skills were the responsibilityof other parts of the university, not engineering.16It is further worth noting some exceptions to these writing-averse practices. For instance, Parettiand Burgoyne recommend problem-based learning as an approach that can enable greaterattention to communication instruction and practice in upper-level design courses, finding thatboth students and faculty found these kinds of writing assignments useful.20 And House et al.described a curriculum where approaches such as student writing portfolios, incorporatingwriting into several engineering courses, and using a combination of rubrics and peer reviewimproved student learning outcomes related to communication.21While these sources advocate for more writing within the
Arts in Creative Writing from Virginia Common- wealth University.Annemarie Galeucia, Louisiana State University Annemarie Galeucia, M.A., works for Communication across the Curriculum (CxC) at Louisiana State University (LSU). She is a Ph.D. candidate in LSU’s cultural geography and anthropology program, and has over 10 years of qualitative research and teaching development experience. Prior to her work at CxC, Annemarie was a research associate for CU-Boulder’s Center for Media, Religion and Culture, where she developed qualitative research materials and coordinated data analysis for human subject research.Mr. Warren R Hull Sr. P.E., Louisiana State University Warren R. Hull, Sr. is Director of the Chevron Center
. Furthermore, PITCH core faculty are currently developing three online modules to addressthe issues raised above. Students will take these in their freshman, junior and senior years inconjunction with EASC 1112, junior laboratory courses, and senior design courses. The intent ofthese modules is to engage students with writing exercises that will prepare them for the specificPITCH assignments in target courses (i.e., technical memos, laboratory reports and senior designproposals, reports and posters). Students will also benefit from feedback provided by the onlinetechnical writing instructors as well as peer review using the EliReview® software system.15 Theonline modules are being developed now and implementation is expected to begin in fall 2016
were doing it to satisfy their own intrinsic values. While they still believed that good writingwas important to an engineering professional, the lack of continuity in the curriculum madewriting seem far less important to an engineering student.Compounding this devaluation, students often received negative social messages from otherstudents and even faculty about the value of communication coursework. Some students hadbeen told by peers to expect their writing class to be tedious, and mostly just a meaninglessrequirement. One student reported that in a subsequent class with a communication component,the instructor explicitly messaged that the students were there to get an easy grade on thatcomponent and pass through to more important work.The
3 of 4 8. Engineering Technology T123 Issues in Engineering 1 • “Writing Proficiency in Engineering Technology Students and Skill Technology Education 5 of 5 Development in the Classroom” #11907 9. First Year Programs M427 Design in the First 1 • “Implementing and Evaluating a Peer Review of Writing Exercise in a Year: Challenges and 3 of 6 First-Year Design Project” #12126 Successes 10. Materials T536 (Technical Session 1) 1 • “Writing, Speaking, and Communicating-Building Disciplinary
to the technical solution; highlighting the gap inknowledge; announcing the importance of the project; and identifying harms and benefits ofproblem and solution.Not all of these moves are necessary to communicate to a reader from a related community ofpractice, whose technical knowledge and understanding of tacit assumptions closely match thatof the writer: for instance, a supervisor or peer working in the same area, for whom certainmoves (e.g., the real-world problem or how the technological solution links to it) are self-evident. But in order to communicate projects to non-expert audiences, all of these moves areneeded. Fig. 1. Proposal evaluation sheet. This document was used at several stages in the proposal-writing process
students to show theyunderstand were first developed by National Academic Advisory Board member Denny Davisand then revised with feedback from other board members, faculty, the TCE Industry AdvisoryBoard and students. Figure 2 is the poster shown on Twin Cities Engineering walls andpresented to all students during incoming student orientation. It is also used as the cover pagefor student portfolios, so is revisited through each of their four semesters as they gather portfolioevidence for each outcome.In gathering portfolio evidence, students go beyond the straightforward administrative task ofgathering copies of work they have done and write a brief statement that reinforces theirlearning. The statement should assert in what way this particular
experience of the creative arts beyond the superficial might reveal thatthe artist and the engineer are not as different as is usually supposed. The University of Texas atTyler has conducted an experimental project in which engineering students were encouraged toexperience the design process afresh from the perspective of the creative arts. Juniors inelectrical engineering worked under the mentorship of arts faculty in a chosen medium (studioart, writing, or music) to produce legitimate works of art that were displayed, performed, or readpublicly, and documented how their experiences of design in the arts have informed and shapedtheir perspectives as engineers. The structure, expectations, and results of this course aredescribed in this paper.A
students read the texts and write a number of literary analyses throughout the semester. In thelast phase of the process, each student creates an argument to justify his/her selection of the bestwork of the year. While this may seem a risky endeavor, the risk is minimized by establishingappropriate parameters and standards by the “Project Director” (aka the English faculty member)in order to produce a course that is both academically rigorous and engaging to students. This paper provides a brief literature review of current trends in first year composition(FYC) programs and situates this approach within these trends; describes the context of thecourse delivery, including school demographics and curriculum requirements; explains thecourse
, haveexperimented with forms of media production as alternatives to writing for producing anddisseminating scholarly work. Both of these projects focus on the production of new mediaforms, such as web pages, games, and interactive digital art pieces, as the result of scholarlywork, rather than merely as methods for producing more traditional written/publication material.More recently, thanks largely to the proliferation of 3D printing hardware and related grantsfrom the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Andrew Mellon Foundation, digitalhumanists have begun incorporating making practices into their research and pedagogy.Makerspaces and critical design labs such as those at the University of Victoria, the University ofToronto, the University of
Kelso Farrell is an Associate Professor at the Milwaukee School of Engineering. She has a PhD in English Literature (Science Fiction) from Louisiana State University (2007), an MA in English from Montana State University, and a BA in Creative Writing from the University of Montana. At LSU, Jennifer was part of the Communication Across the Curriculum (CxC) and worked in the Engineering Communication Studio. Jennifer has published articles in The Leading Edge, Carbon, The Journal of Popular Culture, and Foundation.Dr. Alicia Domack, Milwaukee School of Engineering c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Impact of Experiential Learning on
weekly class lectures and group assignments, students were required to choose atleast five “choice activities” to attend. Some of these choice activities occurred during thescheduled class period, such as a presentation on how to use SPSS software or how to presentdata using Excel. Other choice activities included attending a workshop on how to write a grantproposal to fund undergraduate research or attending a state-wide undergraduate researchconference. Each section of the course required certain choice activities and gave students thefreedom to select from other choice activities in order to fulfill the requirement to participate in 5activities. The focus section of the course required attending a workshop on survey design, aworkshop
wereunsure about. In addition to arguing that iteration in both disciplinary contexts was useful fortesting design decisions, they also noted its utility within the report writing process. A number ofstudents indicated that the process of receiving peer feedback at multiple junctures in therehearsal process underscored the value of multiple drafts in an engineering context.Ideation: Observations about ideation typically focused on seminar activities or group decisionmaking during the scene development process. Like their observations on problem analysis in theseminar classes, some students acknowledged that activities requiring them to identify and sharedivergent perspectives about issues in a play highlighted the possibility for
interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, interdisciplinary pedagogy for pervasive computing design; writing across the curriculum in Statics courses; as well as a CAREER award to explore the use of e-portfolios to promote professional identity and reflective practice. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Student Persistence Through Uncertainty Toward Successful Creative PracticeAbstract: To increase creative practice among students in engineering and other
engineering design and society and artistically build prototypeswhich can help them to improve their environment. As stated by students in their report, timeconstraints and lack of access to a greater variety of materials were two obstacles preventingthem from further developing their projects.Students also were very engaged in their writing assignments, in which they demonstrated theirunderstanding of the concept of citizen engineering, and explored the interconnectedness oftechnology and society. Students were evaluated based on writing quality, argumentation,engagement with course materials, and making connections with everyday life. Each assignmentincluded a rubric that explicitly spelled out specific evaluation criteria. For example, all
Paper ID #15771Engineering Ambassadors Network (EAN): Goals, Successes, and Challengesin Growing the EANMs. Christine Haas, Engineering Ambassadors Network Christine Haas brings ten years of experience working in marketing and communications with a focus on the science and engineering fields. She’s held positions as the director of marketing for Drexel’s College of Engineering and director of operations for Worcester Polytechnic Institute - Engineering. Now, as CEO of Christine Haas Consulting, LLC, Christine travels around the world teaching courses to scientists and engineers on presentations and technical writing. She
and was awarded NAE’s 2008 Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Implicit Bias? Disparity in Opportunities to Select Technical versus Non-Technical Courses in Undergraduate Engineering ProgramsAbstractUndergraduate engineering students are commonly afforded minimal opportunities to choosetheir courses as compared to their non-engineering peers on campus. In addition, manyengineering programs restrict students’ limited curricular choices to courses that are heavilyskewed to be technical in nature, further limiting students’ ability to realize a broad and balancedcollege
forced requirement of her large introductory STS course. At the same time, they weresignificantly less skilled at reading and writing than Wylie had anticipated. Their open laptops,poor attendance, missing assignments, and silence in response to her discussion questions wereperhaps all signs of their intimidation at this foreign subject, which may have heightened orcreated their resistance to learning about it. In response to students’ inability or unwillingness toread the assigned sources – a widespread cause of poor class discussions – Wylie began showingcartoons about issues relevant to the day’s lecture topic. After all, cartoons demand only basicliteracy skills, require no homework preparation, are fun and silly, and yet nonetheless manage
design, however, presentsengineering programs with two major challenges: placing limits on the “breadth” of eachoutcome; and clarifying the inherent vagueness in each outcome (or, defining the “specificity” ofeach outcome).1 ABET intentionally writes their student outcomes with a degree of vagueness toavoid engineering programs from adopting prescriptive curricular design and to allowengineering programs to have flexibility and freedom of interpretation. However, this vaguenessmay confuse engineering programs about how to address each outcome effectively.1 To addressthese types of issues, McGourty, Besterfield-Sacre, and Shuman called for operationaldescriptions of each outcome; although, they admitted that determining the specificity would bea
the development of empathy for the community, as is (again) adopting a mindset thatde-emphasizes one’s prior knowledge in order to develop an unbiased view and holisticunderstanding of a community’s true needs.4.3 CommunicationEffective communication skills are an essential component of utilizing empathic designtechniques to understand users’ needs, within or outside of service-learning contexts. Walther,Miller, and Kellam8 developed a series of four modules for cultivating empathic communicationskills among engineering students. These modules included (a) a direct focus on improvingspecific communication skills such as talking, listening, and observing, (b) role-playingactivities, (c) reflective writing exercises, and (d) “rich picture
patterns’21. As it was hypothesized that the aptitudes for lifelong learning were present in thesedata, and this hypothesis required testing, the research literature on lifelong learning wasinvestigated for potential theory or theoretical frameworks to guide the study. Deakin Crick etal’s (2004) Effective Lifelong Learning Inventory (ELLI) was selected for a number of reasons6.Importantly, Deakin Crick et al. (2004) have extensively investigated how to characterize lifelonglearning, and write about its many facets6. They explore the notion of lifelong learningholistically in its relevance over one’s lifetime, as well as in the context of traditional learning,including classroom, formal and informal, and self-directed learning6. They position their
education for more than 30 years. As a manager, teacher and researcher, she has served many departments, including Office of BIT President, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, School of Law, etc. In 2011, she built the Center for Faculty Development (CFD) of BIT, which has been named as the National Demonstrational Center by the Ministry of Education of China. Now, professor Pang is the head of Graduate School of Educational and the director of CFD at BIT. Her teaching, research, and writing focused on general education and suzhi education, faculty de- velopment, and higher education management. She has published 8 books, more than 50 papers, and undertook around 15 research projects. Her monograph ”General
global accreditation community has affirmedthe importance of educational breadth, in multiple agreements including the Washington Accord,the Sydney Accord, and the Dublin Accord.14 Engineering historian Bruce Seely has noted thecyclical nature of these calls. 15An ABET-funded study on the impact of EC 2000 by Lisa Lattuca and colleagues at the Centerfor the Study of Higher Education at Penn State16 found that 75% of the approximately 150chairs surveyed reported “some” or “significant” increases in emphasis on communication,teamwork, use of modern engineering tools, technical writing, lifelong learning, and engineeringdesign, without significantly impacting technical outcomes. More than half the faculty reportedsimilar gains in these areas in
available only in the “gray”literature of think tanks, where validity is often assessed through critical readings by peers afterpublication, with responses issued from other think tanks. Compounding this difficulty is the factthat Louisiana carefully controlled the data from charter schools, releasing it only to a smallnumber of favored researchers, in violation of public records laws. The courts only sorted thisout in fall 2014.33Those who had privileged access to data touted success of charter schools: increasedstandardized test scores, increased graduation rates, and increased diversity (interpreted as ahigher number of white students enrolled).34,35 However, critics have pointed out methodologicalflaws in these studies, to the point where one
Motion LLC. With grants fundedby the Maryland Industrial Partnerships Program (MIPS), which is associated with a technologyenterprise unit within the school of engineering at College Park, researchers in the University’sSchool of Public Health had been studying the health effects of Fifth Quarter Fresh (a chocolatemilk beverage produced by Fluid Motion) on high school football players. Unfortunately, inDecember 2015 the University issued a press release touting the health benefits of Fifth QuarterFresh on high school football players recovering from concussions without the study resultspassing through peer review.21 As several news stories highlighted, the press release timingcoincided with the debut of a major motion picture in the United