subjects learned throughout a student’s college career and applies them to a realisticsituation or problem [1]. This method of teaching is known as Project-Based Learning or PBL.Research on this teaching method, as well as experiences from educators, has shown that PBLcan dramatically benefit students in a range of areas. In 2007, the NSSE found that “studentswho do a capstone seminar that requires a final product or performance gain more in desiredareas compared with their peers whose capstones do not require a final product or performance”[1]. Rachelle Poth, a high school teacher in Pennsylvania, shared her personal experience withhow PBL benefits students. For example, Poth brings up the point that since many students arenot good test-takers
-weekresearch project. The scholars and their mentors participated in a weekly WebEx meeting withcoordinators from all CISTAR institutions. The graduate student mentors led these sessions, andsite education coordinators reviewed the assignments. The students created a literature review,followed by a research abstract, and finally a poster to share in a poster session at their institutionand a five-minute WebEx presentation to their peers and graduate mentors. Finally, each scholarwas required to plan and execute one or more outreach activities at a local school, library orscience center and submit a summary of the activity and a reflection on their own experience.The YS program was a successful collaborative effort by Fellows and staff at all
. Traditional office hours are often utilized for assistance with the solvingprocess. Although important, this one-on-one interaction is inefficient. One-to-one environmentcan be replicated with demonstrative VOH, using video chatting software to hold office hours.The professor can write out problems and show diagrams to the students. Instructors can interactwith every student simultaneously. With multiple students are able to participate, others canbenefit from passive participation and professors only have to answer questions once. Recordingthe sessions has additional benefits. First, students who were unable to attend the online meetingcould still gain knowledge from watching the videos. Secondly, students can watch the sessionand follow the
checkpoint for how the teams are performing. The questions in this survey include “How have your understandings about other disciplines changed?” “Overall, what can you and the team do together to ensure you meet your goals?” 4. Reflect and what’s next survey – This survey is intended for students to reflect on their business pitch presentation. The questions in this survey include “How did you feel you did in giving the team’s pitch?” “How confident are you about your team’s success? Why or why not?" 5. Letter to me – This assignment is intended for students to write a “Letter to Me.” In it, students will write to their previous self, the person they were on the first day of the semester. Students will
particularly important within increasingly international and multicultural societiesthroughout the world. Therefore, the present study randomly assigned partners to students forparticipation in pair programming, which involves close collaboration to complete a computerscience coding task. Within a sample of 819 responses from 369 undergraduates in the UnitedStates (US), non-US citizens benefitted from having a partner from another country (primarilythe US) in terms of the amount of lab assignment completed, belief that the assignment wasvirtually error-free, and confidence in quality of the submitted assignment; however, thesestudents were also less involved in writing code during pair programming when they had apartner from a different nation than
sandwich (cooperative) principle of integrated periods of study and trainingin industry. The most popular was six months in industry followed by six months in collegein each of four successive years [4].A requirement of the NCTA was that all students for their diplomas should have participatedin programs of liberal study. This was reinforced in 1957 by a government edict that extendedthe idea of compulsory liberal studies to all levels of technical education even though muchof it was part time study [5]. By 1962 it was seen that the development of literacy, that is theability to read and write, was essential for the general education of all students. Thus, it wasthat in those colleges the term Liberal Studies came to be substituted by General
interesting in both Teresa and Christine’s narratives are what is omitted from the pitch.Christine was not singularly focused on chemistry or engineering, as her narrative suggests. Infact, she also enjoyed writing – so much so that she actually dual majored in Technical Writing.She tells me that the reason she didn’t pursue writing as a career is because she couldn’t see anyviable career options, whereas in engineering, there were plenty of job opportunities. WhereasTeresa felt the need to resolve her competing interests in the elevator pitch itself, Christine omitsthem entirely, perhaps feeling that her writing interests confuse the narrative too much or areirrelevant because they are not practical.One factor Teresa omitted was an admission later
interdisciplinary courses.Change the World: Olin’s First GCSP CourseOlin’s GCSP redesign culminated in the creation of a new course, Change the World: PersonalValues, Global Impacts, and Making an Olin GCSP. It was co-designed by Assistant Professor ofEnvironmental Engineering Alison Wood (who is also Olin’s GCSP Director) and Professor ofthe History of Science and Technology Robert Martello to serve as the cornerstone of theprogram. The main goal of the course is to provide structured support for a culminating reflectivesynthesis. As mentioned above, in the early years of Olin’s GCSP, graduating seniorsaccomplished their reflection through mentored writing outside of any course, which workedwell for students in the early years of the program but less so
Mathcad. 7. Discover the best techniques to perform curve fitting in Excel and Mathcad. 8. Efficiently use Excel for statistical analysis. 9. Solve nonlinear equations using iterative solution methods in Excel and Mathcad. 10. Solve optimization problems using Excel Solver and using Solve Blocks in Mathcad. 11. Identify the basic elements of programming and write user defined functions in Excel and simple codes in Mathcad. 12. Recognize the advantages and disadvantages of the software, Excel or Mathcad, in the solution of different engineering problems.Course Components:CGN 2420 - Computer Tools in Engineering- has two major units: ● Unit I: Excel Tool and Applications. This unit is divided in five modules distributed in
helpful in refining this specific OEMP assignment and developing generalguidelines for writing OEMPs on any topic. If multiple students are not making reasonable, well-justified assumptions, this suggests that the problem should be redesigned to provide morescaffolding that helps students make more realistic assumptions or more explicitly prompts themto write out their justifications. Second, having students metacognitively reflect on their ownassumptions is an important factor in their development of engineering judgment. Byunderstanding what assumptions students are making and the impact these have on design,instructors can highlight productive beginnings of engineering judgment and help studentsunderstand when they have made assumptions that
Paper ID #29200A First Year Engineering Information Literacy Workshop to IncreaseStudent Awareness of Research DatabasesMs. Evie Cordell MSLIS, Northeastern University Evie Cordell is the First Year Experience and Undergraduate Engagement Librarian at Northeastern Uni- versity. She is the liaison to the Writing Program, General Studies Program, Explore Program, ContiNUe Program, NUi.n. and several other First Year Programs at Northeastern University. She also serves on the First Pages (Northeastern University’s common reads program) committee and is a member of the FUNL (First Generation, Undocumented, Low-Income) Network
1833 Nuclear Engineering 26 275 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Number not Held Number @ LibraryFigure 2ResultsBefore the project began, it was determined that each subject should show a rate of at least 80%of citations belonging to materials held in the library’s collection. This high number was chosenbecause of the great emphasis placed on engineering in the University’s mission and visionstatements as well as the overall size and breadth of the library’s collections in general. It was(and still is) believed that in order to compete with peer
process, conducted proposal-writing workshops; Co-facilitator (2004), Boston East Pipeline Network; and Alumni, Lead Boston 2004 (The National Conference for Community and Justice). She won the 2006 Northeastern University Aspiration Award, and was recognized at the 2003 Northeastern University Reception honoring Principal Investigators that obtained funding in excess of $1 million over a five-year period.Mrs. Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University Jennifer Love is a full-time faculty member of Northeastern University’s First Year Engineering Program in the College of Engineering. She is currently working toward a doctorate in education at Northeastern University with her research focusing on preK-20 engineering
engineering career pathways atdisproportionately lower rates than their peers. Research suggests that the disproportionately lowrates may result in students disengaging with STEM careers like engineering as they progressthrough middle school and high school. Therefore, to contribute to research exploring the gapbetween exposure and enrollment in engineering programs, this work in progress paper intendsto explore the relationship between middle school students’ perceptions of engineering, theirinterests, and self-efficacy to better understand how an out-of-school engineering interventionmay influence their engineering career aspirations.This paper uses a concurrent mixed-method, case-study approach, to analyze participants’ surveyand interview data to
operational steps of the Polymer Emulator: initiation and parameter selection (Figure 2,left) and force-extension curve emulation (Figure 2, right).Before performing the ‘Rubber Emulator’ experiment, students are provided a summary ofnetwork elasticity, including a discussion of the challenges of the original statistical model ofnetwork elasticity. Following the experiment, students are required to write a report summarizingand interpreting their findings in analogy of a regular laboratory experiment. This includes theinterpretation of the observed effect of parameter changes (such as crosslink density, solventswelling ratio, temperature) and the comparison with theoretical predictions. Students are alsoasked to replot the data obtained from the
the collaborative experience can support peer learning,whereas other times a divide-and-conquer approach is adopted, and each student completes only aportion of the laboratory activities. The latter approach often leads to students specializing in asubset of the core skills and competencies that are intended to be developed in the laboratorycourse.One approach to encourage all students to develop the core skills desired for the laboratory courseis to include a laboratory final exam as part of the course, which comprehensively assesses thedifferent skills and knowledge competencies intended for the laboratory course. In laboratorycourses with several sections and different instructors, it can be challenging to ensure consistencyin the
.). Jansons has authored over forty peer-reviewed, engine-related publications, and is a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and on the Board of Associates of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Internal Combustion Engine Division (ICED). He is a 2012 recipient of SAE’s Ralph R. Teetor Educational Award, conferred in recognition of significant contributions to teaching, research and student development and a 2015-16 Fulbright Scholar. Jansons has twenty years’ experience working with optical engines, and leads a research group of qualified and expe- rienced graduate students. Jansons serves as the Director of Early Engineering Programs, administering the core group of STEM courses common to
, digital analysis, sustainability, materials and state-of-the-art construction methods. Participants visit contemporary buildings such as the Millennium Bridge, St. Mary Axe, London City Hall, London Shard tower, Pinnacle tower, the new Stadium and Aquatics Center (host to the 2012 Summer Olympics). Students learn directly from architects, engineers and builders responsible for these buildings [6]. • For 2 weeks, students are immersed in Chinese culture and experience numerous culturally significant sites, visit local universities, meet with Purdue alumni, tour engineering based labs and production facilities, and meet one on one with Chinese peers in partner universities. Additionally, expert
with engineering programs did notdisclose a breakdown of faculty demographics on the latest 2018 ASEE data).The number of engineering deans signing the ASEE diversity pledge from those 113 R1institutions has reached 85 at time of writing of this paper. Given there is such an interest indiversifying the engineering professoriate, a logical question is what is the status of the tenure-line black engineering faculty 5-years after the pledge? Findings are reported by incorporatingmulti-level factors, including but not limited to gender, rank, geographical location, andprivate/public status of the institutions. Note that tenure-line in this paper refers to both tenure-track and tenured faculty. This work-in-progress does not include non-tenure
students are in the queue andthe questions that they list. While the Queue software was originally developed to help maximizeefficiency at office hours for large enrollment courses, the software has since been adopted forother educational purposes, including drop-in advising, peer learning, and active learning. Sinceits implementation in Fall 2017, the Queue has been adopted by 25 courses, 4 advising offices,and has facilitated over 70,000 questions.In the early use cases of the Queue, we identified several benefits for students and instructors,including but not limited to saved time, improved accessibility, and improved use of space sinceoffice hours do not need to be in a fixed location when the queue is used. To understand theseimpacts and
conducts research in engineering education, related to classroom and innovative pedagogical strategies. Her own intersectionality led to her passion in promoting and researching pathways into STEM especially for underrepresented minority groups.Ms. Nihal Sarikaya, Northern Arizona University Nihal A. Sarikaya is a student in the Department of Business and Administration at Northern Arizona University. She is working toward a Master of Administration degree, with Professional Writing empha- sis. Her goal is to become a medical/scientific writer. Sarikaya received her BS in biological sciences from the University of Southern California. Also, she has worked in academic research for five years and biopharmaceutical
as bullying still exists from male students and in rare cases,even from some teachers. This project is a continuous improvement work and in futurepublications, results will be shown on the improvement of numbers of women in eachEngineering program and the overall improvement of their perception. The analysis andconclusions shown in this work can be applied to other regions of the world where similarcultural and economic conditions exist, as women still face many problems not only inside anEngineering faculty but sometimes even at home when they decide for an Engineering career.AcknowledgmentAuthors would like to acknowledge Writing Labs, TecLabs, Tecnologico de Monterrey, for theFinancial Support provided to this project. Special thanks to
of higher education. The results of the review will be sent back to the university toaddress shortcomings identified by the review team. An on-site review team of peers will do acampus visit. A fifth year interim report is also required between the reaffirmations. SACSCOCrequires that a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP) is in place for continuous improvement. Proceedings of the 2017 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Section Annual Conference Organized by The University of Texas at Dallas Copyright © 2017, American Society for Engineering Education 2017 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Section Annual ConferenceThere are many similar software packages that can be used for academic program
start of the project in earnest was in Spring 2012. The 5-year, 2 million dollar Projectinvolves the UNM School of Engineering (SOE) only which is composed of four engineeringdepartments (Civil, Mechanical, Electrical and Chemical/Nuclear) and the Computer Sciencedepartment. This Project revolves around the main goals of the National STEP Program and has thefollowing main four components: Mentoring: About 25 mentors participate (5 faculty members nominally from each of the five departments) in 6 mentoring sessions a year—3 per semester, with some older peers involvement. Each group size varies by major/department. Last session is a talk by an expert (industrial or academic). Two of the sessions involve career development
is considered between 2014-2018that are offered in fall semesters. The statistics were analyzed and then the labs are modifiedbased on students’ feedback (SPTE) and from the grading statistics. The lab has 10 experimentsin total, which is divided into two parts. The first part comprises 5 labs, and these are executedon IDE68K tool by writing the code in Assembly Language. The IDE68K suite is compatible toassembly or C programs and can be executed on built-in simulators (Topaloglu, T. and Gürdal,O., 2010). The second part needs C language and a DEMOEM hardware. This hardware withhands-on experience brings more advantage and eases the theory understanding. To bring thebetter outcome from students, where they are capable to compete with the
pressure vessel by applying the thin-walled structure theory.In addition to enduring outcomes (Table 2), the labs will educate students on the “important toknow” topics (Table 3). These are specific (i.e., more detailed) topics that students learn whenthey participate in the lab and write a lab reports afterwards.In addition, students confirm lab results with the theoretical results as a part of lab report writeup so that students will be able to understand the theories behind the lab activities and also tounderstand potential errors associated to each activity during the lab.In addition to the contents of Table 3 for specific topics, students must become proficient withthe equipment usage to conduct hands-on experiments all labs. Also
Accelerator is the Design Thinking Process developed by the Hasso-Plattner Institute ofDesign at Stanford, in which students are encouraged to empathize, define, ideate, prototype, andtest their inventions [5]. The learning objectives for students in the Summer Accelerator mirrorthose set out for students participating in the year-long program, including: choosing a problemand writing a problem statement about how people experience this problem; ideating solutions tothat problem that are better or less expensive than devices that are currently available; sketchingand making a prototype of their idea; obtaining feedback through conferencing and user surveys;and presenting their project to an audience through a “pitch.”Students in the Summer
cybersecurity education including the participation of women. She is an author or co-author of over 30 peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings in these areas. She is a member of the IEEE Computer Society, ACM, ACM-W, Women in Cyber Security (WiCys), SWE(Society of Women Engineers), and NCWIT(National Center of Women in Technology).Brandon Earwood, Texas A&M University-San AntonioDr. Young Rae Kim, Texas A&M University-San Antonio Young Rae Kim, youngrae.kim@tamusa.edu, is an assistant professor of mathematics education in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education and Human Development at Texas A&M University-San Antonio. His research interests focus on how students
pursuing their major [10] [12] [13] [14].Hutchison-Green et al interviewed first-year engineering students to determine what factors, inthe students’ first semester, begin to affect self-efficacy [15]. They found that performancecomparison (i.e., a student comparing his/her performance to his/her peers) makes a significantimpact on self-efficacy, and that depending on the student and the situation, self-efficacy couldeither increase or decrease in response to the situation. Team-based project courses can thusmitigate the possibility of decreasing students’ confidence because they do not require studentsto work individually and then compare their performance to that of their peers. Instead, studentswork together toward a common goal. Team-based
environment, establish goals, plan tasks,and meet objectives” requires a more complex assessment process. First, the new definition of“Team” requires that a team should consist of more than one person working toward a commongoal and should include individuals of diverse backgrounds, skills, or perspectives. Therefore,programs must demonstrate that the definition of Team requirements are met. SO5 requires thatmembers of a team must be able to create a collaborative and inclusive environment. Severalmethods for measuring attainment of this ability have been used by programs:10 “a. Videotaping a team meeting and evaluating the team performance using a rubric. b. Students write descriptions of their contributions and their team members