Paper ID #38560A Process for Systematically Collecting Plan of Study Data forCurricular AnalyticsDr. David Reeping, University of Cincinnati Dr. David Reeping is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering and Computing Education at the University of Cincinnati. He earned his Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech and was a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow. He received his B.S. in Engineering Education with a Mathematics minor from Ohio Northern University. His main research interests include transfer student information asymmetries, threshold concepts, curricular complexity, and
international accreditationmovements of business schools around the world, is of interest to the management of curricula assystematic processes and assessment plans that collectively demonstrate that students achievecompetences of learning for the programs in which they participate. The objective of this work is toanalyze the implementation of the management of learning process at Unisinos University’sPolytechnic School, examining its impact on the curriculum management from the programcoordinators' perspective. This implementation process was designed as a training program forcoordinators of the 19 undergrad programs involved aiming at their development as managers of theprocess as the get involved in the process itself and organized in different
entrepreneurship education program at the university. Throughexploratory factor analysis, the ESE-E demonstrated a 7-factor solution. Factors includedproduct ideation, business planning, customer discovery, team and network formation, ideapitch, people and human resources, and finance. Additionally, correlational analysesdemonstrated that these seven factors were related to each other positively. This means that ifstudents are confident about one entrepreneurial-related skill described in this instrument, theyare likely to feel confident about other entrepreneurial-related skills described in the instrument.Further and interestingly, students with a growth creative mindset tended to have high self-efficacy for product ideation, team formation, and people
-regulation in action (SRA) or strategicaction (SA), is the basis of self-regulated learning (SRL). SRC is comprised of iterative andrecursive cycles of interpreting requirements, planning (e.g., resources, time, strategies),implementing cognitive processes, monitoring progress, evaluating progress against internal andexternal standards, and continually refining approaches to better achieve goals (see Figure 1)[16]. This iterative process continues until a problem is solved or the student abandons the goal.As students manage their activities in tasks, they engage in iterative cycles of strategic activity,including actively interpreting requirements (i.e., interpreting task), developing a plan of action(i.e., planning), acting on a developed plan, and
‡ Department of Computer Science • School of Information University of Arizona ? School of Computer Science Georgia Institute of TechnologyAbstractStudents in engineering programs are typically among those having the highest time-to-degree forany of the programs offered on a university campus. Keeping a cohort of students on track to-wards on-time graduation is extremely difficult given the tightly prescribed nature of engineeringprograms. Any deviation from the standard degree plan, for any reason
execution [17].The main characteristic of this stage is that the team develops the working mechanism toeffectively guide their collaborative work with strategies and plans. Continued collaboration thenleads to the fourth stage, Performing. At this stage, all members understand the expertise,position, working style, and personality of everyone to a certain degree. In addition, the teamcould prevent or even harvest from potential conflicts with constructive conversations.Adjourning is the last stage and refers to the period of time when the team disbands or finishesthe project [11-12]. After successful team experiences, teammates share feelings of sadness,express a willingness to work more in the future, recognize and appreciate the importance ofeach
engineering, non-engineering, and engineering adjacentactivities, and finally, elicit their understanding of how their goals are connected (or not connected)to the activities they participate in.Data Collection Plans – We are presently recruiting engineering students to participate in 45-60minute semi-structured interviews. These students are being recruited through institutionallistservs. After a saturation recruitment of 15-20 students, we will purposefully sample a subset of8-12 students that capture as many academic years and engineering disciplines as possible.Participants will be interviewed by the research team using our protocol. These interviews will betranscribed using the Otter AI platform. Our sample size is appropriate for deductive
career goal is to do lab employment: Students’ Engineer.” research.” career plans Competencies and “Combined with the strong set knowledge: Identify “I designed a project with of communication and competencies and knowledge another intern, which helped me leadership skills I have built, I gained related to career learn team work skills.” know I will be successful in preparation getting a Ph.D. position.” Personal and professional
statements were given, these were primarily focused on the broaderimplications given by proposals. These included impacts to specific communities or populations,systemic changes, and broad changes to the field of engineering. Most mentions of broaderimpacts were highlighted positively, as 85.8% of MO1 codes were positive comments. Oneparticipant shares their evaluation on a proposal’s broad impacts: Furthermore, the research planned in the proposal begins to help individuals understand hidden curricula mechanisms via mentoring, social support programs, and reflective/culturally relevant academic and social integration models in engineering.As shown by this quote, positive impacts of broader impacts are often highlighted, but
example, Intel offers several programs forstudents to learn and solidify AI skills (Intel® Distribution of OpenVINO™ Toolkit) anddeveloping in cloud environments (Intel® Developer Cloud) [1]. For instructors, they offer acollection of lesson plans, labs, and assessments for the same curriculums mentioned [2]. In thesecond case, the company develops core products specifically meant for assisting instructors andstudents in learning. For example, Blackboard’s core product is a learning management systemfor hosting courses and handling classroom management. In addition to publishing textbooks,Pearson has developed the Mastering platform to provide interactive assessments for variouscourses and textbooks. In both of these cases, industry has an
computational essays that use text, along withcode programs, interactive diagrams, and computational tools to express an idea [7]. Theimportance of computational notebooks is to provide programming environments for developingand sharing educational materials, combining different types of resources such as text, images,and code in a single document accessible through a web browser [17]. These are specific ways inwhich the projects were scaffolded to guide students: • The tasks for each project were broken down into smaller sub-tasks. For example, as shown in Table 1 below, the sub-tasks included planning, collecting data, defining functions, performing calculations, and visualizing results. • A detailed outline or a
urbanplanning method. These approaches shift the power relationships traditionally established ininterview settings and allowed student participants to shape the direction of their interviews andstorytelling.In this paper, we first describe the central ethical and justice challenges to soliciting andengaging BIPOC students in research about their experiences. After describing the goals of thestudy, we explain two key strategies that allowed us to address these challenges in our datacollection: 1) Use of boundary objects to elicit participants narratives, and 2) the integration ofparticipatory urban planning methods.We show sample data sets to explain the ways our methods provided opportunities to learn morefrom students, to gain a comprehensive
accrediting agencies, institutional influences of college missionsand resources, and unit-level influences of faculty, discipline, and student characteristics. Starkalso created the Contextual Filters Model that provides an overview of the various contexts thatinfluence course planning for college faculty (Lattuca & Stark, 2011; Stark, 2000; Stark et al.,1988). A study by Lund and Stains examines unique environments and contexts of departmentsin influencing STEM faculty’s teaching practices and finds that disciplinary differences exist andhave shown potential associations to level of adoption of evidence-based instructional practices(2015). Another study shows similar findings where faculty’s teaching practices differ based onthe contexts they
to the stages of self-regulated learning,i.e., planning, performance, and self-reflection.Results: Results indicate that students had prior knowledge of project management but lackedfamiliarity with the research process. Students encountered project management challenges, buteffective communication and clear goal setting were key strategies in meeting deadlines andcompleting coursework. Students valued collaboration and continuous mentoring, and the coursehad a positive impact on students' understanding and interest in research, as well as theirdevelopment of transferable skills for future practice. Overall, this study highlights theimportance of project management skills and mentorship in promoting self-regulated learningand research skills
Multilingual Board GameIntroductionSerious games are a category of games that are often used in education to provide access tocomplex systems. In past research and curriculum development, engineering teachers haveimplemented curriculum around STEM-focused games [1], such as for urban planning [2],transportation engineering [1], chemistry education [3] and computational thinking [4]. Due tothe increased interactive engagement of games compared to lecture [5], [6], [7], engineeringeducators have utilized games to positively impact students' learning. However, theseeducational games are often only available in English. Students whose first language (L1) is notEnglish may be limited in how they present their ideas to peers in these playful spaces
1) that addresses lifelong learning across and between undergraduateengineering education and career trajectories.While there are numerous formulations of lifelong learning and its dimensions, we incorporatedthe Transferable Learning Orientations model [29] which has been developed in the Canadianengineering education context and is based on the Motivated Strategies for LearningQuestionnaire [30], [31] with sufficient emphasis on attitudinal dimensions of lifelong learning.We consider how immediate and long-term learner outcomes are influenced by curricularexperiences and the curriculum planned and enacted at higher levels (Planned-Enacted-Experienced curriculum; [32]–[34]) as well as individuals’ incoming characteristics anddemographics
arranged some club events immediately after the CS I class to maximize CS I student participation. We allocated a work-study student to devote five to ten hours per week to planning, coordinating, hosting hybrid club meetings and events (both in-person and online) and increasing students’ access and engagement. 3. Form a Department Community Center with both in-person and virtual spaces: We established a pilot Department Community Center for students to get together, interact with and support each other. The Center was previously a research-only lab and is currently located in Room C03A. We extended its function to host the ExCITE program, the ACM club, and the ACM-W club. We complement this Center with a
Award, The Nevada Women’s Fun Woman of Achievement Award, and the UNR College of Engineering Excellence Award.Dr. Adam Kirn, University of Nevada, Reno Adam Kirn is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at University of Nevada, Reno. His research focuses on the interactions between engineering cultures, student motivation, and their learning experiences. His projects involve the study of studenMr. Derrick James Satterfield, University of Nevada, Reno Derrick Satterfield is a doctoral candidate in Engineering Education at the University of Nevada, Reno. His research focuses on engineering graduate students’ experiences and motivation centered on career planning and preparation
up earlier to get them ready. The days that hedoesn’t go to school he asks why he doesn’t have school. I have to plan for those days…Sometimes it doesn’t come out as planned. I have to think about what to do. Things change,emergencies come up… I have a Plan A and Plan B just in case” (Family 31). Family relationship building—Another common theme across all seven families wasparents perceiving and leveraging the engineering activities and engineering design practices tosupport family collaboration and build relationships among family members, including siblings,spouses, or extended family members. As one parent stated when reflecting on the most valuableaspect of the program: "El tiempo juntos, aprender juntos uno del otro. Las ideas
, and readily analyzed, so wecould compare observations to faculty and student reports of engagement. Thus, we consideredexisting observation protocols. At first, we planned to use OPTIC, but pilot observations atmultiple institutions with POGIL, lecture, and laboratory classes, revealed that OPTIC workswell for POGIL, but not for lecture. Similarly, COPUS focuses on practices involving clickerquestions and Peer Instruction and is less suited for POGIL. Other protocols had similarlimitations - SEcLo and ELCOT focus on engineering, while PORTAAL and OSE focus onspecific settings. We liked protocols that coded widely used, lower-level practices (e.g., SPOT).We liked how OPTIC coded similar interactions at different levels — within teams
,“understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, andsocietal context” to the 2022-23 criteria with multiple elaborate learning outcomes underCriterion 3: “2. an ability to apply engineering design to produce solutions that meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors. 3. an ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiences. 5. an ability to function effectively on a team whose members together provide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment, establish goals, plan tasks, and meet objectives” [5]. These learning outcomes have
] and aims to let informants’ genuine thoughts and emotionsunfold naturally.Interview StoriesThe interview stories were collected during interviews in six studies, where the context for eachstudy was a unique section of the same preservice teacher education course in a large publicuniversity in the Southeast United States. Each section was offered in a unique semester.Informants were recruited under a protocol approved by the IRB of the large public university inthe Southeast United States. To recruit informants, a researcher visited the classes, explained thepurpose of the study – to learn how preservice teachers learn to use robotics technology in K-12classrooms from videos, lesson plans, and discussions. Informants in all six studies
necessary to develop impactful, innovative, and successfulengineering solutions [9]–[11].In addition to preparing engineering students to successfully address modern engineeringproblems, the inclusion of comprehensive engineering skills in the curriculum has implicationsfor students’ engagement and persistence in the field. Students’ engagement in their field as wellas their plans to pursue an engineering career or engineering graduate education is determined inpart by an alignment between their personal and professional interests and values in engineeringand curricular messages about what engineering practice includes. For some students, thepotential to leverage engineering for social good is a key motivation for pursuing work in thefield [12
students and an introductory course for a minor in Innovation andEntrepreneurship at Shanghai Tech University [42]. The aim of this course is to allowstudents to utilize scientific methods and critical thinking skills to collaborate with teammatesof different disciplines and solve real-world issues [42]. In higher education, researchers havefocused more on enhancing learners' competencies.Additionally, children from six institutions in Shaanxi Province have taken part in virtualworkshops focused on design thinking and STEM education [43]. Plan International has alsoreached a broad audience in implementing design thinking in STEM. Doing so has aided inreducing gender stereotypes about STEM education and has made students more comfortableexploring
undergraduate engineering students (n = 69). In this iteration, the survey wasimplemented within a senior-level space systems design course at a large, Midwestern, historically white,research-intensive, public university. The course serves as an introduction to the engineering designprocess for space systems, including technical content such as mission planning, launch vehicleintegration, or propulsion. In addition, ethical content related to the technical material, such as spaceterritorialization, climate change, and nuclear propulsion, were incorporated into the lesson plansthroughout the semester. This particular course was chosen as the sample for our study due to severalmembers of our research team making up the class instructional team.The survey
criteria for success and constraints on materials, time, or cost. 3-5 ETS1-2: Generate and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem based on 13 how well each is likely to meet the criteria and constraints of the problem. 3-5 ETS1-3: Plan and carry out fair tests in which variables are controlled and failure 22 points are considered to identify aspects of a model or prototype that can be improved MS ETS1-1: Define the criteria and constraints of a design problem with sufficient 22 precision to ensure a successful solution taking into account relevant scientific principles taking into account potential impacts on people and the natural environment that may limit possible
)? if they are a valued member of the team. The RPP establishes rou- Siloed Decision Making (SD): tines that promote collabo- Leadership (PI/Co-PIs) making What team norms, if any, rative decision making and decisions about planning and were developed? Are they guard against power imbal- implementation without soliciting followed? How? ances input or feedback from wider team. Are all team voices included RPP members establish Recommended RPP Improvements in collaborative decision norms of interaction that (RR): recommendations from either making? If yes, how? If no, support collaborative deci- partner on ideas to improve the part- please describe your sion making and equitable nership
interviews). In addition, the researchers observed six instructional sessions (twoto four hours in duration) during the camps to record field notes that informed interviewquestions and identified relevant thematic elements; these observations also providedtriangulation for interpreting the interviews. In this way, the researchers could analyze theinstructors’ challenges and instructional decision making as they formatively processed theirpedagogical effectiveness. Student artifacts were observed during the classroom observations tounderstand the curricular fidelity of the planned activities [38-40]. This study was approved byStony Brook University’s Institutional Review Board (#574341), and voluntary consent wasprovided by study participants.Data
Science and Engineering (CSE) majors from eight CSEcourses at a large, research-intensive university located in the United States. Five questions about thestudent experience in the current course and their plans for the next course were embedded into largersurveys administered in each of the participating courses. In this paper, we focus on student responses tothe following survey questions: “What are barriers that might prevent you from taking the next coursein this sequence?” and “What makes you feel good about your plans to take the next course in thissequence?” Each of the participating courses serves as a prerequisite course for at least one subsequentcourse (for example: Intro to CS I is a prerequisite for Intro to CS II).We address the
plan to collect data that will help usbetter understand how situational factors might serve as a barrier to epistemic negotiations andhow they interact with the CCE norms.Barrier 2: Differences in Disciplinary KnowledgeThe first epistemic question posed in this meeting was regarding the impact of noise in a casestudy. Case study is a research method that ”...investigates a phenomenon (the ’case’) in depth andwithin its real-world context” [18, p.15]. Once the case has been defined, the researcher definesthe boundaries of the case. These boundaries provide a clear scope for the project and help theresearcher make decisions about what data to include [18].As Team X’s original plan was to use a case study methodology to study traditional, in