common thread from UDL, EM, and HCD is collaboratively identifying solutions to meet theneeds of many users. As such, methods from all three frameworks were applied throughout thisproject to identify potential improvements to the bioinstrumentation lab.Background on Participatory Action ResearchOne common application of participatory action research (PAR) is developing knowledge andidentifying opportunities for quality improvement. The PAR approach combines participants andexperts in the research of social practices [12]. Generally, PAR includes cycles of reflection,planning, action, and observation. In education, PAR can be employed by instructors who wishto improve their teaching or courses by gathering evidence of teaching effectiveness
Food - emotions - narrative mapping Entertainment Project Short reflection of personal narrative that explains 2 Project: Personal Narratives mapping Explore the physical and digital material involved in 3 Project: Medium the mapping 4 Project: Methodology Identify, frame an experience, and develop a workflow Identify tools and material needed to re-create 5 Project: Design tools & material experience 6 Project: Prototype Prototype a
the experimental procedures are neglected.This approach is appropriate in most science-based courses and usually results in equivalentlearning gains compared to traditional hands-on labs. However, such an approach mighthinder the development of essential skills associated with labs in engineering education.Among these skills, one might cite communication and collaboration, safety, designingexperiments, and learning from failure. Furthermore, a common critique regarding virtual labsrefers to the use of idealized data that usually does not reflect the uncertainties and nuances ofthe real world [10]. Also, these labs generally lack the sense of reality necessary to immersestudents in more authentic experiences.The use of virtual labs in
theiractual practice (psychomotor) or to speak up when they see unsafe behavior among their peers.In addition, a considerable number of responses did not demonstrate any understanding of safetyprocedure and practice among the students.Among the responses, a few responses were noteworthy as these responses demonstrated the twoextremes: lack of safety knowledge and resources available for safety, and proper understandingof safety and reporting needs. The comments were paraphrased below. • Comments reflecting safety incidents that were not reported to EH&S: o Students left a soldering iron on and unattended for an extended period. o Students were disassembling a large steel structure which was not properly supported
conclusions about real-world problems.a The “short name” indicates an abbreviated name of the outcome for use in the presentation of the data.For the student survey, two additional reflective questions were included. These questions askedstudents to reflect on their weaknesses in the lab learning outcomes as well as any weaknessesthey perceived in their departmental curriculum for these learning outcomes. These questionswere included to get the views of students currently in the programs, as these views may differfrom the views of faculty in the programs and alumni perceptions may be skewed by changes tocurricula over time and time since graduation.The survey design was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at University ofKentucky. The
-building workshops so students can put theoryinto practice, improve their confidence and knowledge, and build community.The ITLP intentionally considers how to make the lab an inclusive and safe space, and itsassessments have included non-cognitive aspects of user experiences. At the end of each term,students and faculty respond to approximately 20 closed-ended and four open-ended questions toprovide qualitative feedback about access, usage, satisfaction, the physical spaces, and technicalstaff. One student user noted, “Every year the ITLP strives to make the spaces better.” Otherstudents reflected, “Staff is approachable and friendly”; “I was never afraid to ask for help… [itfelt] like a safe place to fail”; “Inclusive; a very good place to turn
one inch high, see Figure 3c). The vertical walls of the heating unit arecovered with aluminum foil that reflects the heat and increases the temperature of the plasticsheet that is mounted in an aluminum frame that sits on top of the heating unit. The distancefrom the heating element to the plastic sheet is 6.5” when the plastic is not heated. The sheetmetal pan is mounted on four 1.5” x 3.5” wooden studs, see Figure 3c), that elevates the pan withthe heating element from the base of the heating unit. The distance between the base and pan is9.5” and the distance between the studs in Figure 3c) is 9.5”. The distance between the studs andthe outer wall in Figure 3a) is 1”.Figure 3a) Heating unit for thermoformingFigure 3b) Heating element
safety tips werealso reviewed. Our goals for incorporating the toy adaptation module included providingstudents with an opportunity to: ● work together as a team towards an end goal and hone team working skills through collaboration ● make a difference in the local community by increasing access to accessible and developmentally important toys, and apply knowledge to create a positive societal impact ● hone technical skills including soldering and circuit analysis, and gain hands-on experience in problem-solving ● participate in hands-on exploration of circuitry concepts ● engage in conversations and reflection regarding concepts of accessibility of universal designLab Session: Teams of ~3 students were
identify as female, and 8% of students identify as Black, African American,Hispanic, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.Results & Discussion: A total of 18 groups of students participated in the escape room, of which 6 groups were ableto successfully escape. A 30% success rate suggests that the escape room activity provided achallenge for the students at an appropriate difficulty. This is also comparable to commercialescape rooms which have reported a similar success rate of 26% [3].Effect of experience on communication and collaboration: Students were asked to reflect and rate the effectiveness of their teamwork andcommunication. The responses in the survey were divided by students who reported succeedingin the escape
university if I need it.”In the current reflection, students highlighted the financial challenges associated with internetaccess and having devices connected to the internet. One student suggested that providing freeinternet access or offering the ability to borrow or rent a university computer could ensure equalaccess for all. Another student mentioned that paying for internet services can be prohibitivelyexpensive, especially for those who do not live close to campus due to financial constraints.Therefore, remote lab developers should prioritize creating tools that are less dependent onresources that may be inaccessible to some students. This would help alleviate the digitalinequality barrier and promote more equitable access to remote lab
, the simplicity of the project naturally yields the project to be used in awide variety of learning environments and student learners. When implementation does occur, the generatedresults would need to be studied and further modifications would be made to the teaching approach.Eventually, the module and learning materials along with the project will be made highly accessible toeducators through a centralized soft robotic teaching website being developed at Rowan University.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work partially supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.2235647. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors(s) and do not necessarily reflect the
that this phenomenon reflected that students involved in project-based learning activities were more inclined to regard themselves as a part of the engineeringcommunity.The students in Motamedi’s study [19] tended to prefer the flipped classroom because of itsflexibility with their schedules, their ability to watch lectures when they felt motivated tolearn and when they knew that they would be able to stay focused, and their increasedengagement with short video content. A significant disadvantage was their inability to askquestions while learning the material; thus, students would go to class feeling confused andill-prepared. Vidic et al.’s [18] study of flipped classrooms addressed this issue by allowingstudents to post their questions about
standard deviation and the number of participants for each semester. The Likert-scale used in the surveyconcepts across various ranged from "Excellent" (5) to "Poor" (1), enabling participants to rateinstructional delivery formats. The their perceptions regarding the effectiveness of the take-home kits ormodules' effectiveness is widely desk-scale modules in aiding their understanding of theoretical concepts underlying physicochemical phenomena and unit operations.acknowledged among students,reflected in small standarddeviations. Emphasizing the importance of face-to-face components in blended learning, thesemodules received high