) are related to mathematics and equations; two items (Nos. 31 and 30) are related toabstract vs. concrete thinking; one item (No. 9) is about problem solving in different contexts;and one item (No. 20) deals with reflection and self-regulated learning. These research findingsas well as their implications and significance are discussed.IntroductionEngineering Dynamics is a foundational, sophomore-year, required course in manyundergraduate engineering programs, such as mechanical, aerospace, civil, and environmentalengineering. Built directly upon college-level physics mechanics and engineering staticscourses, Engineering Dynamics involves numerous fundamental physics mechanics concepts, forexample, Newton’s second law, the principle of work and
most influenced their attitude toward it. At the end of the semester, students were alsoinvited to participate in a reflective survey. All students enrolled in the class participated in theSIMS surveys. However, survey results were only included in the study for those students whoconsented.Twenty-two of the 29 students enrolled chose to participate in the study, providing a total of 260SIMS survey responses. Using the Self-Determination Index (SDI) as a measure of overallmotivation, motivational differences among students appear to be greater than the differencesamong activities. The study did not identify any one mode of teaching that was more effective inmotivating students than others. The students’ motivation appears to be more
Adaptive Follow-Upmodules [3], it was observed that this also lacked any impact on overall student performance. Infact, Adaptive Follow-Up in the Mastering Engineering system was punitive by some of thestudents rather than as a resource to encourage mastery of the material [4]. Additionally,although Exam Wrappers did not seem to increase exam scores and performance; overall, havingstudents fill out quiz and Exam Wrappers did seem to foster reflection and adjustment in mostparticipants [5]. Most recently, Exam Wrappers appear to be useful. They encourage students tothink about their study habits, the types of errors they tend to make, and the variety of ways thatthey are or could be engaged in the course [6].The course is a four-credit course
Najmus Saqib is an Assistant Professor in the R.B. Annis School of Engineering at the University of In- dianapolis (UIndy). Saqib received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado School of Mines (CSM), focusing on ”Optical Diagnostics of Lithium-Sulfur and Lithium-Ion Battery Electrolytes using Attenuated Total Reflection Infrared Spectroscopy”. He likes to use innovative pedagogical techniques to facilitate student learning.Dr. George D. Ricco, University Of Indianapolis George D. Ricco is an assistant professor of engineering and first-year engineering coordinator at the University of Indianapolis. He focuses his work between teaching the first two years of introductory en- gineering and engineering design
degrees 0 ‐0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 Strain, % Figure 9 Stress-Strain Response of LaminatesOf course, the specimens were not fabricated with strict quality-control standards, and the testresults reflect that fact. For example, the students’ spreadsheet based on “typical” carbon-epoxyproperties would predict a modulus of 18.5 million psi for the modulus of the 0° specimens, andthe 700,000 psi published fiber strength would correlate to 420,000 psi tensile strength for a 0°specimen (assuming a 60% fiber content by volume). However, in the
to 12 total, 4-hour days of in-class instruction, scattered over thecourse of 3.5 weeks. As a result, this transition process and the resulting course provides a uniqueopportunity for both personal reflection and for future research. This work-in-progress paper combines literature on study abroad programs and acceleratedlearning with instructor and student feedback regarding this instance of accelerated Statics offeredabroad through PUWL. More specifically, it examines the successes and shortcomings of thecourse in light of the logistical and pedagogical decisions made by the instructors, the students’own experiences abroad, and the literature-based best practices reviewed after the course’scompletion. By observing stand-out successes
bladder adaptive response, and (iii) understand the fundamental mechanisms that correlate the mechanical environment and the biological process of remodeling in the presence of an outlet obstruction. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Effects of a New Assessment Model on Female and Under-Represented Minority StudentsAbstractIn 2016, Michigan State University developed a new model of classroom education andassessment in their Mechanics of Materials course. This model used a modified masteryapproach that stresses formative assessment, guidance in the problem-solving process, andstructured student reflection. We now refer to this new approach as SMART
are located after the narrated lectures. The advantage of the example videos is that students can watch them repeatedly the week they are released and again while doing their homework or studying for the exams. 5. PowerPoint™ presentation with all examples without solution. 6. PowerPoint™ presentation with all examples with solution. 7. Assessed activities such as assignments and exams.Alignment of critical course componentsThe term alignment is used as the “interdependence among the critical course components thatensure that students achieve the desired learning objectives for the course” [13]. Each moduleprovides a set of specific learning objectives that are reflected on each learning or assessedactivity and support the
all statics problems, including particle problems and rigid body problems; the calculationof internal forces or external forces; and problems involving a frame, a machine, or a truss. Thisapproach is also applicable to solving problems in other courses such as Strength of Materialsand Dynamics. In this approach, the first step in solving any problem is to articulate a “Strategy.”This simple step requires the students to take a few moments to reflect on the problem and writedown a strategy rather than trying to pattern match or “find the right equation.” If the strategy isNewton’s 2nd law, which it often is in Statics, then the next step is for students to “Choose aSystem.” Students are required to define the system by drawing a dotted line
this orother process of deeper inquiry.Instructors can also receive useful feedback. Obviously, the results of an initial poll give awindow into what students initially grasp. Later, after repolling, the instructor can view thechange in the students’ responses and reflect upon the effectiveness (or lack thereof) ofadditional comments or explanations. It is indeed humbling for an instructor to experiencenegligible or even “incorrect” changes among students’ responses after “the perfect explanation”has been given. Hopefully, this is part of a formative process in which instructors can betteranticipate what students reasonably can – and cannot – absorb within a certain scope ofconversation or allotted time.Student Feedback:All three cohorts were
, followed by reflection upon whatthey have done. Bonwell and Eison [1] stated “that in active learning, students participate in theprocess and students participate when they are doing something besides passively listening." Thegoal of active learning activities is to actively involve students in the teaching and learningprocess in order to increase student engagement, performance, and retention [2].Despite the considerable published research in the literature [3-6] showing the advantage ofactive learning approaches in STEM and engineering education and its impact on increasingstudents performance, many instructors still do not implement active learning in their teachingcurriculum. The time required to design, implement and revise an active learning
beginning and end of the study. All error bars show (+ or -)1 S.E.It should be noted that at both schools, participants had difficulties understanding some conceptson the SCI, specifically concepts that were not taught in the class. This understanding led to aminority of students choosing not to fully complete SCI. These attempts were not included in theoverall results, as they did not reflect the overall understanding of students. Some students foundthe SCI to be more difficult than anything that had been taught during the semester and showedless effort overall on this study. Because of the vocal lack of support in the concept Inventories, apossible fix for these major problems has been implemented in the study for other
diversity with only one African-American and one student from Africa.The overall categorization of the Homework problems is shown in Table 2. Note that eventhough 33 students were registered for the course that on any given week only 25 to 30 bothturned in homework and were present to take the quiz. At the university, attendance is taken atclass and the students are allowed to miss lectures totaling 2 weeks’ worth of meetings over thecourse of the semester.The homework breakdown shows some immediate points. The number of homework problemscategorized by the fidelity paid to the published solutions is not constant but varies by problem.For example, the number of problems categorized as 3 (reflecting virtual copying of solutionmanual) varied from a
to ensure high levels of studentlearning, engagement, and overall satisfaction.It is noted, nonetheless, that the post-survey via student feedback is subjective, and might notreflect the extent to which students learned. The responses to question six in the post-survey,however, reflect that experiments and analyses of the lab related to the strength of materials course,but do not reveal specific learning outcomes. Future research will incorporate both control and testgroups in order to initiate comparison analyses and reveal specific learning outcomes.REFERENCES[1] Amadieu, F., Mariné, C., & Laimay, C. (2011). The attention-guiding effect and cognitive loadin the comprehension of animations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 36-40.[2
mechanic courses. It is ourhope that the use of the CW this will make it easier for faculty members to implement the DCIin their courses, and for us to collect data on the instrument so we can improve it in the future.Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force Academy, theAir Force, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Distribution A. Approved forpublic release, USAFA-DF-2020-27: distribution unlimited.References1. Gray, G.L., D. Evans, P. Cornwell, F. Costanzo, B. Self, “Toward a Nationwide Dynamics Concept Inventory Assessment Test,” Proceedings of the 2003 ASEE Annual Conference, Nashville, TN, June 2003.2
work throughproblems, and when they should rely on calculations to help adjust their intuition. This exercise hascertainly provided a moment of self-reflection for the authors and a direction towards improvement oftheir courses. Bibliography[1] D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, “Force concept inventory,” Phys. Teach., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 141–158, 1992.[2] C. Henderson, “Common Concerns About the Force Concept Inventory,” Phys. Teach., vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 542–547, 2002.[3] J. Docktor and K. Heller, “Gender Differences in Both Force Concept Inventory and Introductory Physics Performance Gender Differences in Both Force Concept Inventory and Introductory Physics Performance,” Am. Inst. Phys
posted solution to reflect ontheir mistakes or successes on each assessment problem.The second form of feedback is called the dashboard. An example dashboard for a specificstudent is shown in Fig. 4. The dashboard is a visual document that captures the student’sperformance in all aspects of the course. The dashboard contains visual elements for thecomputing projects, homework, and other required coursework. The mastery bar chart is theelement on the dashboard that shows how a student’s mastery is developing over a semester. Thechart has a bar for each objective in the course. In each assessment, the activated objectives havethe potential to increase the length of the mastery bars. The amount that each objective barincreases depends on the weight
N N Couple y-component Y N Y N Couple z-component Y N Y NThe last section of the worksheet prompts students to analyze how the reactions must change tomaintain equilibrium when they remove either hinge. Students explore how a reaction couplemust develop when only a single hinge is present and reflect back on how the two hinges worktogether to generate an equivalent couple in the previous configuration. They also consider anddiscuss how changing the direction of the cable tension would affect the system. Figure 5. Activity 3: Two and Three-Force
mapping. Science, 331, p 772-775.[10] G.D, Kuh, J. Kinzie, J.H. Schuh, E.J. Whitt, 2005. Student success in college. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. p 193.[11] M.C. Lovett. “Using Reflection and Metacognition to Improve Student Learning”, 2013. Stylus Publishing. p 23.[12] S. A. Ambrose, M. W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, M. C. Lovett, M.C., M. K. Norman, 2010. How Do Students Become Self‐directed Learners? In: How Learning Works: Seven Research‐based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey‐Bass. p 188– 216.[13] J. Metcalfe. “Learning from Errors”. The Annual Review of Psychology. 2017. 68:465-89.[14] H. Haron and A.M. Shaharon. “The Pedagogical Issues in Engineering Statics”. In Proceedings of the International Conference of
learning and oftenchange their approach to studying for the class. Continued frequent exams let the student knowif the changes to their study habits are working or not. Since they are guided in ‘best practices’,the later exams often show a marked improvement, reinforcing the value of structured practiceand learning.The second step is grading appeals. Rather than providing a detailed breakdown of a student’serrors, minimal marking is used. Students are graded on the 0% or 100% scale. They mustreview their work (with the help of detailed solutions), identify their errors, identify the type oferror (conceptual or minor), and in the case of minor errors, rework the problem to obtain the80% credit on the rubric. This structured reflection allows
differences in the mean between the two samples. In thisstudy, statistical significance is assumed to be referring to a significance level of 5%. It isclarified that, although a more accurate statistical analysis that would account for properprobability distributions and sample sizes is possible, the analysis presented here is consideredsufficient to identify trends within the context of this study.According to these tables, the proposed assessment model clearly improves the quality of courseinstruction and learning environment during the semester and results in higher studentsatisfaction, particularly as this latter is reflected in the overall rating of the course and instructor(Q7/Q8 and Q16 in Tables 1 through 6, and several questions in Tables 7