present study, we explore the self-reportedsubjective experiences of four of the students (Table 1, one student declined to be interviewed),including how each saw their own contributions in the group discussion and the uncertainties thatthey wrestled with. Data sources include video of the in-class discussion and stimulated recallinterviews in which the students were shown clips of the video and asked questions like whatstood out to them about their group’s work on the task, to what extent they agreed with theirteammates’ ideas, and how comfortable and engaged they felt.Data analysis procedures included interaction analysis (Jordan & Henderson, 1995) of therecorded discussion, with memo writing and discussion of the tentative findings in
perspective after his lecture (learn in an unconventional way).” “An extremally good friendly and funny environment. There hasn't been a moment in call where the environment has felt unwelcoming or toxic.” “He calls on every student making them feel part of the class with getting their attention.” “I like the interactive setting and that the Material is not overwhelming due to examples of real-life applications.” “He comes to class talking to us about his weekend or what he did, and it makes me feel more comfortable in class knowing he’s willing to share those details with us he just doesn’t come in and starts writing stuff on the board.” “I like that he talks loudly, many other
was a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Georgia Southern University-Armstrong Campus, Savannah GA. He received his Ph.D. and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology and his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering (Cum Laude) from Louisiana State University. He has published 16 papers in peer-reviewed journals, 28 papers in peer-reviewed conference proceedings, and given 12 technical presentations on various topics including: additive manufacturing, mechatronics, biomechan- ics, and engineering education. He currently teaches the Engineered Systems In Society, Mechanical Engineering Professional Practice, and Capstone Design I and II courses.Dr. Dominik May, University of Georgia Dr. May
, self-evaluation and peer evaluation Learning Outcomes 0 Not stated 1 No outcomes stated 2 Goals for course stated but not in the form or learning outcomes 3 Learning outcomes clearly stated 4 Learning outcomes stated and are tied to specific assessments Revision / Redoing 0 Not stated 1 No rewriting or redoing of assignments allowed 2 Some rewriting or redoing of assignments allowed, but penalized 3 Rewriting and redoing of assignments allowed 4 Rewriting and redoing of assignments encouragedFor
Paper ID #43969Incorporating Artificial Intelligence into Mechanical Engineering with AmazonDeepRacerDr. Pooya Niksiar, The Citadel Dr. Niksiar is assistant professor of Mechanical Engineering Department at The Citadel. He received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Clemson University, his M.Sc. from K. N. Toosi University of Technology and his B.Sc. from Isfahan University of Technology, Iran. Prior to joining The Citadel, he was a lecturer at Clemson University. His research includes the design and development of advanced functional porous materials for bio applications. He has published several peer-reviewed journal
represented nearly 56% of program participants. Additionally,nearly 40% of the SBIR host companies ultimately hired their Fellows full-time forperformance testing and prototype commercialization. Seventy-two percent of the postdocsnoted that the SBPRDF fellowship gave them a competitive edge in the job market, with somefurther reporting that they gained valuable grant writing and business experience. Of allFellows surveyed, 84% believed the fellowship experience enhanced their professionalqualifications. While the longitudinal survey of the SBPRDF program participants taken in2020/2021 (Ivanitzki, 2022) by the IPERF team reported many positive outcomes attributable Proceedings of the 2024 Conference for Industry and Education
activities from different perspectives [3], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Differenttypes of student’s design assessments have been used by instructors including self, peer, and expertassessments of design reports, final product performances, open- and close-ended questions,videos of design teams, and students’ portfolios [10]. Measuring student design knowledge hasseveral complexities and each assessment has its advantages and disadvantages.By conducting a systematized literature review and summarizing some significant research studiesin this area, which are described in the next sections, we found that there is a need for acomprehensive rubric and approach to measure students’ design skills longitudinally andthroughout an entire curriculum, based on the ABET
their own surveys [10] - [12]. Instructors with large classsizes have turned to software assessment tools to measure the teamwork skills of individuals andthe roles within the teams. For example, CATME and TeamUP provide a survey to gather selfand peer evaluations from individual team members as well as instructors [13],[14]. For thestudy presented below, it was necessary to create a customized assessment tool to determine howindividuals fill functional or task-oriented roles in their teams and the impact of that process ontheir engagement and course experience.ContextIPPD is an educational capstone design program where students from thirteen engineering andcomputer science programs work in multidisciplinary teams for two semesters in designing
likely to participate in studyabroad programs than higher-income students [4]. This paper reports on a novel courseallowing students from the U.S. and Mexico to collaborate across national and lingualboundaries without leaving their home campuses, lowering the financial barriers typicallyassociated with international experiences. II. REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATUREThe need for engineers to solve complex problems with international peers has been reiteratedin many studies and reports. A most recent report by the United Nations Educational, Scientific,and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) highlights the importance of building engineeringcapacity across national borders for sustainable development of our global world [5
students also presented theirfindings as a group presentation to obtain the final grade for the project. A standard rubric was used for grading the student work, with 60% of the grade assigned to thecontent (quality and depth of analysis) and including the major aspects of the EOP framework. Theremaining 30% and 10% of the project grade were assigned for the presentation (clarity of expression,organization of ideas, and adherence to academic writing standards) and collaboration (peer evaluation ofthe group's collaborative effort, including communication, contribution, and teamwork), respectively.Furthermore, the students completed an indirect voluntary assessment using an anonymous surveyconcerning the EOP concepts. The survey was created
optimization for aerospace applications.Sohini Gupta, Wheeler High School Sohini Gupta is a junior high school student at Wheeler High School, a distinguished magnet program in Marietta, GA. She is passionate about STEM, particularly engineering. Committed to pursuing a career in STEM despite challenges faced by underrepresented groups, Sohini actively seeks opportunities to engage in hands-on projects and STEM-related activities. She aspires to inspire her peers by being a proactive role model in the scientific community.Dr. Ibrahim H. Yeter, Nanyang Technological University Ibrahim H. Yeter, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at the National Institute of Education (NIE) at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) in Singapore
©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 The Perception of Engineering Undergraduates Towards an Active Learning Pedagogy at a Minority Serving InstitutionAbstractExperimental centric pedagogy (ECP) which is an active learning approach has been reported toincrease student engagement, critical thinking, peer collaboration, as well as motivation inengineering related courses. However, little is known on the perception of students about thisActive Learning Pedagogy (ALP). This study aims to investigate the perception of minorityserving institutions (MSI) engineering undergraduates on the use of ALP as an active agentduring instruction. This study adopted a quantitative approach in a pre-post-test design. Theengineering
. •EPICS Supervisor •Research Advisor Managerial •Community Partners •Peer TAs •Collaborators TA •Mentees •Students Subordinate Figure 2. Top to down rank GTA’s navigate management in service-learning programs 3. MethodsThis exploration initiated with a curiosity about the distinction between GTA’s experiences inservice-learning relative to other courses, as well as their development relative to undergraduatestudents enrolled in the service-learning courses
activities and interaction with peers, instructors, and academic advisors, on 4-point Likert-type scale from not at all to 5 or more times. • FYS objectives on 5-point Likert-type scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree; and changes in confidence and motivation in educational and career areas on 5-point Likert- type scale from decreased greatly to increased greatly. • Pre- and post-FYS major choice.Non-Student Stakeholder SurveyA short survey about the current and future options for FYS courses was administered to 38 COEnon-student stakeholders identified by the Penn State’s COE Taskforce on First-YearEngagement. Specially, stakeholders were asked about their initial thoughts regarding convertingthe current 1
critical thinking skills. Gradually, the student will be able to apply the concepts learned processing from basic to complex skills through activities like laboratories with specific feedback with the sole intention for improvement. The application of the knowledge might also then lead to analysis by exploring connections and organizing information into meaningful domains similar to writing a report. This also might include discussing discrepancies in cases and the student might explore other personal variables through their increased critical thinking [17].The taxonomy introduces a new dimension, highlighting four types of knowledge—factual,conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive—aimed at addressing diverse
Shift the current focus of the group to a new subtask or tool. Maintenance Support group cohesion and peer involvement. Acknowledge Inform peers that you read and/or appreciate their comments. Answer yes/no questions.3-3-2. Data annotationTo measure the impact of ChatGPT on student interactions in CSCL, two experts familiar withCST manually annotated each message according to CST. As used in previous CSCL research[29, 30], we consider the complete message posted by a student as the unit of analysis, defining itas a single student interaction during a brainstorming session. Each message was categorized withone of the main skills in CST, and the
-term and long-term educational planning, and discussing time management. Advocating. Recommending or supporting the protégé. Examples: writing support letters for graduate school applications, serving as a reference for scholarship applications, and nominating the protégé for special recognition. Facilitating. Assisting to make processes easy to bring about an outcome. Examples: Guiding conversations in the classroom or laboratory, referring the protégé to a campus resource or office. Mitigating. Lessening the adverse effects of circumstances, undue burden, or mistakes. Examples: sharing tactics to deal with micro-aggressions, giving words of encouragement, and providing perspective
, Vancouver Dr. Dave Kim is Professor and Mechanical Engineering Program Coordinator in the School of Engineering and Computer Science at Washington State University Vancouver. His teaching and research have been in the areas of engineering materials, fracture mechanics, and manufacturing processes. In particular, he has been very active in pedagogical research in the area of writing pedagogy in engineering laboratory courses. Dr. Kim and his collaborators attracted close to $1M in research grants to study writing transfer of engineering undergraduates. For technical research, he has a long-standing involvement in research concerned with the manufacturing of advanced composite materials (CFRP/titanium stack, GFRP
online,and instructors have the option to utilize a series of handouts to supplement learning. The videocontent was primarily developed, filmed, and acted out by four, typical college-aged, engineeringstudents to ensure the story plots were amusing and would interest their peers. Once created, thevideos were reviewed by a number of other instructors and steel engineers to verify accuracy ofthe technical content.The paper provides instructors with more background on the process of creating engagingengineering videos, highlighting some of the difficulties in filming as well as editing the content.The theoretical basis for some of the videos will be discussed. In particular, the paper will focuson techniques used to intentionally attract students
. B. Yancey, Reflection In The Writing Classroom. University Press of Colorado, 1998.[4] P. Groißböck, “E-portfolios in teacher education: ‘Teaching e-portfolios’ in mentoring processes or peer-learning in higher education,” 2012, doi: 10.1109/ICL.2012.6402153.[5] B. Eynon and L. M. Gambino, High-Impact ePortfolio Practice: A Catalyst for Student, Faculty, and Institutional Learning. Taylor & Francis, 2023.[6] H. C. Barrett and N. Garrett, “Online personal learning environments: Structuring electronic portfolios for lifelong and life-wide learning,” Horiz., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 142– 152, 2009, doi: 10.1108/10748120910965511.[7] S. Rubín and M. Rümler, “E-PORTFOLIO: A METACOGNITIVE ACTIVITY TO
to be meritorious and significant by a rigorous peer review process.This list developed by Diamond is a good guide for faculty interested in preparing a paper forpublication in any engineering education research journal and especially for JEE. Anotherperspective on conducting research in education is the National Research Council (NRC) reportScientific Research in Education [3]. 1. Question—Pose significant questions that can be investigated empirically. 2. Theory—Link research to relevant theory. 3. Methods—Use methods that permit direct investigation of the question. 4. Reasoning—Provide a coherent, explicit chain of reasoning. 5. Replicate and generalize across studies. 6. Disclose research to encourage
-institution) funded program built on the theoretical framework oflegitimate peripheral participation [3] with an emphasis on inclusivity, community, and belonging[4]. To date, the Program has increased Scholar retention, academic performance, and engagementwith student support services relative to peers [5].As part of the Program, an annual faculty workshop was designed to catalyze and sustaincollaborations between NCC and HU STEM faculty. The workshop consisted of interactivemodules to facilitate directed discussions and produce deliverables. We will share the lessonslearned, obstacles overcome, and the outcomes of the collaborative process of hosting this type ofworkshop. The paper documents the process used to identify workshop outcomes and
well- being or success in specific metrics” [11,p. 4]. In this definition they connect “fair conditions” with “individuals and groups” and thesuccess in whatever endeavor being evaluated (e.g., “specific metrics”), but clearly at the outcomeof the endeavor.A report calling for technology design to be more inclusive provides another take on thechallenges we face trying to understand equity and equality. In [12], equality is defined aseveryone having “the same opportunity” even if it affords some in the group “an existing (andoften unconscious) unfair advantage.” In contrast, equity means everyone getting an opportunitythat levels the “playing field with their peers” thus increasing the “fairness to compete.”In summary, these definitions draw
Students identify Students write and test engineering correct requirements controller code in Students collaboratively Students compose Students self-directFaculty may for given context Python/Matlab identify and diagnose rigorous technical collaboration on failuresselect fitting reports project tasksindicators or Students apply Students use relevantdraft their own
Zealand in their publication, “Parson’s Programming Puzzles: A fun and Effective LearningTool for First Programming Courses.” Parson and Haden describe the unique challenges faced inintroductory programming courses as students are often asked to engage with complex codingactivities [7]. The first of these challenges being that traditional computational activities weredeemed boring by students and often lead to a lack of persistence in completing activities andcourses. The second challenge pinpointed was how to isolate and disentangle the complexsyntactical thinking inherently embedded within code writing. Thus, this challenge probed thequestion of how best to separate the complex, language specific, syntax associated with acomputational language
[11, 12] introduced knowledge surveys (KS) to develop self-assessment skills instudents. Rather than requiring students to provide answers to learning prompts, KS requirestudents to rate their ability to perform the specified skill tied to a learning objective. Pre-courseor pre-unit of instruction KS allow faculty to discern prior knowledge students may bring to thecourse while serving as a cognitive “heads up” for students of learning objectives and material tocome [10]. KS completed in close proximity to an assessment event (e.g., exam, design project,or writing assignment) allow faculty to compare students’ self-assessments of learning with theirown assessments of student learning (i.e., the grade on the assignment). Such comparisons
- this data would be later used by them to write a laboratory report.The experimental group of students was exposed to an experiential learning approach for threesemesters. The curriculum design incorporated real-world scenarios, laboratory work, andinteractive experiences to enhance their understanding of biological concepts.Pre- and post-surveys were given to the undergraduates to assess student engagement. Thesesurveys captured 'students' perceptions of their learning experiences, motivation, and interest inthe subject matter. Additionally, we observed their active participation during experientiallearning sessions.1.1 Pre-Survey: A survey was administered to students enrolled in a university biology course tomeasure their motivation level
another group of through breakout rooms. presentations until all teams have presented to every team. Self-reflection to a prompt (1 min.), Breakout rooms for each grouping paired discussion (2 min.), group 1-2-4-all and PollEv to help facilitate large [7] discussion (4 min.), report out to large group report out. group (5 min.). Each student provides peer feedback An online survey tool (e.g., Google
Paper ID #43129Design Iterations as Material Culture Artifacts: A Qualitative Methodologyfor Design Education ResearchDr. Grant Fore, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Grant A. Fore, Ph.D. is the Assistant Director of Research and Evaluation in the STEM Education Innovation and Research Institute at IUPUI. As a trained anthropologist, he possesses expertise in qualitative methods and ethnographic writing. His primary research interest is in the teaching and learning of ethics in higher education through community-engaged and place-based pedagogies. ©American Society for
Engineering course combined project-based learning with variousfeedback methods, including feedback from instructors, outside experts, peer students, projecttools and artifacts, and self-assessment. The findings confirmed that incorporating feedbackwithin project-based learning effectively motivated students to complete their projects within theexpected timeframe.ChatGPT is becoming a crucial tool in education, offering a new way to enhance learning. Itassists students in improving their writing skills by providing feedback and suggestions forimprovement. Although not yet widely used in Project-Based Learning (PBL) 19,20 , ChatGPT canbe integrated into project-based learning, enhancing interactive and personalized learningexperiences. Additionally