Further modify the object oriented programs and add behaviors as defined in an object oriented approach to the Cone classFor example, in the second week of the semester the following problem was assigned ashomework and was to be completed by hand. A pump is pumping water into a conical tank at a constant rate of 1.15 gal/min. The tank dimensions are: top inner circumference = 2.87 ft, bottom inner circumference = 2.60 ft, and inner tank length along the slanting surface = 1.47 ft. If the tank was initially empty, how long (in s) will it take to fill 80% (by volume) of the tank? Page 11.943.3The
learning system continuously tabulates and communicates student and classprogress in a variety of ways, including progress (a list of objectives indicating what a studentcan do and what s/he is ready to learn), percent mastery since the last assessment, and a pie chartshowing the state of overall course mastery. Each pie slice represents a topic module, and themastery of each module is represented by the “filling up” of the slice. Complete module masteryis indicated by a completely full slice of pie, as demonstrated with the case study examples inFigures 6 and 7 that show ALEKS initial and final assessment pie charts. All students completedthe ALEKS math placement assessment before the fall term; the initial and final ALEKSassessments were
collection of first-year engineering courses. Some descriptive information about theuniversities, the college of engineering degrees offered, student demographic information, andthe collection of first-year engineering courses are presented in Table 1. Table 1. Summary of Descriptive Information about Three Institutions in Study Uni. Descriptive Information First-Year Engineering (FYE) Course/s 1 University: Medium-sized, private, STEM+Business university 1. Introduction to COE Degrees: Aerospace, Civil, Mechanical, Electrical
ProgramsWhile literature examining the term “onboarding” specifically is limited within higher education,programs designed to support newly admitted students are commonly described in first-yearexperience literature [20]. These programs are meant to support students’ transition into collegeand have been around since as early as the 1600’s. In fact, Harvard College implemented anorientation program that connected new students with current students in 1636 [21]. The firstonboarding programs were primarily designed to support the transition of new students into post-secondary education. Today’s onboard programs vary among institutions, but it is common tosee one- or two-day orientation programs, first-year seminars, welcome weeks, and commonbook reading
[19]. In addition, we will survey sophomore-levelstudents in spring 2020; all of these students will have taken the course. In summary, this work-in-progress paper presents a survey that measures a range ofoutcomes to assess the impact of a first-year engineering design course. By surveying thestudents at the beginning and end of the semester, positive changes in student self-efficacy andstudents’ perceptions of their skills are measured.References[1] A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy,” in Encyclopedia of human behavior, V. S. Ramachaudran, Ed. New York: Academic Press, 1994, Vol. 4, pp. 71-81.[2] A. Bandura, “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioural change,” Psychological Review, vol. 84, pp. 191-215, 1977.[3] A
College John R. Williams Outstanding Teacher for 2012, and the 2012 Statler College Teacher of the Year.Dr. Robin A. M. Hensel, West Virginia University Robin A. M. Hensel, Ed.D., is the Assistant Dean for Freshman Experience in the Benjamin M. Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at West Virginia University. While her doctorate is in Curriculum and Instruction, focusing on higher education teaching of STEM fields, she also holds B.S. and M.A. degrees in Mathematics. Dr. Hensel has over seven years of experience working in engineering teams and in project management and administration as a Mathematician and Computer Systems Analyst for the U. S. Department of Energy as well as more than 25 years of
1. Arduino. (2017). http://www.arduino.org/, last accessed: January 26, 2017. 2. Cardella, M. E., Wolsky, M., Paulsen, C. A., Jones, T. R. (2013). Informal Pathways to Engineering. In Proceedings of the 120 th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA. 3. Carnasciali, M-I., Thompson, A. E., Thomas, T. J. (2013). Factors influencing students’ choice of engineering major. In Proceedings of the 120 th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, GA. 4. Conrad, J. M., Harkins, M. S., Taylor, D. B., Mayhorn, J., Raquet, J. (2015). Prospect for Success in Engineering: Assessing Freshmen Curriculum Engagement. In Proceedings of the 7th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference. Roanoke
] state, “spatial reasoning is a mental process that involves thinkingabout relationships between three-dimensional (3D) objects.” From the early 1990’s researchershave been studying the importance of spatial reasoning skills. Most researchers who have studiedspatial skills or their components state the fact that engineering, architecture, and most scientificjobs require people to have good spatial thinking skills [2]. People with high spatial abilitybenefit particularly as they have enough cognitive capacity for mental model construction.Researchers like Hsi et al. [3] have been recommending the need to introduce spatial skills inintroductory engineering courses and emphasizing the need for including these skills throughoutengineering
engineering include a program at University of Arkansas that showed significantly higherfall-to-spring student retention and higher average GPA among students who were part of a freshmanpeer mentoring program [6], as well as Marra et al.’s study of students who participated in a peermentoring program and their subsequent feelings of belonging and intentions to persist in engineering[7].Summer Bridge ProgramsIt is well established that summer bridge programs work. Summer bridge programs have beenimplemented at many universities in an attempt to combat the high rates of attrition observed in STEMmajors, especially in students from underrepresented backgrounds in STEM [8]. Bridge programs takemany forms, with some focusing substantially on
Development Program) in the early 1980's, the RESP curriculum aims for the mostdifficult parts of first-year calculus, chemistry, and physics. In other words, RESP is notremedial.Put another way, RESP’s guiding philosophy is to give students the chance to have a badsemester, if one is coming, without impacting their academic record and with ample support todevelop new skills for student’s new collegiate setting. Students do not receive course credit, toremove the threat of permanently codifying poor performance on a student’s transcript. Thisdiffers from models that offer course credit, which carries the risk of permanent academicconsequences. During the summer, students build resilience as well as technical skills and entertheir fall semester aware
factor that has remained constant over this period of time is students communicating their impression and belief that STEM majors are“hard”. Parents and society express the same impression.A recent New York Times article attributes some of this hardness to tough introductory math andscience classes. The article included the following quote from a student (with 800 Math SATand reading and writing scores in the 700’s) who switched from mechanical engineering topsychology during fall of their sophomore year: “I was trying to memorize equations, and engineering’s all about the application, which they really didn’t teach too well,” he says. “It was just like, Do these practice problems, then you’re on your own”.5Seymour and
goal of every engineeringschool. Overall, we should be considering both pathways to creating a more inclusive system. Bibliography 1 "Abstracts of Studies about Diversity in Engineering and Science" Online Ethics Center for Engineering 8/6/2009National Academy of Engineering 2 "Synergies (2008 Annual Report) ". Rep. National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering. Web..3 Lim, V. "A Feeling of Belonging and Effectiveness Key to Women's Success." Diverse: Issues in HigherEducation 26.2 (2009): 17.4 Kukreti, A., Simonson, K., Johnson, K., and L. Evans. "A NSF-Supported S-STEM Scholarship Program forRecruitment and Retention of Underrepresented Ethnic and Women Students in Engineering." ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition, Conference
Conference. San Antonio, TX. June 10-13, 2012.2. Hein, G., A. Kemppainen, S. Amato-Henderson, J. Keith, and M. Roberts. “Who Creates and Develops First- Year Engineering Design Activities?” Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE Conference. Louisville, KY. June 20-23, 2010.3. Kemppainen, A., N. Jeason, and G. Hein. “Modifying a Pumping System in a First-Year Engineering Design Project” Proceedings of the 2010 ASEE EDGD 65th Mid-year Conference. Houghton, MI. October 3-6, 2010.4. “Engineering Pathway” http://www.engineeringpathway.com/engpath/ep/Home. Accessed December 18, 2012.5. “MERLOT: Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching” http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm. Accessed December 18, 2012.6
concept(s)claimed. Unlike the real patent system, enforcement of patent claims was formally left to theinstructor. Typically, enforcement involved a quick meeting with the infringing team to find away to modify their idea so that it now fell into a useful gap in the other team’s patent claims.Teams who subsequently felt that their patent was being infringed upon were likewise brought infor a quick discussion to see how the other team’s idea fell into a gap in their claims. Having theclass patent system thus generated very effective discussions about what patent claims mean,how they work, and why they are written as they are. Class patent applications were submitted as a pdf file attached to an email to theinstructor. A sample patent
viewed as their dominant style(s).Exit Survey: At the end of the course, an exit survey with 7 questions was administered, and 42students completed the survey. The exit survey, shown in Figure 6, specifically addressed thestudents’ experience with the simulation programs used in the course. Students were told thattheir data would not be reviewed until the final grades were submitted and were advised toprovide honest responses to the questions.Name: _____________Q1. The simulation modules helped improve my confidence level in learning engineering.Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agreeQ2. I think the simulation modules are good learning supplements.Strongly disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly agreeQ3. I enjoyed using the simulation
excitedabout the idea of solving a real-world problem and adding value by using their creativity. Someworry about bringing a solution to life due to their little engineering experience so far. In week 2,there is a dip in motivation. Most students again find teamwork and discussion helpful. Somecomment heated discussion within their team and difficulty reaching consensus. During week 3,there is an increase in motivation. Many say they enjoy the hands-on rapid prototyping activity.Week 4’s planning activity such as coming up with a materials list gets some students excited.After week 5’s proposal presentation, many students comment that they find sharing their ideasand seeing other students’ ideas interesting. Week 6 is the first construction and
other student support programs like livinglearning community, research experience for undergraduates, and supplemental instructionthereby study their combined effect on overall student retention and graduate rates.References[1] Z. S. Wilson et al., "Hierarchical mentoring: A transformative strategy for improving diversity and retention in undergraduate STEM disciplines," Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 148-156, 2012.[2] P. B. Thayer, "Retention of students from first generation and low income backgrounds," 2000.[3] E. T. Pascarella, C. T. Pierson, G. C. Wolniak, and P. T. Terenzini, "First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes," The
faculty, and more learner-centered teachingpractices evidenced. In general, across the larger network, while some faculty met with othersacross departments because of scheduling, for the most part, faculty stayed with their own.But this was not entirely the rule. Other faculty appear to be Brokers across disciplines. Mech4,for example has In-degree of 14, and Out-degree of only 8, indicating that s/he is approached bytheir colleagues nearly twice as much as s/he looks to their colleague for help in teachingpractice. This is a typical Source pattern of someone who has expertise to give.Figure 3. Network of a Source Broker across DepartmentsMaterials5, on the other hand, with In-degree of 12 and Out-degree of 15, approaches othersmore often than s
created a new position to keepthe program going long-term. The current E2 director has other job duties, but the camp and thepeer mentor program make up 50% of her responsibilities (25% for each program). Fortunately,the current staff member spent two years assisting the previous camp director with this program,and experienced students also have assisted in easing the transition between staff. It is alsoimperative to partner with other campus programs, units, and resources to ensure that theprogram is successful. Some changes made by campus residential life in 2018 possibly had anegative impact on the camp’s enrollment and participation due to competing activities.Communication for planning 2019’s camp began immediately after the 2018 program to
backgrounds, geographical location of hometowns and/or family makeup) selected cohortof URM non-participants. Page 22.1561.10 Bibliography1. Atman, C. J., Sheppard, S. D., Turns, J., Adams, R. S., Fleming, L. N., Stevens, R., . . . Lund, D. (2010). Enabling engineering student success: The final report for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education. San Rafel, CA: Morgan & Claypool.2. Borrego, M., Froyd, J., & Hall, T. S. (2010). Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments. Journal of
MARKING – DOES IT REALLY IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING?AbstractThe paper reports on an initiative which aims to improve student achievement by boostingtutorial engagement via the introduction of peer-marked assignments. A compulsory first-year course, perceived as a difficult, „gatekeeper‟ course, was chosen for evaluation of theinitiative. Lack of student engagement in tutorials was perceived by the lecturers as asignificant barrier to improved student achievement. To encourage tutorial attendance andparticipation, students received a small number of marks for doing a (two-weekly) tutorialassignment, and marking another‟s, under the guidance of an academic staff member.Attendance at tutorial sessions consequently improved
. Go public: This is a high stakes motivating component introduced to motivate the student to do well. Learner and community centered.Challenge 2…NThe following progressively more ambitious challenges enable the student to increasinglydeepen their knowledge of the topic being explored. Repeat the complete legacy cycle for eachchallenge.Reflect BackThis gives student the opportunity for self-assessment. Learner centered.Leaving LegaciesThe student is asked to provide solutions and insights for learning to the next cohort of students,as well as to the instructor(s). Community centered.Curriculum Development ProcessIn general, the LC CBI modules developed at UTPA are designed according to a five-task“backwards design” process fostered by
PhysicsTeacher, 30, 141–158 https://aapt.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1119/1.2343497Lindell, R. S., Pea, E., & Foster T.M. (2007). Are They All Created Equal? A Comparison ofDifferent Concept Inventory Development Methodologies, American Institute of PhysicsConference Proceedings, 883(14), 14-17. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2508680Loch, B., & Lamborn, J. (2016). How to make mathematics relevant to first-year engineeringstudents: Perceptions of students on student-produced resources. International Journal ofMathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(1), 29–44.https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1044043Magana, A. J., Falk, M. L., Vieira, C., & Reese, M. J. (2016). A case study of undergraduateengineering students' computational literacy
have already proposed algorithms, pipelines and tools to resolve the issues based onthe U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)’s requirement onprotecting protected health information [6]–[8]. However, HIPAA requires protection on lots ofunexpected information in the academic setting, such as locations, dates, telephone numbers, faxnumbers, social security numbers, etc. [9]. In the education context, Rudniy reported anautomating deidentification project using peer feedback textual data for online writing projectsvia MyR [10]. However, our peer to peer comment data is structured in groups to facilitateteamwork learning so that it is highly possible that the commenter mentions more than one groupmember, which might
engaging found in the lower right corner, andLow/High, Low/Low, also referring to the corresponding Learn/Like scores in the upper left and lower leftquadrants respectively. S T U D E N T R AT IN G S O F L E AR N IN G v s . E N G AG IN G F AL L 0 6 4 .5 0 M in:P r es / D em o T eam B ld g A c t iv M in: P r ep / B ld g
engagement with students’ course ratings andcourse performance by analyzing learning analytics data (e.g., site access, timestamps, etc.)captured within the learning management system. Additionally, students from both online and in-person sections will be invited to participate in focus group interviews to explore faculty-studentconnections and course enjoyment. Furthermore, a follow-up study will further assess theimpact on student outcomes, student motivation, effort regulation and self-efficacy between thein-person and online sections as part of a retention study.References[1] M. Borrego, J. E. Froyd, T. S. Hall, “Diffusion of Engineering Education Innovations: A Survey of Awareness and Adoption Rates in U.S. Engineering Departments,” Journal
majors in a service course will bepiloted based off of this first-year experience course project. Similar data will be collected tomeasure effectiveness.Bibliography[1] S. Lee, S. Kastner, and R. Walker. Engineering for The Future: Mississippi State University’s Cyber SummerPrograms. ASEE SE Annual Conference, 2016, in press at http://se.asee.org/.[2] D. Reese, T.J. Jankun-Kelly, L. Henderson, and S. Lee, “Impact on Retention from a Change in UndergraduateComputing Curricula,” in Proceedings of the 2013 ASEE Southeast Section Conference, Cookeville, TN, 2013.[3] M. Biggers, A. Brauer, and T. Yilmaz. “Student perceptions of computer science: a retention study comparinggraduating seniors with CS leavers,” in Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE
objectives “How often is there tension in your team caused byfor each of our roles.” member(s) not performing as well as expected?”“Team members seek solutions that will be good “I can rely on those with whom I work in this group.”for all of us.”Adapt Educate“Our team will re-establish coordination when “We work to improve and refine our existing knowledgethings go wrong.” and expertise.”“We regularly monitor how well we are meeting “We evaluate diverse options regarding the course ofour team goals.” the project.”“We seek to understand each other’s strengths “We use our opposing views as a learning
; Bucks, G. W., & Meyers, K. L. (2015, June), A Multiple-institution Investigation of Student Perceptions of the Inverted Classroom in First-year Engineering Courses Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23413 2. Banu, E. A., & Swamidason, S. M., & Raju, P., & Rajan, P. (2015, June), Video-based, Game-integrated Concept Tutors – Effectiveness in Freshman Courses Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.25038 3. Bucks, G. W., & Ossman, K. A. (2015, June), Variations on Flipping a First-year Engineering Computing Course Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition