process because of the nature of the reflections (e.g., describing what they ate in considerable detail).ParticipantsThis paper describes the first stage of analysis in this project. For this stage, we used data fromthe 2016 cohort of RSAP, which included 91 students who participated in three different tracks:Europe (Italy, Switzerland, and Germany), China, and the Dominican Republic. Demographicinformation for this cohort is in Tables 2 and 3. In general, the program has larger representationof women and underrepresented students than the population of the College of Engineering(CoE), and the 2016 cohort is no different. All participants signed consent forms agreeing toparticipate
protocol in which students were asked to describe their engagementin the course activities. Specifically, the protocol included a series of questions intended to elicitstudents’ reflections on their experience with the engineering design process along withadditional questions related to various other aspects of the course including collaboration, theintegration of math and science, and students’ overall perceptions of the course. A total of twelveinterviews were conducted with the six students in the case study sample, one interviews witheach student at the end of two of the semesters in which they were enrolled in the engineeringcourses. Interviews were conducted during the final week of the academic year in which studentswere enrolled in the
observer and was at the preschool for allplanned lessons and activities, went on the two field trips, and participated in the teachers’planning time. All planned lessons and activities were video recorded and later transcribed.These were not analyzed for the part of the study being reported here.A modified form of lesson study was the method used to collect data from the teachers. Lessonstudy is where teachers work together to study curriculum and formulate long-term goals forstudent learning, write lesson plans, conduct the lessons, watch each other and collect data whilethe lesson is taking place, reflect on the lesson by sharing data and using it to illuminate studentlearning, and develop new goals for the next lesson [44]. The director of the
, which opens up questions about howto determine what amounts to a “good” concept map. This is particularly evident when student-generated concept maps cannot be analyzed against an absolute target,. Further, without theability to define hierarchies of key concept to sub-concept in dynamic socio-technical systems,there is a challenge to assess the orientation of knowledge acquisition for students [3], [4]. Thisresearch considers traditional scoring of concept maps that tend to emphasize node andconnection quantity [5] (i.e., the number of concepts expressed), which might be problematic forliberal arts courses demanding engineering students critically reflect and rethink their priorassumptions and heuristics about the relationship between
microwave circuitry.Dr. Diane L Zemke Diane Zemke is an independent researcher and consultant. She holds a Ph.D. in leadership studies from Gonzaga University. Her research interests include teamwork, small group dynamics, dissent, organiza- tional change, and reflective practice. Dr. Zemke has published in the International Journal of Engineering Education, the Journal of Religious Leadership, and various ASEE conference proceedings. She is the author of ”Being Smart about Congregational Change.” c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Learning to Read and Take Notes in DynamicsIntroductionABET criterion 3i states the need for students to become life-long learners [1
influence – often negatively – their pursuit of careers in engineering and computerscience [2], [5]–[9].While at one time, computer science was seen as a profession that was both welcoming and open todiverse membership [10]–[15], this vision was either never realized or quickly lost [16]–[19]. Culturaland gendered expectations (what everybody `knows` and commonsensically `performs`, but fewactually think about) that have been part of the lived reality of this technological society seem to havefound their way into computer science, and it is not working in everybody’s favor. Faced with claimsthat computer science’s `face` as stereotypically white or Asian, and male, is somehow reflective of asort of evolutionary inevitability – `that’s just the way
hypotheses rather than conclusions. First, PIsexpect undergraduate lab workers to express “interest” and “excitement” about research. Weworry that assessing students according to how a professor perceives their “enthusiasm” canunintentionally exclude students who differ from the professor, such as by gender, race, class, orculture. Second, members of the two labs tell stories about failure to undergraduates in differentways, which serve as powerful modes of socialization. Discourse styles as reflected incommunities’ storytelling may influence undergraduates’ sense of belonging. Third, we tried anew methodology of inviting students to discuss their different kinds and levels of expertise withregards to the concept of T-shaped expertise, i.e., having
unfortunate realities14. Although the 3 large fundamental engineering courses in this study pose a different set ofissues, which often implies that quality teaching is not possible in large classes, researchers ineducation10,42,54,75 suggested the contrary –quality teaching is quite possible in large classes whilefocusing on student-centered, cooperative, active experimentation, and high-level thinkinglearning, instead of the traditional teacher-centered, individual, reflective observation, androutine-drill learning. Almost 2 decades ago, Felder23 had recommended the need to change the pedagogy usedin engineering classrooms. According to his study at that time, many engineering classes in1999 were taught in exactly the same way that
knowledge – higher level learning skills which are nottraditionally emphasized in the undergraduate classroom. Therefore, these higher levellearning skills become not just purely aspirational goals but need to be actualized in order tomake the KI based pedagogy effective. This is where an active learning model can prove veryeffective. This paper describes such an active learning model developed and implemented in2017 for the introductory electronics course in the junior year. This learning model consists ofthree key components which are described in details - the concept introduction or pre-workcomponent, the concept exploration or classwork component, and the concept reflection orpost-work component. In addition, new assessment techniques tailored
outcomes, but thecriterion invites programs to develop its own in addition to those. Some programs chooseto alter the seven outcomes to reflect the strengths and uniqueness of their specificprogram. This was encouraged in the early years of EC2000, but it became clear to mostprograms that this provided little benefit and potentially caused problems.11 Today mostprograms use the ABET criterion 3 student outcomes verbatim. This example takes thatapproach.Identify where in the curriculum these outcomes are met. The student outcomes aregenerally attained through the curriculum, which for most programs means four years oftargeted coursework. It is therefore important to assess the degree to which any course inthe curriculum supports the attainment of
of education [31] since personaldevelopment also addresses “being”, “agency” and “identity”; terms which are also oftenconfused. Without wanting to become someone else (ambition and or identity) there is nopurpose to the pursuit of knowledge and skill. “Becoming” is how we gain the experiencefrom which wisdom as it is commonly understood is derived through self-reflection. 2Academic courses tend to emphasise knowledge at the expense of as skill and rarely directlyaddress being [31].Yet knowledge, skill, and a sense of identity and agency are of little use in a world in whichrapid changes give knowledge and skill finite lifetimes. Thus a more important question maybe how does an educational organization ensure that graduating students are
Engineering Education, 2018Teacher Implementation of Structured Engineering Notebooks in Engineering Design-based STEM Integration Units (Fundamental)In the classroom, engineering notebooks allow students to develop their ideas, take notes, recordobservations, and reflect on what they have learned. Structured notebooks are used to helpstudents engage with material at greater depth through analyzing questions, formulatingpredictions, and interpreting results. Notebooks are an important resource for teachers toformatively assess students’ ideas. By incorporating notebooks into classroom instruction andusing them to guide feedback to students, teachers can use notebooks to support student learningof engineering design in STEM integration.This
thatinform women’s decisions to enter each respective sector. More importantly, there is vanishinglylittle work on women’s decisions to enter different engineering careers in contexts where womenare well-represented.In our paper, we discuss participation of women in engineering in Malaysia, a context wherewomen represent a high share of both academia and industry (e.g., overall, 45% of theengineering workforce) [3]. Findings from the 2013 Malaysian MWFCD Women in the LaborMarket Study conclude that women are about 46% of the public and 51% of the privateengineering, manufacturing, and construction work sector [4]. Studying the Malaysian contextwill help us gain purchase on the way choices are driven by “preferences for science” [5],reflective of
/staff partnerships to a) develop more accurate and richer explanations for patterns of student recruitment, retention, and graduation at Cal Poly; b) enact change to better support student success; and c) evaluate and reflect on efforts to enact change.This work was strongly informed by a then-active Cal Poly collaboration [2011-14] with theUSC Center for Urban Education (CUE), which encouraged the institution, as a whole, to shiftfrom a “focus on students” as the problem to “institutional accountability.”In the 6 months following the PLC (prior to 11/1/2012), participants had submitted three grantproposals to address PLC findings and leverage collaborative relationships that were developedvia PLC participation
reflect on the atrocities that led to the racial unrest in 1943, and the deindustrializationthat precipitated the racial tumult during the summer of 1967. Both events are inconspicuousaspects of Detroit’s past, that have direct connections to bringing about its current state. I dowhat I do because unfortunately Detroit is not an anomaly in regard to other predominantly blackurban cities. True democracy depends on individuals collectively toiling to secure justice andequitable living conditions for these resource-forsaken communities. I consider diversity to be a synonym for difference or variety, appearing incharacterizations of opinion, religion, race, or any other classification of something or someone.Given the history of monolithic
active interest in these areas when in high school. For both Tech- and CS-persistergroups, computing interest decreased from high school to college, but tech majors’ interestdecreased less than did non-tech majors. It is somewhat counterintuitive to see lower ratings inInterest for both groups when they reach college. This is most likely a reflection of loss of 9interest in the individual items that make up the composite such as gaming or game design orhardware, for instance. This interest shift coupled with the specialization that takes place in CSor IT majors may account for the overall decreased interest we observed. It makes sense thatstudents who choose a specialized major focused on
industry and needed for the world of tomorrow” (Spiegel, 2016, pp. 1). The modelprovides a framework to analyze, design, and assess courses and learning opportunities acrossthe design, enactment, and post-instruction phases of course implementation. The framework isbroken down into five separate components: Articulate, Design, Enact, Reflect, and Collaborate.Articulate. Engineering Learning begins by articulating the purpose and rationale for a course in a few sentences. This entails addressing four points: 1. Rationale and Purpose of the Course: What is the value and overall purpose of the course? Why this course at this time for the students? How does this course connect to other courses in the sequence?Moving Beyond Active
conversation about how we teach and train engineers to workin diverse teams in first-year programs and beyond. Students also showed a decrease in teamratings of their effectiveness over the course of the semester. This decrease may not be an overallreduction in students’ effectiveness in teams. In fact, student reflections on teaming activities andcases of conflict in teams decrease over the course of the semester. Instead, we believe that thisshift occurs as students learn more about what it means to be a good team member, become morecomfortable giving their peers feedback and subsequently deliver ratings that are more realistic.As part of understanding students’ perceptions of working on diverse teams, we have beenpaying close attention to how
theirengineering communities. They meet many of their fellow classmates and use this informationwhen forming study groups and/or reaching out to their peers for assistance.Authentic Scenario (Relevancy)An authentic project is assigned to pique student interest and demonstrate the applicability of thecourse. For this study, we used the 2007 collapse of the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis, MN [19].Students are asked to reflect on their past and current understandings in the form of reflectionquestions: “What engineering concepts do you need to explain the cause of the collapse?” “Whatrole will this course play in preparing you to understand the cause of the collapse?” This allowedcourse concepts, often seen as abstract, to be directly applied to an authentic
level (α), statistical power level (1-β), andsample size (n). Thus, “…when any three of them are fixed, the fourth is determined” [37,p 98].When using NHST, an effective way to minimize the probability of committing Type I and TypeII errors and ensure that significant results reflect important substantive meaning, is to conductan a priori power analysis to determine an optimal sample size given an expected effect size [37,34]. Below we discuss an a priori power analysis conducted prior to testing the engineeringvalues, self-efficacy, and identity scales. To determine a meaningful Effect Size (EF), that our scales of engineering values, self-efficacy, and identity need to be able to detect we conducted an a priori power analysis using
printer are that itprovides students with complete design freedom to create a variety of models on computersoftware in one afternoon, select the best designs, and create physical models for live testing.Over a period of three years, undergraduate engineering students in a structural materialslaboratory class, designed and 3D printed simple connections, lateral beams, and trusses; andthey conducted stress analyses. As part of the class assignment, students reflected on theirexperiences. Based on students' final written portfolios for the class, the majority indicated thatdesigning with computer software, combined with 3D printing, increased their creativity anddesign confidence, and enhanced their self-efficacy and identity as engineers who
, J. A. Hicks, W. Davis, and R. Smallman, “Free will, counterfactual reflection, and the meaningfulness of life events,” Social Psychological and Personality Science, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 243–250, 2015.[7] M. D. Alicke, J. Buckingham, E. Zell, and T. Davis, “Culpable control and counterfactual reasoning in the psychology of blame,” Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull., vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 1371–1381, Oct. 2008.[8] K. Epstude and N. J. Roese, “The functional theory of counterfactual thinking,” Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 168–192, May 2008.[9] P. M. Gollwitzer and V. Brandstätter, “Implementation intentions and effective goal pursuit,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 186–199, 1997.[10] P. M
well with their desire to have their studentsthinking about customer needs, making an impact, and reflecting on the consequences of theirwork. Dean A at a primarily undergraduate-focused institution remarked: I think as our engineering students think about how they're going to solve world problems and how they're going to make a difference in the world, how do they do that with an entrepreneurial mindset, and how to think about what does it really mean to create value, how do we do that and what are the things that you think about. It's not about just for the technology but really understanding customer needs, and what is the real need. It's not just about developing a really cool hammer and then not looking
Results of a Spreadsheet Tool,” is the first recorded use of “empathy” in theDesign in Engineering Education Division (DEED) of ASEE [17]. Like many of itspredecessors, Eggert’s paper only mentions “empathy” once when describingprofessionals’ interpersonal style, which includes “empathy, tolerance, honesty, trust, andpersonal integrity” [17]. As part of a person’s “style,” empathy is considered apsychological trait, one that reflects an engineering designer’s personality. The concept “empathic design,” coined by Leonard and Rayport, had gainedprominence prior to its presence in engineering education [18]. The first reference to“empathic design” in DEED appeared in 2011. Titus and colleagues called empathicdesign “the ideal form” of human
average 6-year graduation rate of 67.1%,and above the national average 6-year graduation rate of 59%. One-year freshman retentionrates for the Fulton Schools of Engineering reflected rates higher than the national average.The first-year freshman retention rate for students admitted in 2016 within the engineeringprogram was 86.1%. By comparison, 85.7% of all 2015 freshman were retained at ArizonaState University after one year and nationally, retention of freshmen was 60% after one year(source: ASU institutional data). Table 1: One-year Freshman Engineering Retention Rate by Term Initial Admit Term First Term (Spring) Second Term (Fall) Fall 2012 95.60% 88.10% Fall 2013
via;abstract hypothesis, active testing, concrete experience and reflective observation. However, inengineering service learning, students work to create real solutions for a real customer. Whilethey might ride in and out of the iterative steps in the engineering design process, in the end theirideas must be resolved, not only with their engineering team members, but also with real peopleand situations in the world. In fact, it can be said that engineering service learning improves theeffectiveness of ELT due to its necessary connection to the real world.3. Methods3.1 ParticipantsData analysis for this paper will concentrate on selected questions from the ENGR 102 HScourse evaluations collected for Academic Years (AY) 2014-15, 2015-16 and
toacknowledge the material realities (e.g., the intersections of the sociocultural landscape, historyand cultural and political past and present that create complex interactions and interpretations oflived realities) of students whose embodied knowledge may not align to the structural norms offormal schooling [12]. The assumption that engineering is only created through one kind ofknowledge impacts the “acceptance of difference” [13]. It is important that students, especiallyLatinx students, see themselves reflected in the curriculum and provide spaces to engage them inengineering activities in their own language, culture, and communities.This paper introduces a new paradigm by inverting the logic portrayed in many studiesinvolving research that
-defined metrics,five of the six felt that their projects had been at least a partial success as measured by quantifiedstudent learning outcomes and/or student attitudes and comments. The sixth instructor felt thatthe evidence gathered was inconclusive. All six indicated that they planned to further revise andre-implement their course improvements in the next course offering.As part of the deliverables for completion of the Working Group, faculty were also asked tosubmit reflections of their experience in summer program. These reflections were a valuablemeans of helping faculty express their thoughts and provided feedback to the organizers aboutpositive aspects of the group and possible improvements for the next offering. Three mainthemes were
computerassisted virtual environment (CAVE) EON Icatcher and EON Professional integrated developmentenvironment (IDE) software. Two groups of graduate students enrolled in the course for twoconsecutive years provided feedback through surveys, discussions, and informal interviews.Students gained practical experience with designing VR systems and VR environments,appreciated the labs, and were excited about their VR projects.IntroductionThe demand for new knowledge content is high in engineering education practice at the graduatelevel. It is expected that the graduate courses lead, or at least reflect, the current state oftechnological developments and scientific discoveries. To stay competitive and current,curriculum designers are under constant pressure to
of the US professors and/oradministrators by the students. Each situation was reviewed individually to determine ifassignment extensions or other interventions were needed so not to penalize the student.Findings and Opportunities for Future Program OfferingPrevious literary works, as described above, provide rich description of challenges andopportunities for future consideration when implementing programs in Africa, as well as anyother country outside of the United States. These prior documented findings, coupled withextensive student surveys provide an enhanced perspective on future challenges.Below highlights the many opportunities for improvement and consideration.After reflecting over the past several years, there have been many