B.The study consisted of applying the "in-class quiz" methodology at the undergraduate level overa period of three years. Students from the departments of civil engineering, electricalengineering, and mechanical engineering participated in the pilot study, the details of which arepresented in Table 1. Table 1: Pilot Study Course Description (Engineering) Course Session Year/s Department1 Major2 Number Average of Age
provided strong evidence of validity for the EPRA tool from someof the interview cases examined.AcknowledgementsThis material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant#1158863. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Bibliography1 ABET, "Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs Effective for Evaluation During the 2015-2016 Accreditation Cycle," ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission, Baltimore, MD, 2014.2 L. J. Shuman, M. Besterfield-Sacre and J. McGourty, "The ABET "Professional Skills" - Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed?," Journal of
. Page 26.743.13[4] Atman, C.J., Adams, R.S., Cardella, M.E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J.J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 359 -379.[5] Trevelyan, J. (2014). The making of an expert engineer. London: Taylor & Francis.[6] Van de Poel, I., & Verbeek, P. (2006). Editorial: Ethics and engineering design. Science, Technology & Human Values, 31(3), 223-236.[7] Van de Poel, I., & Royakkers, L. (2011). Ethics, technology, and engineering: An introduction. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.[8] de Moura, G.R., Leader, T., Pelletier, J., & Abrams, D. (2008). Prospects for group processes and
., & Jenkins, A. (2006). Strengthening the teaching‐research linkage in undergraduate courses and programs. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2006(107), 43-53.[5] Elton, L. (2006). The nature of effective or exemplary teaching in an environment that emphasizes strong research and teaching links. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2006(107), 33-41.[6] Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 29(2), 183-201.[7] Hathaway, R. S., Nagda, B. A., & Gregerman, S. R. (2002). The relationship of undergraduate research participation to graduate and professional education pursuit: an empirical study. Journal of College Student
. RM Felder & R Brent. Teaching and learning STEM: A practical guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2016 15. MT Chi. “Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities.” Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 73–105. 2009. 16. S Loucks-Horsley, N Love, KE Stiles, S Mundry, PW Hewson PW. Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2003. 17. T Tolnay, SA Spiegel, & JZ Sherer. Development and Use of the Engineering Learning Classroom Observation Tool (ELCOT). 2017. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Columbus, OH. June 245-18, 2017. Downloaded on March 12, 2018 from: https://www.asee.org
. Raspberry Pi #1 (located on the robot) read the room information, actuated themotors, and collected and processed images of the warehouse. Raspberry Pi #2, which handledall of the path planning and tweeting to indicate the start and end of the challenge. These are justthree examples of the seven different ways students in the distributed-expertise section stitchedtogether their knowledge to solve the warehouse robot challenge. Figure 4: Three Example System Diagrams for Warehouse Robot ProjectTable 3 below summarizes the solution diversity data based on our qualitative analysis of thefinal project submissions and the availability of examples for each section. These data aredescribed using a none-few-some-many s cale to qualitatively
proposed changes. Policy Paper. Education. Maxim Institute – retrieved from http://www.maxim.org.nz/files/pdf/policy_paper_ncea_reforms.pdf 10 January 2007 7. Riding, P., Fowell, S. & Levy, P. (1995) An action research approach to curriculum development. Information Research, 1(1). Accessed at http://InformationR.net/ir/1-1/paper2.html on 26 September 2006. 8. Steif, P.S. & Hansen, M.A., (2007). New practices for administering and analyzing the results of concept inventories. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(3), pp 205 - 212 9. Smaill, C., Godfrey, E, and Rowe, G.B. (2007). The transition from final-year high-school Physics and Mathematics to first-year Electrical Engineering: A work in
. Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. 1987, Ithaca, NY. CornellUniversity Press,5. Hake, R. Interactive-Engagement Vs. Traditional Methods: a Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics TestData for Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics, 1998. 66. 64.6. Laws, P., D. Sokoloff, and R. Thornton. Promoting Active Learning Using the Results of Physics EducationResearch. UniServe Science News, 1999. 13.7. Hausfather, S. It's Time for a Conceptual Change. Science and Children, 1992. Nov/Dec. 22.8. Inquiry Descriptions From the Exploratorium Institute Inquiry Forum. 2004.9. Redish, E., J. Saul, and R. Steinberg. On the Effectiveness of Active-Engagement Microcomputer-BasedLaboratories. American Journal of Physics
Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Excellence in Engineering Education and Educational Technology: Views of Undergraduate Engineering StudentsAbstractDuring the 1990’s and continuing today there has been an increased attention to understand theissues that may affect the quality of engineering education. According to the National Academyof Engineering 1 and programs such as the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology(ABET), many universities around the world have been making major efforts to recognize thechallenges faced by engineering educational programs and making changes to achieve“Excellence in Engineering Education”. The purpose of the study reported in this paper is tounderstand the views and
, (McGraw- Hill, 2013).6 Munson, B. R., Okiishi, T. H., Huebsch, W. W. & Rothmayer, A. P. Fundamentals of fluid mechanics. 7th edition. edn, (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2013).7 integrated computer simulation software and information systems (Russia, 1998).8 Naoumov, V., Al-Masoud, N., Haralambous, A., Goldreich, A. & Monsy, E. in 51st AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition (AIAA, Dallas, 2013).9 Naoumov, V., Haralambous, A., Koc, M., Goldrich, A. & Bryton, T. in 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including the New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition (AIAA, Nashville, 2012).10 Bloom, B. S. Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of educational
-Making and Professional Identity Development for Engineering Undergraduates. 2011;100(4):630-654.10. Foor CE, Walden SE, Trytten DA. I wish that I belonged more in this whole engineering group: Achieving individual diversity. Journal of Engineering Education. 2007;96(2):103–15.11. Capobianco BM, Diefes-Dux HA, Mena I, Weller J. What is an Engineer? Implications of Elementary School Student Conceptions for Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education. 2011;100(2):304–328.12. Downey GL, Lucena JC. Knowledge and professional identity in engineering: code-switching and the metrics of progress. History and Technology. 2004;20(4):393–420.13. Sheppard S, Colby A, Macatangay K, Sullivan W. What is Engineering Practice
registered account) onour AACR group website (www.msu.edu/~aacr/). Please visit our site if you are interested inlearning more about computerized text analysis in STEM Education.AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank the four instructors who participated in the study and the students in theirclasses who completed these assignments.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under award1022653 (DUE). Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation (NSF).References 1 Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., and Glaser, R. (2001) Knowing what students know: The science and design
to answer (43)In addition, information about the students’ major, year in program, graduate degree(s) beingconsidered, and participation in undergraduate research was also collected. These will beoutlined and discussed further as part of the study results.B. Data CollectionData were collected via an online survey administered through a commercial web interface.Faculty or administrators from each of the participating institutions sent survey invitationsthrough undergraduate student listservs with a link to the survey. This link directed participantsto another website with the questionnaire. To ensure student responses remained protected,survey information could only be viewed by the research team.. As an incentive, students whocompleted
Page 22.1316.14 different audiences when talking about their work or a problem? Are they able to listen to others and effectively incorporate input? Can they communicate their ideas to multiple audiences in the many modes they need to?References 1. Atman, Cynthia J., Deborah Kilgore, and Ann F. McKenna. 2008. Characterizing Design Learning Through the Use of Language: A Mixed-methods Study of Engineering Designers. Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 97(3): 309-326. 2. Atman, Cynthia J., Sheri D. Sheppard, Jennifer Turns, Robin S. Adams, Lorraine N. Fleming, Reed Stevens, Ruth A. Streveler, Karl A. Smith, Ronald L. Miller, Larry J. Leifer, Ken Yasuhara, and Dennis Lund. 2010. Enabling
Engineers National Survey about Engineering: Are Women More or Less Likely Than Men to Be Retained in Engineering after College?” SWE Magazine 53(4): 22-25.2. Hewlett, S., Luce, C., Servon,L., Sherbin, L., Shiller, P., Sosnovich, E., Sumberg, K. (2008), The Athena Factor: Reversing the Brain Drain in Science, Engineering, and Technology, Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review.3. Foust-Cummings, H., Sabattini, L., Carter, N., 2008, Women in Technology: Maximizing Talent, Minimizing Barriers, New York: Catalyst. Retrieved January 11, 2011 from www.catalyst.org.4. Anita Borg Institute (2009), “Recruitment, Retention and Advancement of Technical Women”, 2009 Technical Executive Forum. Retrieved January 11, 2011 from http
. Liebler, R. J. “The five-minute quiz.” Journal of Accounting Education 2003, 261-265.2. Mahwhinney, V.; Bostow, D.; Laws, D.; Blumenfeld, G.; Hopkins, B. “A Comparison of Students Studying-Behavior Produced by Daily, Weekly, and Three-Week Testing Schedules,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,1971, 257-264.3. Carney, A.; Fry, S. W.; Gabriele, R. V.; Ballard, M. “Reeling in the Big Fish: Changing Pedagogy to Encouragethe Completion of Reading Assignments.” College Teaching, 2008, 56 (4), 195-200.4. Sappington, J.; Kinsey, K.; Munsayac, K. “Two Studies of Reading Compliance Among College Students.”Teaching of Psychology, 2002, 29 (4), 272-274.5. Kugel, P. “Improving Learning Without Improving Teaching,” Computer Science Education 1989, 145-152.6
meaningswith engineering, and how educational experiences may need to be designed and assessed toaddress the complete (and varying) meaning(s) of the concept.In this paper, we present portions of a larger research project motivated in part by the researchquestion: What is the set of concepts, ideas, approaches, tools, methods, and philosophies that could be included as the “necessary knowledge of sustainability” for all engineering students?Our approaches to answering the research question include three parts: (1) an in-depth collectionand analysis of published descriptions of sustainable engineering in practice, in research, and ineducational innovation; (2) a set of interviews conducted with undergraduate students at
, M., Miller, R., Mitcham, C., Olds, B., and Wolfe, H. “Assessing engineering students’ abilities to resolve ethical dilemmas”, Proceedings from the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2003. 5. Shuman, L, Besterfield-Sacre, M. and McGourty, J. “The ABET professional skills—can they be taught?”, Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 41-55. 6. Zhang M., Ater Kranov A., Pedrow P., Beyerlein S., McCormack J., and Schmeckpeper E. “A Direct Method for Teaching and Measuring Engineering Professional Skills: A Validity Study for the National Science Foundation’s Research in Evaluation of Engineering and Science Education”, Proceedings of the 2011 American Society for Engineering Education Conference
bivariate correlational analysis was conducted (Field, 2009).Results from this analysis let to the answering RQ2 and RQ3 using a series of statisticalmodeling methods. First, a Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) test was conducted toanswer RQ2. Those results served as a baseline model for a Multivariate Analysis of Covariance(MANCOVA) test to answer RQ3. These tests were chosen because they powerful tests and arerobust to violations of normality [35], [37]. MANOVAs are a useful way of examining groupdifferences among multiple independent and dependent variables. MANCOVAs are used to givean adjusted mean for each group based on the covariate(s) to detect differences (i.e., examiningwhether there would still be a difference if the covariate
, L. Guàrdia, and M. Koole, “Online university teaching during and after the Covid-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity,” Postdigital Sci. Educ., pp. 1–23, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y.[5] C.-H. Tu and M. Mcisaac, “The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes,” Am. J. Distance Educ., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 131–150, 2002, doi: 10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2.[6] N. Lin, Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge University Press, 2001.[7] S. J. Hausfather, “Vygotsky and schooling: Creating a social context for learning,” Action Teach. Educ., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 1996, doi: 10.1080/01626620.1996.10462828.[8] C.-H. Tu
: College and postcollege outcomes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 629–654, 2000, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200009)37:7<629::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-8.[12] G. Orfield, P. Marin, S. M. Flores, and L. M. Garces, “Charting the future of college affirmative action: Legal victories, continuing attacks, and new research,” Los Angeles. CA: The Civil Rights Project at UCLA, 2007.[13] G. A. Dietz, E. D. McCray, and E. P. Douglas, “Critical theories for unmasking the personal and structural racialized experiences of engineers,” Jan. 2019. Accessed: Feb. 21, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10097748-critical-theories-unmasking- personal-structural
: 10.1007/s11469- 020-00356-3.[9] C. Son, S. Hegde, A. Smith, and X. Wang, “Effects of COVID-19 on College Students’ Mental Health in the United States: Interview Survey Study,” J. Med. Internet Res., vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 1–14, 2020, doi: 10.2196/21279.[10] J. W. Creswell, Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, 4th Editio. Boston, Massachussetts: Pearson Education, Inc., 2012.[11] Z. L. Duraku and L. Hoxha, “The impact of COVID-19 on higher education: A study of interaction among students’ mental health, attitudes toward online learning, study skills, and changes in students’ life,” 2020.[12] IAU, The Impact of Covid-19 on Higher Education
Annual Conference & Exposition.Lande, M. (2020, June). Learning Trajectories through Undergraduate Engineering Curricula andExperiences. In 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference.Lande, M., & Leifer, L. (2009, October). Student representations and conceptions of design andengineering. In 2009 39th IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1-2). IEEE.Lande, M., & Liu, Y. (2019, June). Design Process Geometries: Shapes and LearningTrajectories of Engineering Students’ Design Process Concept Maps. In 2019 ASEE AnnualConference & Exposition.Mosborg, S, R Adams, R Kim, C Atman, J Turns & M Cardella (2005). Conceptions of theEngineering Design Process: An Expert Study of Advanced Practicing Professionals.Proceedings of American