Collection

2024 South East Section Meeting

Authors

John W. Brocato, University of Georgia

Tagged Topics

Diversity

continues the conversation begun in the first meeting and introduces the course’smajor writing assignment, the Individual Professional Development Plan (IPDP). Thisassignment requires students to craft a specific plan for their college careers and beyond, a planthat in its final form may be a written paper, a narrated presentation (PowerPoint, etc.), or amultimedia work of some sort. Students also submit multiple drafts and participate in a guidedpeer review of each other’s work. The third engineering-communication class meeting reviewsprevious strategies and guidelines along with some of the common issues arising out of the firstdrafts and peer reviews, after which students have one more week before submitting their finaldrafts. Although the

Conference Session

Emerging Computing and Information Technologies II

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

Computing & Information Technology

isasked to fill out a rubric that asks certain questions about the student author’s work. Forsummative review, the reviewer is asked to rate the work numerically based on a set ofcriteria (organization, clarity, etc.).Peer review has been widely used in higher education since the 1970s, and onlinesystems have been available for over 20 years. The largest ongoing project in this area isthe NSF-funded Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) project [11], which has been used bymore than a quarter-million students. While the pedagogical benefits of peer review arewell established, students must be trained in how to write an effective review. CPR doesthis by having students review three artifacts supplied by the instructor: one is a modelartifact, and the other

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching Physics or Engineering Physics II

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Teresa L. Larkin, American University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

basic concepts in mechanics to be opened a little wider.VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A variety of quantitative and qualitative assessment tools are currently available withinthe PER community. Qualitatively, the current study made use of free-writing activities to assessstudent understanding of basic mechanics. Critical to the writing activities is the feedbackprovided to the students. The benefits of instructor- (as well as peer-) feedback are numerous.The instructor-student relationship is quickly fostered and enhanced. Because students are givenprompt critical and detailed feedback, they take the writing activities very seriously. Oneoutcome is the quality of the students‘ work is clearly improved. Furthermore, the writingactivities

Conference Session

Teaching Tools: Communication (NEE)

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Maryam Mirabolghasemi, Mississippi State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators Division (NEE)

analyzing the results. This form of peer interaction encouragesthe students to present a persuasive argument and engage in a technical discussion. An audienceof peers is less authoritative and less intimidating than the course instructor, and may serve as alearning resource for students (Hilgers et al., 1999).In addition to the benefits presented above, by learning and practicing other modes of technicalcommunication, engineering students develop a foundational skill that is key to their futuresuccess (Prausnitz and Bradley, 2000; Kmiec, 2004). Writing emails, preparing budgets andjustifying them, and taking meeting minutes are examples of routine tasks for engineers(Tranquillo and Cavanagh, 2007; Lepek and Stock, 2011). Nonetheless, engineering

Conference Session

Research in Biomedical Pedagogy

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Renata Fortuna Ramos, Rice University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical

. Without changing thecontent of the class or the equipment used, active learning was introduced in 2013 at threedifferent stages of the class:1. Before lab: An extra lab session was offered to one team of students per section per week todevelop their capacity to be peer-leaders. These students worked in groups to gain an in-depthunderstanding of the material to be covered the following week in lab.2. During lab: The peer-leaders present a short lecture covering the necessary backgroundinformation. Additionally, they serve as ‘experts’ helping their peers troubleshoot and completethe lab activities.3. After lab: Peer-leaders write a modified in-lab protocol with detailed instructions on how toimplement a new laboratory activity that reinforces the

Conference Session

Design in Engineering Education Division: Design Teams

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Behzad Beigpourian, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Daniel M. Ferguson, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Frederick C. Berry, Purdue Polytechnic Institute; Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Siqing Wei, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

University. Recent research has focused on 1) using writing and communication assignments to improve the teaching of engineering design and 2) developing a flexible mobile studio pedagogy using the Mobile Studio Instrumentation Board.Dr. Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University, West Lafayette Matthew W. Ohland is Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineering students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods has been supported by the National Science Foundation and the Sloan Foundation and his team received Best Paper

Conference Session

Scholarship in Engineering Technology

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Nancy Denton; Sarah Leach

© 2005, American Society for Engineering Education” 24% e. other __________ 6. Based on your experience with ASEE, the peer review process has impacted the scholarly aspects of the Annual Conference Proceedings 24% a. by substantially raising the quality of the writing 57% b. by raising the quality of the writing somewhat 10% c. in no significant way d. in a negative way. (Explain _______) 7. At your institution, how do you feel ASEE Conference Proceedings papers are perceived, with respect to their role in scholarly endeavor? 5% a. conference proceedings papers do not imply scholarship, especially not

Conference Session

Communication Across the Divisions I

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathryn A. Neeley, University of Virginia; Judith Shaul Norback, Georgia Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

3 of 4 8. Engineering Technology T123 Issues in Engineering 1 • “Writing Proficiency in Engineering Technology Students and Skill Technology Education 5 of 5 Development in the Classroom” #11907 9. First Year Programs M427 Design in the First 1 • “Implementing and Evaluating a Peer Review of Writing Exercise in a Year: Challenges and 3 of 6 First-Year Design Project” #12126 Successes 10. Materials T536 (Technical Session 1) 1 • “Writing, Speaking, and Communicating-Building Disciplinary

Collection

1999 Annual Conference

Authors

Sohail Anwar; Paula Ford

illustrations. • Compose effective sentences. • Evaluate their documents to be sure that the documents fulfill their purpose and to ensure that they can be revised if necessary. • Collaborate effectively with their peers in a community of writers who provide feedback on each others’ work and occasionally write together. • Write several specific kinds of documents that recur in technical and scientific communities. • Employ computer technology effectively in the solution of communication problems. • Communicate in an ethically responsible manner.There are, of course, several options for creating a syllabus that will meet the course objectives.One approach is to have students write one

Conference Session

Rethinking PowerPoint and Other Acts of Communication

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

April A. Kedrowicz, University of Utah; Maria Dawn Blevins, University of Utah

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

expectations for the assignment, and review writing consultation sections the criteria for evaluation Contemporary Students prepare a 5 minute Communication instructors provide Students deliver presentations in small groups, Issues presentation that informs their audience instruction on organization, delivery, and receive feedback from peers and the Presentation about a contemporary civil engineering visual aids, discuss expectations for the communication instructor, and have the issue

Conference Session

Nuclear and Radiological Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Bryndol A. Sones, United States Military Academy

Tagged Divisions

Nuclear and Radiological

organized into groups of 2-3 with a direct faculty mentor andan external client who is recognized as a subject matter expert doing current workin that field. In the fall of senior year, the course starts deliberately slow andexhaustive in identifying, analyzing, and communicating design options to peers,faculty mentors, and external clients. Throughout the course, a thread that ties thetwo semesters together is the writing and presenting for an engineeringconference which usually occurs within a month of graduation. All studentsfinish the experience with a publication in the conference proceedings. Ratherthan assess all ABET SOs a-k, the course has a central focuses on assessing theability to design a system, component, or process (SO c) and

Conference Session

Improving the Teaching Skills of Graduate Students

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mary Lynn Brannon, Pennsylvania State University; Sarah Zappe, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Graduate Studies

Observation Project assignment. This Alternate Assignment requires thestudent to attend a teaching and learning workshop or write a paper based on a pedagogicalarticle that they found in an engineering journal such as the Journal for Engineering Education.Because it is important for the student to practice giving a presentation to a group, the studentpresents to the class on the topic they selected for this assignment. This ensures that the non-teaching student has an opportunity to be observed and receive feedback from their peers in theclass. The instructor gives feedback as well in summary statements after the students arefinished.The three assignments, Peer Observation Project, Teaching Observation Project, and the

Conference Session

Improving Communication Skills in ME

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Theresa McGarry; Edward Young; Elisabeth Alford

Session 1098Teaching and Grading in Conferences: Improving Students’ Understanding of Expectations and Evaluations Edward Young, Elisabeth M. Alford, Theresa McGarry University of South CarolinaAbstract: This paper describes the results of a novel approach in a senior mechanical engineeringlab course, which combined team reporting, self-assessment of writing, conference grading, andconsultative techniques that help learners improve both their communicative competence and theirperformance. We argue that the approach increases communications assignments and makes themmore effective

Conference Session

Accreditation and Related Issues in ECE

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Hue Van Tran; Steven Reyer; James Friauf; Owe Petersen; Katherine Wikoff

Humanities.Instructors provide evaluation and feedback on writing in all of these writing-intensive courses.In EN-131 Composition, instructor feedback is supplemented (and amplified) by evaluation andfeedback provided by other students through peer critiques generated in small-group writingworkshops. EN-131 students are then required to implement that feedback through revision ofmultiple drafts. During the peer-review process, students also engage in self-assessment andreflection on their own writing, albeit somewhat obliquely. Critiquing other students’ workhelps to develop the editing skills and awareness of quality standards necessary for students toevaluate their own work, and the multiple-draft writing process encourages continual self-reflection and

Conference Session

Entrepreneurism in BME

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

David Smith; John Troy; Penny Hirsch

nature of this session varied. One year itinvolved a debate; another year the instructor analyzed the conventions of some of the articlesassigned for the writing project. In 2003, students were also encouraged to take drafts of theirsecond papers to the university’s peer tutoring center for additional review. Page 9.1206.6Step 4: Grading the final paper. Instructor grading is the most time-consuming and important Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004 American Society for Engineering Educationactivity, especially on the first paper

Conference Session

ERM Poster Session

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kevin Dahm, Rowan University; Roberta Harvey, Rowan University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

AC 2008-2300: USING LET ME LEARN® TO PROMOTE METACOGNITION ANDFOSTER TEAMING SKILLSKevin Dahm, Rowan University Kevin Dahm is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University and a certified Let Me Learn® consultant. He earned his BS at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (92) and his PhD at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (98). He is the recipient of several ASEE awards, including the 2002 PIC-III Best Paper Award, the 2003 Joseph J. Martin Award and the 2004 Raymond W. Fahien Award.Roberta Harvey, Rowan University Roberta Harvey is an Associate Professor in the Department of Writing Arts at Rowan University and a certified Let Me Learn® Consultant. She teaches writing

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Professional Skill Development

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David Alan Degenhardt, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Brian S. Woodard, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

reports which the authors deemed generally unimpressive, so thestructure of the class was changed to address this deficiency. Students now submit two individualwritten assignments prior to the final technical report, which are returned with inline feedbackfrom the instructor. Additionally, students are assigned to blind peer review reports fromclassmates. Evidence has been collected to compare similar final reports between offerings of thecourse, and evaluations show a drastic improvement in the quality of the final reports with theseadditional writing assignments and feedback as part of the course. Surveys are taken at thebeginning and end of the semester to assess student perceptions of their skills in several areas.The results of these surveys

Conference Session

Continuing Professional Development Division (CPD) Technical Session 1

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Olukemi Akintewe, University of South Florida; Walter Alejandro Silva Sotillo; James Anderson

Tagged Divisions

Continuing Professional Development Division (CPD)

) Grant #DUE 1525574.References[1] P. Anderson et al., "How writing contributes to learning: new findings from a national study and their local application," Peer Review, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 4-9, 2017.[2] U. National Academy of Engineering, The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. National Academies Press Washington, DC, 2004.[3] M. Palmquist, "A Middle Way for WAC: Writing to Engage," WAC Journal, vol. 31, 2020.[4] T. Cary, K. J. Brent, B. Josh, B. Natascha Trellinger, and R. E. Rebecca, "Writing to Learn Engineering: Identifying Effective Techniques for the Integration of Written Communication into Engineering Classes and Curricula (NSF RIGEE project)," New Orleans, Louisiana

Collection

2000 Annual Conference

Authors

Nora Valeiras; Luis A. Godoy

first interviewed and fill a questionnaire which is used as a diagnosis ofthe situation.The name of the workshop has involved over time. In 1997 it was called “Peer-ReviewWorkshop” and the present it is called “Workshop on the Process of Publication inEngineering”. The workshop is framed on a wider activity called “Initiative to Strengthenthe Publications in Engineering Faculty” which is directed by the Dean of Engineering.3. Contents of the workshopThe workshop has an open structure formed by units. During the first unit the activitiesare centered on reading, analysis of texts, and writing using papers by other authors asbasic elements. Arguments and discussions are built using such texts. As the workshopprogresses, each participant uses his

Conference Session

ASEE Multimedia Session

Collection

2002 Annual Conference

Authors

Roger Wallace; David Adams

report—all with transmittal letters. We developedinstructional materials and assignment sheets to provide students with guidance. Both coursesincorporate one opportunity for a formal feedback/revision cycle.Civil & Environmental Engineering Writing Center (CEEWC). The department sponsors a peerconsultant writing center for students. Several students work in this center, providing coveragefor 8-10 hours per week. The technical writing specialist supervises these students (who werealready employed in the University Writing Center). The center has a dedicated space. Facultye-mail copies of assignment sheets and course issues to these peer consultants.Stand Alone Technical Communications Course (CE 462). The technical writing specialist

Conference Session

Exploration of Written and Team Communication

Collection

2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Randi Sims, Clemson University; Kelsey Watts, Clemson University; Evan Ko, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign; Rebecca A. Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Gary Lichtenstein, Arizona State University; Karin Jensen, University of Michigan; Lisa Benson, Clemson University

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods Division (ERM)

Paper ID #38448Overlooked, Underlying: Understanding tacit criteria of proposalreviewing during a mock panel reviewMs. Randi Sims, Clemson UniversityKelsey Watts, Clemson University Kelsey Watts is a recent graduate from Clemson University. She is part of the Engineering Education Research Peer Review Training (EER PERT) team and has also developed Systems Biology outreach modules for high school students.Ms. Evan Ko, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Evan is recent undergraduate graduate in Bioengineering with a minor in Material Science and Engineer- ing at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.Prof

Conference Session

Capstone Design III

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Morshed Khandaker, University of Central Oklahoma; Peter Orono, Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis; Stephen Ekwaro-Osire, Texas Tech University

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

academicsemesters. Each project generally involves more than two members. The final group report,presentation, and oral interview are the usual methods to evaluate each member’s contribution tothe project. Since these tools sometimes do not suffice, peer assessment questionnaires have alsobeen suggested by researchers to evaluate each student’s contribution to the project. The goal ofthis research was to evaluate each student’s participation in a team based project from the oralpresentation performance. The result will provide an additional assessment tool for an instructorto effectively evaluate each student’s performance in a group. To accomplish this, team projectdata was collected from freshman and senior level courses from two universities

Conference Session

Reflective & Critical Pedagogies

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Katarina Larsen, KTH - Royal Institute of Technology; Johan Gustav Gärdebo, KTH Royal Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

forteam communication, critical reflection in relation tosources and assumptions. Page 26.1586.3From the perspective of pedagogy and classroom learning, the underlying reasons forimplementing these tools are to:  Advance the student‟s ability of self-assessment through explicitmodels and frameworks for analytical thinking, discussing and writing texts,within the humanities and social sciences.  Practice peer learning through combining web forums and seminars.  Reflect on learning process to achieve a meta-understanding, e.g.awareness of their learning process and ways to improve further.The paper is organized in fivesections

Conference Session

Industrial Engineering Division (IND) Technical Session 2

Collection

2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janice Mejía, Northwestern University; Katherine Scharfenberg, Northwestern University; Jill Hardin Wilson, Northwestern University

Tagged Divisions

Industrial Engineering Division (IND)

require engineering professors teaching capstone courses to spendconsiderable time evaluating student writing. Varied teaching tools and methods to convey theimportance of communication in professional environments may also be incorporated to enhancestudent learning. Clear communication within an engineering capstone course is important forstudents and engineering instructors.  The work in progress describes an effort to improve communication and assessment of studentlearning in an industrial engineering capstone course. To better assess learning objectives,several changes were made to the curriculum over a four-year period. The changes include thedevelopment of a course guide, updated rubrics, project charter discussions, teamworkassessments

Conference Session

Graduate Studies Division (GSD) Technical Session 5: Skill Development in Graduate Education

Collection

2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Britney Russell, University of Connecticut; Antigoni Konstantinou, University of Connecticut; Ayah Abdallah, University of Connecticut; Fayekah Assanah, University of Connecticut

Tagged Divisions

Graduate Studies Division (GSD)

student community in scientific communication. This evidence-based practice paperdescribes the implementation of a unified “Professional Development” (PD) course series tosupport the success of graduate students. This PD program features a course to enhance thestudents' verbal scientific communication skills through a practical, feedback-driven, and peer-reviewed format. A scientific writing course, a course complementary to scientificcommunication, is being developed to help students improve their writing skills. A key objectiveof both these communication courses is to teach graduate students how to use storytelling inspeaking and writing to make their scientific findings clear and engaging for all audiences. It alsoexplains how storytelling can

Conference Session

Graduate Student Experiences

Collection

2003 Annual Conference

Authors

Nancy Thompson; Eric Vilar; Beth Davidson; John Brader; Michael Matthews; Elisabeth Alford; Sirena Hargrove-Leak

8.776.11 offered the client our knowledge, which was shared among employees worldwide. This “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” company’s operating premise is distributed cognition, the ability to learn from peers and near- peers, and to pass this knowledge to the client as well as use it to meet the client’s needs. This procedure is similar to what students must learn when writing or researching a task for their professors. The premise of the company is that the employee is never alone, whether solving a problem or creating a new design. This premise can be translated into distributed

Conference Session

Open-Ended Problems and Student Learning

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Amanda S. Fry, Purdue University; Monica E. Cardella, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

Educational Research and Methods

the students with feedback on intermittentsolutions - can be especially challenging when it is hoped that students will understand andrespond to the feedback in ways that indicate learning has taken place. The aim of this study isto examine how students in a first-year engineering course perceive and respond to feedbackreceived from a Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA) and their peers as they iterate throughmultiple drafts of their solutions to Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs). In this paper, we reportcase findings based upon three interviews each from four students from a single team thatparticipated in the interviews following three MEAs implemented in a single semester. Findingsindicated all four students struggled with the feedback

Collection

15th Annual First-Year Engineering Experience Conference (FYEE)

Authors

Song Wang, University of Hartford; Enrico Obst, University of Hartford; Beth Richards, University of Hartford

better and deeperunderstanding of engineering concepts and practices through realistic projects [10, 11]. Writingexperience also promotes students’ academic engagement, and providing students with formativefeedback on their writing can improve their mindset, belonging, and perseverance in college [12,13]. Effective oral communication can build student’s self-confidence and enhance theirconnections and inclusions with peers and faculties. Creating a supportive learning environmentthrough practices like engagement and providing opportunities for positive interactions amongdiverse peers can further promote students' sense of belonging [14].Research SignificanceWhile industry increasingly values engineers with strong technical skills and

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Warren Hull, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge; Dianne Raubenheimer, North Carolina State University; Arlene Russell, University of California, Los Angeles

University ofCalifornia--Los Angeles (UCLA). This partnership is supported by a CCLI--Phase II grant toextend an established software platform (Calibrated Peer Review™) to include both oral andvisual communication within engineering education.BackgroundCalibrated Peer Review™ (CPR) is a web-based application that enables students to criticallyreview other students’ written assignments anonymously, but only after they have achieved asuccessful calibration level via online critiques of standardized assignments. The current projectexpands and enhances this widely used “learning by writing” tool to a more comprehensive“learning by communication” model that includes graphical/pictorial and oral presentation tools.The principal intellectual contribution

Conference Session

Curriculum in Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology: Part II

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

HongLi Luo, Indiana University-Purdue University, Fort Wayne

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Technology

applications ≠ Know the fundamental lossless compression and lossy compression techniques ≠ Know the current image compression and video compression standards ≠ Know the basic technologies in designing adaptive multimedia applications ≠ Know the different protocols for multimedia transmission ≠ Write a simple Internet networking application using socket programming ≠ Know the current peer-to-peer multimedia networking applications ≠ Gain hands-on experiences on multimedia transmission technologiesTo accomplish these objectives, the course is composed of lectures, homework, laboratoryassignments, literature readings and course project. Hands-on laboratories are mainly designed tohelp students get familiar with the multimedia compression