applied to two different drivers on the same track.With this metric, areas for driver improvement could be identified and potentially be used toguide an event-specific driver selection process or personalize driver training.Student learning objectives linked to ABET outcomes are described in the context of how theyare assessed in this course. Results from student self-efficacy surveys and student achievementon assignments are presented and discussed as they apply to ABET outcomes b, g, i, and k.IntroductionAuthentic engineering experiences, such as student competitions, sponsored projects, designclinics, and project-based learning modules have been incorporated broadly within theundergraduate curricula to enhance student learning. The challenges
duringsummer programs2 and here we employed a similar assessment process.Pre-program questionnaires were sent to the students and were completed before the startof the program. This included asking the students to provide their backgrounds, relevantclasses they had taken, and their learning expectations from the program. During theprogram, assessments are completed at the end of each day and students are asked to reflecton the effectiveness in delivery of content, their self-efficacy ratings in material presented,instructors rating and any feedback for improvement. We anonymized the data daily andsent it to the instructors. Post-program evaluations covered feedback on the program,learnings from each student, and self-efficacy of the content. Students
learning experiences [1 - 4], positive self-reflections are important parts of the theoryof motivation and self-efficacy [35]. When answering Question 5, the students liked “the processof seeing and creating parts from scratch,” “how much detail the MoonRay can print,” “objectsrising like Phoenix,” “upside down grown parts,” and “the quality and accuracy of the process.” 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Figure 8. Students’ 3D Printing Attitudes and Perception Survey Results: Questions 1 – 4
have introduced a new course:Online Project-Based Engineering Experimentation. The course is project-based and designed tooperate in both a blended format, online with classroom labs, and fully online.Recently the topic of project-based learning for first-year college experiences delineated how toincorporate project-based learning (PBL) into the classroom and curriculum [2]. Limiting thefield to engineering still involves numerous investigators. The work of Fini et. al. has quantifiedmuch of the PBL assessments in terms of self-efficacy, teamwork, and communication skills inthe civil engineering environment [3]. The work of Han et. al. on Hispanic students showed thatPBL had a significant impact on students who were not at risk, albeit the
keyobjectives throughout the primary module content. The pre-survey includes technical questionsand basic demographic questions including GPA and number of Internet courses taken andquestions designed to better understand student self-efficacy toward computer and VR use. Theassessment and evaluation methods based on the objectives are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1: Summary of assessment & evaluation methods and of their effectiveness Objectives Assessment and evaluation Indication of effectiveness of methods the assessment/evaluation 1. Development of a series of Monthly collaborative Functioning VR modules; VR modules for AM process
pair that had finished the lab andone that has not) and placing them into the same breakout room in Zoom. Of course, before doingthis, both pairs consent to help or receive help. The student pairs that finished their lab early arerequired to help other student pairs. The same two-step approach of creating a PL environmentand then a PPPL environment is implemented in both lab design projects.Since self-reflections are determined to be important components of experiential learning [2-4],and positive self-reflections are significant components of the self-efficacy theory [9], studentswere required to include two self-reflection paragraphs in their lab reports to close the experientiallearning feedback loop. The open-ended questions asked of each
Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) is a self-report instrumentdesigned to assess college students’ motivational orientation and their use of different learningstrategies for a college course. According to [14], the instrument is a measure of student self-efficacy, intrinsic value, test anxiety, self-regulation, and use of learning strategies. Constructsfrom this survey center on measures of the types of learning strategies and academic motivationused by college students. This instrument uses 44-items with a 7-point likert-type scale withstatements focused on student motivation, cognitive strategy use, metacognitive strategy use, andmanagement of effort. Additionally, a number of researchers have also utilized the MSLQ toexamine whether there is a
., Implementing Project-Based Learning in Civil Engineering-A Case Study. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 2017. 30(3): p. 272-277.3. Chen, P., A. Hernandez, and J. Dong, Impact of Collaborative Project-Based Learning on Self-Efficacy of Urban Minority Students in Engineering. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 2015. 11: p. 26-39.4. Shekar, A., Project based Learning in Engineering Design Education: Sharing Best Prac-tices, in ASEE Annual Conference. 2014.5. Waychal, P., Team and project based learning: A critical instructional strategy for engineering education. QScience Proceedings, 2015: p. 40.6. Aditomo, A., P. Goodyear, A.-M. Bliuc, and R.A. Ellis, Inquiry-based learning in higher
explicitly ask them to display and explain their output displays before theyleave. This is a time-consuming activity; to create time to do this, we have reduced the numberof required tasks in each lab, allowing us and the students to concentrate on a few, criticalconcepts. In this way, we are able to verify assure that students understand what they have doneand they can correct errors before they leave lab.Our third problem-solving activity for the students involves the validation of their results byquantifying uncertainty and identifying discrepancies between predictions and measured results.While it is not unusual for lab instructors to require that uncertainty be quantified, we askstudents to take the extra step of discussing uncertainty in depth
orchange to other majors mainly due to poor teaching and advising; the difficulty of theengineering curriculum; and more importantly - the lack of “belonging” within engineering [1-8]. In addition, the review paper of Geisinger at el. provided a detailed investigation provides allthe reasons why students leave engineering majors and identified common reasons that influencestudents to leave engineering programs [9]. The factors listed in this paper are: inadequate andtraditional forms of teaching and advising; classroom and academic climate, difficulty inunderstanding course content, lack of conceptual understanding, competitive grading structure,lack of self-efficacy or self-confidence, unsuitable high school preparation, difficulty incapturing