accreditation.II. IntroductionUnion University2 has a long and rich 179-year history of being a university affiliated with theTennessee Baptist Convention. The University’s academic excellence has been in liberal artsbased education. The first professional program, Nursing, began in 1962 at the request of thearea physician community. Forty years later, Union University started up another professionalprogram, Engineering, in the same fashion: out of need and at the request of area industriesthrough the Chamber of Commerce. At the time of this writing, the Engineering program3 is inits third year of operation with 21 students and the first class of graduates is slated for May 2005.The program will apply for ABET accreditation in January 2006 for a historic
master’s degrees will be advised by a graduate committee consistingof three engineering faculty members, at least one of which is from the School of EngineeringEducation.Ph.D. in Engineering EducationTo obtain a Ph.D. in engineering education, students must i) complete 36-48 course credit hoursbeyond those achieved for the bachelor’s degree, ii) pass a cumulative exam in a traditionalengineering content area, iii) write and defend an original proposal for research in engineeringeducation, and iv) conduct research for, write, and defend a Ph.D. dissertation on an engineeringeducation topic. A master’s degree is not required as part of the Ph.D. program, although creditsearned in master’s programs will often count towards the Ph.D. requirements.This
State.During this process, input was also sought from one group of constituents, juniors who arecurrently in the program. They were given the task of working in teams to brainstorm what therevised BME curriculum would look like given the following design constraints: 1. The NC Legislature has mandated that 4-year programs cannot exceed 128 hours of credit. 2. The curriculum must include fifty-one credit hours of courses mandated by the University and College of Engineering. These include 21 hours of humanities and social sciences courses, and a 4-hour writing course. ENG 111 and ENG 112 (Figure 8), two 3-hour courses, are to be replaced by a new 4-hour course, ENG 101, beginning in fall 2003. Other requirements include a 3
Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Educationbiocompatibility, and understand bioethical issues associated with the use of biomaterials.Results: Problem-solving student accomplishments Each of the three modules shared common problem-solving course learning outcomes.Through these courses, students develop problem solutions using information from severalinformation sources, function effectively on multidisciplinary teams, express ideas effectivelyorally and in writing, plan and monitor progress, improve self-knowledge of how they learn, andself-assess their role in developing an effective solution. Rubric development and implementation. The term
after ties to ethnic or women’s studies have been severed, the helpfulaspects of the reforms for students of color and white women are often lost.* The name bell hooks is a writing voice the scholar, whose real name is Gloria Watkins, uses in order to remindreaders that she is a holistic self who embodies more than just her words. She does not capitalize the name (Bell Page 8.918.1Hooks is actually her great-grandmother’s name) in order to emphasize the importance of what she says over whosaid it. For the sake of accuracy and out of respect, bell hooks is not capitalized here.Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for
finalhomework assignment was a reflective essay on whether or not the student planned to remain acivil engineering major and why/why not, and what strengths/weaknesses did they have when itcomes to the skills/attributes outlined by the BOK2 and ABET.The freshmen thought that the five most important skills were communication, ethics, teamwork,creativity, and design. Although the small number of female and minority students madeidentifying statistically significant differences difficult, at the conclusion of the Introduction toCivil Engineering course, reportedly a greater percentage of females (20%) had lost interest incivil engineering compared to their white male peers (10%). Out of 134 students, 11 lost interestin being a civil engineering major, yet
Intelligence(AI). This category of AI, utilizing deep learning, a subset of Machine Learning (ML), excels inprocessing and generating natural language text. The ChatGPT model undergoes training onextensive datasets, empowering it to grasp the details and complexities inherent in humanlanguage. ChatGPT has a significant ability to produce high-quality text that seamlessly mirrorshuman writing. Its proficiency extends to extracting knowledge and addressing challengingacademic queries. This inherent capability enables it to tackle examination questions that mayprove elusive through conventional web searches, delivering responses that are not only accuratebut also dependable [5]. ChatGPT stands as a promising tool with versatile applications
institutions, which adds to the credibility of the author’s choice. Atthe same time, other repositories or additional sources may return the results differentfrom the received results. For example, the topic of Additive Manufacturing, whichconstituted only two percent of the retrieved manufacturing-related activities has beenpopular among K-12 educators for at least a decade, at the emergence of three-dimensional (3D) printing era [10]. Such printers became a necessity in makerspaces andas one of the first I4.0-related activities in K-12 settings. Some authors are now trying tolink makerspaces to the advancement of manufacturing in I4.0 settings [12].Another discovery is the discipline orientation of the authors who write about both STEMeducation
that “student population in such a course has tremendous variation inbackground, motivation, expectations, and analytical skills”, Singhania7 proposes somesolutions for improving the situation. He recommends warning students against “thinking on-line”, and instead teaching them to write the programs at their desks, only testing when satisfiedwith the result. He also identifies several suggestions for group techniques: allowing students toread and check each other’s programs, group review of a program, and other forms of teaminteraction. Fienup2 also supports group work. He writes (in reference to his object-orientedCS-2 course), “team projects avoided overwhelming students with large projects by decreasingthe amount of work that each student
arrive at general consensus ofwhat appears to be widely accepted definitions, and to shed light on how common terms areused.Active learning is generally defined as any instructional method that engages students in thelearning process. It is widely accepted that active learning requires students to take part in “pre-planned” learning-related activities, believed to spark and stimulate their learning, while in theclassroom 5, 6 .These activities would include: reading, writing, solving problems, answeringquestions, participating in a discussion, etc.; and most important, students must be engaged inthinking tasks while actively involved. It is generally understood that during active learning, lessemphasis is placed on transmission of information
and stimulate their learning, while in theclassroom. (5, 6) These activities would include: reading, writing, solving problems, answeringquestions, participating in a discussion, etc.; and most important, students must be engaged inthinking tasks while actively involved. It is generally understood that during active learning, lessemphasis is placed on transmission of information and more on developing students’ skills.Additionally, during an active learning cycle, emphasis is placed on students’ exploration oftheir own abilities, including: their thinking process, their value system, their intellect, and theircourage to express themselves orally and in writing. Active learning is contrasted to thetraditional lecture where students passively
with opportunities for peer instruction, individual and group problem-solving exercises, and discussion and consideration of experimental demonstrations. During the exercises the instructor would circulate through the lecture hall with approximately 100 students. After a period of time for these exercises the instructor would review or present a solution to the problem in collaboration with the students using a tablet PC. The in-class time was also used to discuss additional applications and current areas of related research. Approximately one-third to one-half of the class was spent with the instructor speaking at the front, but the presentation was not based on pre-planned notes, but rather
verification, and teaching with new educational methods, which includes peer instruction, personal response systems, video games, and state-of-the-art CAD tools. Page 23.1288.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Use of a CPLD in an Introductory Logic Circuits CourseAbstractIn the 2011 Fall semester we successfully adopted a complex programmable logic device(CPLD) for use in our introductory logic circuits course at the University of Hartford. Whilethe adoption of the corresponding CAD tools is an important element, we have been
authentic experiences. However, inkeeping things at grade level and making room for youth to insert their ideas and experiences, allbackgrounds are primarily vague and do not explicitly suggest harm will come to the zone. Forexample, "The Park," although highlighting what will be lost, there is also language to suggestthat another park is available—leaving plenty of space for youth to compare this with theirnearest parks and playground compared to our fictional space. Prior to building the prototypebridge, youth were instructed to write down their zone choices and justifications for building onthem on the worksheet. The activity was also designed intentionally to create small groups which each youthleader would spearhead. The only additional
situation and write prediction. They certain conditions. their predictions. contrast their •Modality: In- •Modality: In- results to their presence class presence class predictions. •Modality: Virtual.Figure 1. Schematic view of the innovation implemented and the modality.The regular resources for this course were adapted to the innovation (Modified ILD + Phet) priorto the beginning of the course to have a balanced and clear picture of the topic, activities, numberof sessions to introduce the innovation, assignments, and test days. The topic that
context: Implementation of CE Education requiresknowledge of workforce development, community, government coalitions, funding, and policy.Research activities focus on the best practices in these areas and are informed by socioeconomicfactors that influence the findings' scope and impact on social justice. The research design andimplementation plan are created from what is learned in the literature review, using researchtools, and methods aligned with supporting theories.1. Illuminating Truths in a Literature ReviewAs a writer, Lamott's TEDR speech video [14] is motivational about finding the truths we wish toreveal through writing. I want to reveal the “truth” that advances in clean energy technology andthe rapid growth in the CE sector
this type of mentorship (Leydens 2014, Nieusma 2011). One such initiative, theAccess Network, aims to do just that. The Access Network is a collection of programs (sites) thatare situated in U.S. universities that work towards a more equitable, diverse, inclusive, andaccessible version of the STEM community (Quan 2019). Access prioritizes student leaders, bothat the network-level and in their local sites, by empowering them to take the lead on actions andby providing support for this work. Access sites engage in activities that build inclusive learningcommunities, provide guidance through peer mentorship, and support growth in students’leadership around social justice.One major function of the Access Network is to connect students across these
two thirds or more of the instances ofeach feature in the teacher’s discussion transcript, they also associated non-examples with eachfeature (i.e., “over-coding” for the feature). Most especially, participants over-coded instancesfor Feature 1, linking many quotes to this feature even though the quotes did not encouragestudents to engage other teams about their designs; this finding was also evident in thesynchronous discussion. In the Identifying Strategies assignment, PSTs collectively identified atotal of 15 strategies that the teachers used with respect to the three features. The most frequentlymentioned strategies for each feature were: having students call on a peer for critique orfeedback (Feature 1), posing questions about whether
. However, whenstudents did reflect on out-of-major courses, they tended to recount a wider variety of enactedphilosophies, including more learner-centered ones (progressivism, social reconstructionism, andexistentialism). Qualitative analysis of students’ descriptions of their most impactful classesrevealed five major factors that contribute to the success of a course: course components, theinstructor, the student experience, the subject matter, and other stakeholders (e.g., peers andteaching assistants). Exploring these impactful classroom experiences highlights connectionsbetween the literature and student experiences as well as supports new faculty who areconsidering the type of instructional environments they will strive to create in their own
Tech. She has done work as a transformational change postdoctoral research associate with the University of Colorado at Boulder. Her research and practice spans student intervention programs, faculty agency, evaluation, grant-writing, and facilitation of change initiatives. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Stewardship of the Stories: Learning from Black Engineering Students’ Lived ExperiencesAbstractIn 2019 - 2021, during a research study involving 24 Black engineering student participants whowere currently or formerly enrolled at a predominantly White university in the United States,some participants answered interview questions, based on their lived experiences, in astorytelling manner
offers more opportunities for innovative impact. Each increase in Innovative Impact requires more extensive research, design, and review in the innovative outcome. In IBL, students are encouraged to develop their learning and innovative solutions so they contain high levels of knowledge development (DoK-3 and DoK-4) and high levels of impact (Academia and Society levels).Tokenized Learning SystemThe tokenized system allows students to log, track, and provide evidence of their individual self-defined learning goals easily and efficiently to all course instructors involved. The token flowprocess also incorporates anonymous peer/instructor review as well, giving studentsresponsibility and experience in providing/receiving
supported by the findings of the study whereby persisters reported fewerrestraining forces while switchers reported fewer driving forces. The two driving forces that arecommon among persisters and switchers are formal support programs and peer supportprograms. Strengthening these two programs would increase the driving forces for all students.These findings will assist faculty, advisers, and program planners to better meet the needs ofwomen in engineering programs and likely help to reduce the attrition rates of women inengineering.Keywords: women engineering persistence environment motivation force-fieldWhile there is a general shortage of engineers, the need is acute in the under-represented areassuch as women and minorities. According to the
is an assistant professor of rhetoric and composition and the writing program admin- istrator at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, AZ. His research on rhetorical theory, in- frastructure, and communication pedagogy informs his teaching of courses in rhetoric, composition, and technical communication in engineering.Elizabeth Ashley Rea, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Prescott ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Fostering Educational Equity in EngineeringAbstract: This is a research paper. Students in introductory engineering courses face challengescommunicating and integrating their ideas in team projects. Often these challenges with
curriculum that she designed and taught. Her current doctoral research at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focuses on decision-making strategies and the personal, interpersonal, and external influences on those strategies across engineering educational contexts. Outside of research, she is a teaching assistant at the university's machine shop, where she assists students with a wide range of digital fabrication tools and precision machinery. Outside of school, Nicole is interested in biking, yarn crafts, sci-fi and fantasy writing, sustainable living, social justice, and the intersections of all of these. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022
-ended problem. Typically, the instructorshould develop the problem to be solved by all students. If students are allowed to choose theirown topic, this would increase intrinsic motivation, but would make it difficult for the instructorto ensure consistent knowledge between all students [13]. When PBL was applied in an undergraduate electrical engineering course, it was found toresult in significantly higher conceptual understanding compared to the traditional lecture method[14]. To ensure individual student participation, fairness, and accountability, many studiesincorporated peer evaluations [15, 16]. PBL also has positive results on student perceptions. Forexample, when PBL was implemented on an Administration Theory course, students
explored peer-reviewed journal publications on P-12 engineering education from2000-2015 across five large periodical databases (PsycInfo, EBSCO Full text/ERIC, Scopus,Professional Development Collection, EBSCO Education source. Since we are interested in themeasures of students’ affective views with respect to engineering focused interventions, wemodified the search criteria to include terms such as interests, attitudes, self-efficacy, identity,motivation, and aspirations. These affective views were chosen as areas of concentrationbecause they are the most commonly used as measures that, if increased, would predict a higherlikelihood of students pursuing engineering. With the additional search terms for students’affective views, we repeated search
objectives V Planning a Class: Offers a structured methodology for organizing a class with emphasis on constructing an outline, board notes, and out-of-class activities VI Writing: Covers the fundamentals of making written presentations using the chalk board, vu-graphs, and PowerPoint slides VII Teaching Assessment: Covers student, peer and self-assessments and separates myth from fact regarding their usefulness. Classroom assessment techniques (Angelo and Cross, 1993) are illustrated throughout the seminars. VIII Communications - Speaking: Covers fundamentals of communication skills with emphasis on speaking to a group and generating positive emotion from students IX Communications – Questioning: Examines different
and conceptual information used to frame the problemin terms of needs/constraints; 2) design practices used (e.g., generating ideas, consideringmultiple stakeholders, remaining tentative); and 3) stylistic choices (e.g., organizing theirresponse, depicting context). We developed three DST scenarios and tested them in a chemicalengineering program over a three-year period (n=580). To make data analysis feasible, twoundergraduate peer-learning facilitators analyzed each DST independently (14 PLFscontributed), following minimal training. Results. Using a validity-as-argument approach (Linn,1994), we argue that the DST provides valid information about design problem-framing ability,provided the information is used for course improvement purposes
towards degree programs, those completing IEP may be at an academic advantagewhen compared to students with a similar academic background but who do not attend anintensive language training program. By improving students’ ability to communicate in thelanguage of instruction, IEP-attending students can become better equipped to engage in thelearning activities that lead to academic success, such as critical listening, taking notes, readingtextbook materials, understanding class lectures, performing writing assignments, interactingwith English-speaking peers in group assignments, and seeking assistance from English-speakingfaculty outside of the classroom. Regardless of a student’s field of study, an improved ability tounderstand and communicate in
diSessa’s p-prims (Louca, Elby, Hammer, & Kagey, 2004),but for this study I am simply identifying various views, habits of mind, and patterns of actionthat seem tethered to decisions in various contexts. My framework states that 1. Teachers haverepertoires of resources that are bigger than what you would see at any given time. 2. Resourcesget “called up” or activated in various combinations due to situational conditions in response toclassroom, contextual, peer or social contexts, and are not necessarily consistently called upevery time. 3. Sometimes co-activated resources may be highly unstable and sometimes theymay be mutually reinforcing.In this paper I’m particularly interested in teacher moves, authority, what counts as knowledgeand