., Verstegen, D. M. L., de Jong, N., Czabanowska, K. & van Merriënboer, J. J.G. (2015). The promised land of blended learning: Quizzes as a moderator. Educational Research Review 15:59–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.05.001 Vista, A., Care, E. & Griffin, P. (2015). A new approach towards marking large-scale complex assessments: Developinga distributed marking system that uses an automatically scaffolding and rubric-targeted interface for guided peer-review.Assessing Writing 24:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.11.001 Wingard, R. G. (2004). Classroom Teaching Changes in Web-Enhanced Courses: A Multi-Institutional Study. E
for creation of the working group was to enhance prevalence ofactive learning in engineering classes in order to improve both retention and graduation rates,thus keeping these students in the engineering pipeline.Method: The team created an intensive summer program where faculty had to commit to attend akick-off meeting, a minimum of four 2-hour working sessions, and a mandatory finalpresentation. During these sessions faculty benefited from: guest speakers on developing courseoutcomes, teaching methods, and assessment techniques; access to a forum for faculty to discussadapting methods to their various subjects, including potential pitfalls and best practices;receiving peer and technical feedback and support for their new ideas
a course that meets two times a week). This model of distancelearning inherently presents challenges to teaching and learning. First, there is an inefficiencyof instructor time, when time is lost while traveling (the instructor devotes three hours to teacha one hour class at the distant location). A dedicated distance room is required twice per week,and such rooms are in heavy demand and often difficult to schedule at our university. Finally,there is a potential for loss of engagement in the far cohort who views class through a screen,most often in lecture format, with limited interaction with peers or the instructor. However, themost compelling reason to adopt a blended course model by the instructor in this study was theopportunity it
build each case is described, and examples are shared.Background on the Pedagogical Ninjas ProgramPedagogical Ninjas ProgramThe Pedagogical Ninjas program was designed to combine faculty development aroundpedagogical risk-taking with the dissemination of ideas through an additive innovation cycle [4].Inspiration for the program came from previous efforts to create and sustain faculty-led learningcommunities [5], that are willing to take risks [4] in pedagogical transformation [6, 7, 8]. Anadditive innovation cycle (Figure 1) is a community-driven process wherein participants engageeach other in the following four steps: (1) becoming inspired by the local community andinstructor peers, (2) sharing and learning about pedagogical ideas and
small numbers, already face heavier service loads than their majority, men peers. So,in this study we asked, “What differences have these programs made in the hiring outcomeswithin our college?”This case study describes some of the recent interventions implemented at the University ofColorado Boulder (CU Boulder) College of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS), apredominantly White, very high research activity doctoral institution [1]. We present thedemographic history of the college’s tenured/tenure-track faculty compared to national averagesin the United States, a discussion of changes incorporated into the tenured/tenure-track facultysearch processes over the past five years, the hiring results over the past decade, and insights
STEM initiative and translate her passion for STEM into opportunities that will attract, inspire and retain more girls in STEM to make it the new norm. She has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert systems for space station, manufacturing equipment models, and architected complex IT systems for global collaboration that included engagement analytics. She holds a US
analysis for a local wastewater plant facility.Ms. Shelly Tan Shelly Tan is an undergraduate researcher working with Dr. Lucietto. She is currently pursuing a Bach- elors of Science in Health and Disease at Purdue University, and began working with Dr. Lucietto in the summer of 2019 as part of the Summer Stay Scholars program. In addition to her biology course- work, Shelly is pursuing minors in Studio Arts and Chemistry. Outside the classroom, she enjoys writing creative fiction, making art both physical and digital, and moderating for her favorite online communities. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Professional Women Identify Their Professional
mixed section is featured - else themixing is done in the discussion without a dedicated heading. Templates for writing dissertationsand journal articles recommend the divided format [see 30]. This reporting approach often alignswith how the design was conducted, e.g., a quantitative phase followed by a qualitative phase ortwo phases concurrently, but more integrated designs with multiple stages are not easily splitcleanly between quantitative and qualitative results.Some designs have transgressed the separate quantitative and qualitative results sections andinstead framed their results from their themes. Fogg-Rogers, Lewis, and Edmonds [34] in theEuropean Journal of Engineering Education and Crede and Borrego [35] in the Journal ofEngineering
graduate schooltraining, which socializes future faculty toward traditional definitions of scholarship that remaindeeply held: that scholars create new knowledge for academic communities and demonstratetheir expertise in writing; and that discovery research is harder and requires more expertise thanteaching or service [24] [37]. In a multi-institutional case study of reform institutions, O’Mearacharacterized a “culture war” around decisions about promotion to full professor, wrapped up ininstitutional self-image and values of prestige associated with traditional scholarship [24].Ratcheting up of research expectations to improve rankings has also been identified as asignificant barrier [37]. In addition, CAOs have reported difficulty in expanding
Observation Protocol (RTOP) and his work has been cited more than 2200 times and he has been published in multiple peer-reviewed journals such as Science Education and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching.Dr. Lindy Hamilton Mayled, Arizona State University Lindy Hamilton Mayled is the Director of Instructional Effectiveness for the Fulton Schools of Engineer- ing at Arizona State University. She has a PhD in Psychology of Learning, Education, and Technology and her research and areas of interest are in improving educational outcomes for STEM students through the integration of active learning and technology-enabled frequent feedback.Prof. Robert J Culbertson, Arizona State University Robert J. Culbertson is an
the grant: block scheduling of freshmen,creating a new First-Year Experience course, creation of new student learning communities inhousing, expansion of the peer mentor program, and development of a new Faculty Staff mentorprogram. Figure 2 shows the goals of objectives of the Strengthening Institutions grant. CDP Goal 1. Strengthen SJSU’s core academic performance in two key areas: retention and graduation. Objective 1.1. By Fall 2019, SJSU will increase freshman to sophomore student retention by 5%. Objective 1.2. By Fall 2019, SJSU will increase the 6-year graduation rate by 9% for all first- time freshmen. Objective 1.3. By Fall 2019, for upper division transfers, SJSU will increase the 5-year graduation rate by 6%. CDP Goal 2. Providing
timeline. Lastly, participants started to receive job offers inearly March and continued until positions were filled.Job Search ResourcesThe most commonly used resource across all of our participants was their advisor, which rangedfrom PhD advisors to faculty mentors and undergraduate advisors depending on the individual.Advisors often encouraged the participants to enter the job market, provided access to importantnetworks, and reviewed documents. Other peers, currently on or just off the job market, werealso a highly used resource for participants as they drafted documents, prepared for job talks, andnegotiated their needs and wants. Two of the participants also participated in a faculty trainingprogram which gave them insight to the job search
Paper ID #28865Outcome-Based (Engineering) Education (OBE): International AccreditationPracticesProf. Junaid Qadir, Information Technology University, Lahore, Pakistan Junaid Qadir is an Associate Professor at the Information Technology University (ITU)—Punjab, Lahore since December 2015, where he directs the ICTD; Human Development; Systems; Big Data Analytics; Networks (IHSAN) Research Lab. His primary research interests are in the areas of computer systems and networking, applied machine learning, using ICT for development (ICT4D); and engineering education. He is the author of more than 100 peer-reviewed research papers
students direct their responses so that they were better able to focus on smallerpieces of the larger engineering challenge. Many of the instances of this code also served to prompt the students to think about theirideas in more depth or to explain their ideas more. For example, when students were writing thepros and cons of their different ideas in their notebooks, Mr. Reed told a team, “So, what do youmean it has the best results?”, asking them to expand further on their thoughts and justify theirideas more. As his were later listing the pros and cons of their solution, Mr. Smith said “So whatworks? Focus on the positive. What was good about your solution?” Many of the examples in this code group also served to prompt students to
education, simulation and automation, process improvement, ergonomics, supply chain, and cyberlearning. He has published more than 115 peer-reviewed research articles in reputed conferences and journals and received multiple best paper awards. Aqlan also holds 7 U.S. patents/patent applications and is the recipient of two NSF grants ($800K) and several internal and in-kind grants ($30M). He has received numerous awards and honors including the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence Award, Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Young Researcher Award, School of Engineering Distinguished Award for Excellence in Research, Council of Fellows Faculty Research Award, IBM Vice President Award for Innovation Excel
c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Use of a Low-Cost, Open Source Universal Mechanical Testing Machine in an Introductory Materials Science Course1. IntroductionIn recent decades, there has been a paradigm shift in engineering and science education frommore traditional passive learning (transmission of facts and knowledge from a lecturer to thestudents) to active learning (engaging with applications and learning through collaboration andcooperation with peers) [1]-[3]. Increasingly, instructors and employers are recognizing that athorough knowledge of engineering theory alone (natural sciences, mathematics, and design) isnot enough to prepare a student to be a fully competent engineer. Rolston and Cox
andearly high school students game development. A two-day game development workshop wasdesigned after two months of preparation and offered to twenty middle and high school studentsin two sections in the summer of 2019. Students were taught the basics of the Nintendo Switchdevelopment environment along with basics of virtual reality (VR), and asked to design a simpleVR game. Nintendo Labo VR kits were also utilized in the workshop. This paper illustrates thedesign of the workshop including the features of the Nintendo Switch development environmentin addition to the Nintendo Labo VR kits. The participants were given pre- and post-workshopsurveys and demonstrated their products to their peers at the conclusion of the workshops. Eachstudent was
of fall 2018 had over 2000undergraduate students enrolled [8]. Although overall the university enrolls more undergraduatewomen [9], this is not true for the college of engineering. As reported in 2016 only 24% ofundergraduates and graduates seeking engineering degrees at this university were women [10]. A search of the literature was conducted using the ERIC database, and 89 peer reviewed,academic journal articles published in the last 15 years were found to be relevant to the currentstudy. To be included as a relevant study, the focus had to be on factors influencing women’sdecisions to major in engineering and/or gender differences in influences to choose anengineering or STEM major. Twenty-eight studies clearly met these criteria
PFSlearning outcomes, please see: https://prospect.uncc.edu/.MAPS serves as indoctrination for new COE students to learn, understand, and establishpersonal connections to academic success and professional development strategies and campus-wide resources, networking opportunities, and organizations. The program structure is dividedinto two peer-led components: (1) transition, academic, and professional development coachingand (2) Supplemental Instruction (SI) for selected COE gateway courses. The coaching programhas evolved based on experiences and feedback from key stakeholders, leading to the continuousdevelopment of new strategies for improving participant satisfaction, academic and professionalsuccess, and retention. These enhancements have made a
, although Creswell labelsall quality-related methods as “validation.” [10]. We can demonstrate validation using thesemethods from Creswell and others: Disclosure of researcher bias to demonstrate reflexivity [10], [11], and Peer reviews of the study and its results to demonstrate effective communication for understanding and acceptance [10].While students should respond truthfully, response bias is possible [12]. Response bias couldarise from lack of understanding or lack of an appropriate level of engagement with theassignment.This study is limited by its time frame, institutional space, courses that the participants in thestudy sample are currently taking, and their frame of mind when they completed the assignment.There is
the seven principles ofgood feedback practice7. The quizzes 1) helped clarify what a good performance was, 2)facilitated the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning, 3) delivered high qualityinformation to student about their learning, 4) encouraged teacher and peer dialogue aroundlearning, and 5) provided information that we could use to modify our teaching. The studioformat and flipped nature of the course were key to supporting these basic feedback principles.Experiment ResultsThe most significant effect of the latest method of flexible assessment was seen in its impact onthe final overall course grade and one of the final exams. Table 2 shows the lab and lecture finalexam averages from the previous (Spring & Fall 2018
Operations in 2015, he has worked as a research engineer for the Center for Nanoscale Science and En- gineering in the nanofabrication cleanroom facility at the University of California, Riverside. During his time there, he has helped train the next generation of engineers on how to conduct their research in the nanoscale. Since working at CBU, Dr. Butler has collaborated with Dr. Rickard on the development of a nanofabricated sensor that monitors intraocular strain. Dr. Butler’s research has resulted in nine papers within peer-reviewed journals. He is also a Senior Member of the IEEE.Mr. Gibson Fleming, California Baptist University Gibson Fleming, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Student of Gordon & Jill Bourns
understanding of the research process. As the most important takeaway, afemale high school chemistry teacher said, I learned how research is done. I had the opportunity to work with a new professor and learn about their research and how it relates to 3D printing.From a follow-up survey conducted about six months after the RET experience, five RETparticipants responded. Of the five, four teachers said that they implemented their learnedexperiences from the RET into their teaching. The implementation rages from using scavengerhunt activities for Free-Body diagrams developed during the RET to writing and winning a$1,000 technology grant to purchase a 3-D printer and supplies by utilizing modules andactivities developed during the RET
). Write the left-hand side of the Colebrook equation and the right-hand side of the Colebrook equation in different cells. The difference should be minimized using the Solver function by changing the variable D Proposal I: The proposed pipeline path has a total length of 7500 m and the location is rock formations that can be difficult to excavate and lay the pipeline. This path is largely deserted and there is no significant impact on the environment Proposal II: This proposed pipeline path has a total length of 4500 m and the location consists of the forest with wildlife. This is not difficult to excavate. There could be an impact on the existing ecosystems during the excavation process. Proposal III: This proposed pipeline path has a total
-winning programming that helps connectengineering faculty with their peers around the scholarship and practice of teaching and learning. Today,EETI supports the College’s approximately 100 faculty, 40 staff, and 150 graduate students withprograms spanning educational innovation, ENED research, mentoring, teaching support, and ENEDconference travel. A more comprehensive overview of EETI’s formation, programming, and theoreticalinspirations can be found elsewhere (Morelock, Walther, & Sochacka, 2019; Secules, Bale, Sochacka, &Walther, 2018). For the purposes of this paper, we will focus on EETI programming directly related to ENEDresearch, which we define as the systematic study of ENED settings—including the Scholarship ofTeaching
what they have learned sofar and what is left to cover [see Appendix]. The training is done in person, and it is not alwayspossible for all three of the newest selectors to be present at every training session, so this chartgives everyone a sense of their progress. At the time of this writing, the newest cohort ofengineering selectors are currently half-way through this more structured training. It is importantto note that due to the winter holidays, conferences, and the like, this in-depth training has beendelayed and sporadic. A downside to the enriched training is that it takes longer, increasing thelikelihood that life and other responsibilities will get in the way. It is a tradeoff - if you needsomeone to start selecting immediately
village in Sri Lankawith social constraints. Students present their recommendations to their peers in class with richtechnical and non-technical discussions.ENGR 351 Community-Based Participatory Engineering ApprenticeshipTo support the increasing number of students who wish to work with both local and internationalcommunities, and develop their capabilities related to the social and environmental context ofengineering practice, a new elective was offered in Spring 2019 with the explicit intent tofacilitate student exposure to and ability to work in a participatory way with community groups.The course facilitates connections between the theories and praxis of engineering that aresocially and environmentally just. Students develop skills of
department are accredited by theEngineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET. There were around 265 electricalengineering and around 230 computer engineering students enrolled as of the writing of thispaper. Since this was a pilot online offering, capacity was limited. There were 21 studentsenrolled (full capacity) by the time the semester started. Most students in the class ended upbeing juniors, although there were some sophomores as well as seniors. Most of the seniors hadnot yet started their 2-semester sequence senior design project effort.The course was offered as a hybrid online offering, thereby giving students the flexibility tocomplete majority of the work including the lab exercises outside of a physical lab. A largepercentage of
. Conventionalconstruction pedagogical methods put students in a passive role, especially when solvingpredictable construction problems with simplistic and anticipated solutions [3]. In general, mostSTEM coursework are heavily skewed towards writing deliverables, which ultimately hindersactive engagement [4]. Thus, a paradigm shift in pedagogical methods such as integrativelearning is required in CM programs to prepare minority CM students with the skills andknowledge to interface with the unstructured challenging environment of the constructionindustry. An integrative learning pedagogical methodology is a potential innovative method thathas been found to be effective in other disciplines, such as the medical field; specifically toprepare students through inter and
groups of students work together on a technically focusedvideo. The video transfer the learning they have gained in the course in both the lecture and thelaboratory, and translate that into a short video they create on their tablet computers supplied bythe academic department. All equipment in the laboratory space is available for their use tocreate the video. Example topics of videos are: manifold gauge operation, propeller nick repair,and carburetor icing. The students present their video to their peers during a classroom period.The students are assessed by both the course instructor and other faculty that are not part of thecourse. The assessment of the project is a rubric that includes the major sections of introduction,video content