grouped in bindersas display items for ABET evaluators. Each course would contain examples of poor, averageand exceptional student work gathered in a tabbed binder. This was provided to ABET programevaluators as an illustration of the achievements of students, proof of student learning.Then came the shift in ABET criteria to a more assessment driven process. Now there is anexpectation to demonstrate student learning and active engagement. Clearly, Xeroxed copies oftraditional assignments are not adequate evidence of group work, experiential learning and otheractive instructional techniques. Simply providing these traditional assignment samples does notadequately reflect student-student interactions, learning which occurs through group
. Student teams also presented their work to thecommunity partner. In addition to the final drawings and presentation, students were graded onan individual reflection paper about the design process and given peer evaluations to grade howthe team worked together. Because drafting classes (e.g., AutoCAD, Revit, Solidworks) arecommon among many engineering disciplines, this approach is seen as a model of how CE maybe incorporated easily into many engineering programs. In addition to explaining the coursedesign, this paper presents summative reflections from the professor, a community partner, andthe Center for Community Engagement coordinator about successes and failures with respect tothese projects. These reflections are provided as learning
Paper ID #19581A Sea of Variations: Lessons Learned from Student Feedback about the Roleof Trust in First-year Design TeamsMs. Natalie C.T. Van Tyne, Virginia Tech Natalie Van Tyne is an Associate Professor of Practice at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univer- sity, where she teaches first year engineering design as a foundation courses for Virginia Tech’s under- graduate engineering degree programs. She holds bachelors and masters degrees from Rutgers University, Lehigh University and Colorado School of Mines, and studies best practices in pedagogy, reflective learn- ing and critical thinking as aids to enhanced
interested in all aspects of engineering education, including how to support engineering students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teach- ing decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineering education.Dr. David P. Crismond, City College of New York David P. Crismond is an Associate Professor in the School of Education at City College, City University of New York, 138th St. & Convent Ave. NAC 6/207b, New York, NY 10031; dcrismond@ccny.cuny.edu. His research interests relate to engineering design cognition and instruction, and helping teachers build their own design pedagogical content knowledge, create their own video-based
theamount of diversity that can be displayed within the context of a single assignment. It isimportant to note that we are not analyzing the assignment solutions for correctness but onlylooking at the thinking and organizational strategies used at this time.2. Theoretical Foundations based in Writing to LearnLearning to program is a complex process that could benefit from Writing to Learn (WTL)strategies. The struggles of novice programmers is well documented [1]. A commonly citedfactor is “fragile knowledge,” which is knowledge that is incomplete and superficial [2].Students who effectively employ metacognitive strategies, such as reflection and self-assessment, are more likely to master the problem solving skills that are essential toprogramming
investigates how undergraduate engineering students’learning trajectories evolve over time, from 1st to senior year, along a novice to expert spectrum.We borrow the idea of “learning trajectories” from mathematics education that can paint theevolution of students’ knowledge and skills over time over a set of learning experiences(Clements & Sarama, 2004; Simon, 1995; Sztajn et al., 2012; Corcoran, Mosher & Rogat, 2009;Maloney and Confrey, 2010). Curricula for undergraduate engineering programs can reflect anintended pathway of knowledge construction within a discipline. We intend our study ofindividual students within undergraduate engineering programs can highlight how this mayhappen in situ and how it may compare to a given, prescribed
education, if we are to survive, is the facilitation of change and learning. The only man who is educated is the man who has learned how to learn; the man who has learned how to adapt and change; the man who has realized that no knowledge is secure, that only the 7 process of seeking knowledge gives a basis for security.”Education literature includes extensive discussion of the qualities and competencies of effectiveself-directed learners, and of student attitudes toward self-directed learning.8,9,10 For example,Candy describes self-directed learners as individuals who are curious, motivated, disciplined,reflective, analytical, persistent, responsible, flexible
, and research practices in science.Dr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa D. McNair is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she also serves as Assistant Department Head of Graduate Programs and co-Director of the VT Engineering Com- munication Center (VTECC). She received her PhD in Linguistics from the University of Chicago and a B.A. in English from the University of Georgia. Her research interests include interdisciplinary collabora- tion, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include interdisciplinary pedagogy for pervasive computing design; writing across the curriculum in Statics
© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Teaching Dynamics of Cultural Dimensions In Design To Create Sustainable Environment: A Cross-Cultural Comparison Of ArchitectureAbstract Sustainable design is the concept that recognizes human civilization as an integral part ofthe natural world, and that nature must be preserved if the human community itself is to survive.Cultural dimensions of design are the tangible and intangible aspects of cultural systems that arevalued by or representative of, a given culture and reflected in the built environment [12]. Therewas no existing course in our curriculum to cover the topic of culture and design. Therefore, it isnecessary to develop a new
education research through doctoral education programs; two developedengineering education knowledge and practices through exposure as part of our doctoral andpost-doctoral program work; and one of us developed the knowledge and practices while in afaculty position. In our new faculty positions, we represent both tenure and non-tenure trackroles and have positions that are within a range of programs.To examine the impact of institutional context on our agency, we selected and implementedaspects from both collaborative autoethnography and collaborative inquiry to study theexperiences of our research team [14, 15]. Throughout the first two years of our positions, wewrote weekly, monthly, pre-semester, and post-semester reflections to capture and make
engineering concepts through low-stakes practice, and as a means ofassessing student progress. One such strategy has been utilized in various courses at a small, privatecollege with a general engineering degree program. This homework approach encourages students toauthentically engage with engineering concepts by incentivizing completion over correctness andrequiring students to complete a metacognitive reflection following each assignment. This approach hasshown strong improvements in the homework habits adopted by the students.In fall 2019, this homework approach was adapted for use in a thermodynamics course at a large, publicresearch institution. Although there are a few practical differences in implementation at the two schools,the purpose is
forclassification of respondents’ views into one of the five major educational philosophies:essentialism, perennialism, progressivism, social reconstructionism, or existentialism. Responsesto supplementary questions allowed for students’ philosophies to be compared based ondiscipline, gender, past educational experiences, current teaching practices, and future careergoals. Students’ philosophies were also characterized as espoused or enacted by comparing theirself-declared philosophy with that determined by the Inventory. Results indicated thatessentialism is the predominant philosophy among the graduate students in this sample,according to both the Educational Philosophies Inventory and student self-reflections. Students’current teaching practices, as
. After each lesson and after thelesson series, students completed a written reflection on what they had learned, totaling to fivereflections over the semester. Their responses will be explored with a thematic qualitativeanalysis to answer the research questions above. The lessons continue to be adapted to thiscontext and are being taught to all sections of the course this semester. A rollout to all incomingfirst-year engineering students is planned for the Fall of 2023, so this analysis is ongoing, and allconclusions drawn so far are from Fall of 2022 and are denoted as a WIP.Definition of EmpathyDuring a pilot study in the Fall of 2022, 59 first-year students in the honors sections of“Introduction to Engineering” at a large R1 university
]. The instrument assesses learning preferences on four scales withtwo dimensions each: Processing with the Active and Reflective dimensions; Perception with theSensing and Intuitive dimensions; Input with the Visual and Verbal dimensions; andUnderstanding with the Sequential and Global dimensions. Ratings are represented by a degreeof preference for each learning scale: balanced (no preference between dimensions), moderatepreference for one dimension, or strong preference for one dimension.In the processing scale, active learners prefer learning the material by applying it, discussing it orexplaining it to others. Reflective learners prefer to think about and reflect on the material first.In the perception scale, sensing learners prefer to
Society for Engineering Education, 2014 What’s in the Soup? Reflections from an Engineer, a Physicist, and an English Professor on an Interdisciplinary Summer Grand Challenge ProgramIntroduction to the Summer Grand Challenge ProgramThree professors with common interests and goals piloted in Summer 2013 a program focused onsolving one of the fourteen Grand Challenges of the 21st Century identified by the NationalAcademy of Engineering (NAE).1 These challenges range from providing energy from fusion toengineering better medicines. The summer program was centered on making solar power cheaperand locally manufacturable in a less developed region. The program purposefully broughttogether humanities, science
SESSION 2330 The Learning Portal Richard L. Upchurch, Judith E. Sims-Knight University of Massachusetts DartmouthAbstractUndergraduate engineering education is experiencing a paradigm shift, from teacher-centered tostudent-centered pedagogy characterized by student teamwork and integrative curricula 1. Theresearch and experiences underlying this shift have revealed that effective learners not only learnactively, but they develop an awareness of their skills in learning, and engage in self-assessmentand reflection. Research in psychology has found that the
skills, and becomeinterested in and prepared for future global engagement. The course teaches students aboutglobal engineering through the use of guest speakers from different departments and industry,group projects, case studies, and written reflection. International modules, each around twoweeks in length, involve visits to engineering companies, universities, and cultural sites. Theprogram currently serves around 180 students on approximately seven different internationaltracks annually. Prospective transfer students from NOVA and VWCC were included in theprogram in recent years through a partnership with the VT-NETS scholarship program.Virginia Tech Network for Engineering Transfer Students (VT-NETS) Funded through the National
. Page 24.1118.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Student Perceptions of Connections between Statics Class and Co-op Work ExperienceAbstractIn this paper, a collection of essays written by students at Kettering University in a sophomore-level engineering class, Statics, is analyzed to determine what connections the students seebetween their classroom experience in Statics and their co-op work experience. These studentswere given a class assignment to write an essay in which they reflected on the links betweentheir co-op work assignment and their Statics course. The pedagogical purpose of thisassignment was to prompt students to think in depth about the
, evaluation, and inference, as well asexplanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerationsupon which judgment is based.’” In this paper, we describe engagement with a writing assignment forundergraduate systems engineering students intended to foreground engineering judgment in studentwriting processes from the perspective of an instructor and an undergraduate student. We conduct areflective autoethnography to construct key elements of the ways both student and instructorparticipate in the construction of engineering judgments through the course’s writing processes.This reflective essay advances the possibility for engineering judgments constructed in well-designedwriting assignments to improve
. Centralto the module was providing definitions of virtue and of teamwork as a virtue and implementingstrategies from an empirically-grounded framework to develop students as virtuous teamworkers. Drawing from Lamb et al. (2021), strategies included “(1) habituation through practice,(2) reflection on personal experience, (3) engagement with virtuous exemplars, (4) dialogue toincrease virtue literacy, (5) awareness of situational variables, (6) moral reminders, and (7)friendships of mutual accountability.”Teamwork-relevant outcomes were assessed using two approaches: self-report and peer-assessment. Students reported perceived embodiment of fifteen teamwork attributes forthemselves and for each of their teammates pre- and post-Project 2. The most
Engineering: Origami bridges, building, structures would soon be possible.Hands on experience: Folding a printer paper and making a basic miuri ori fold: The instructordemonstrated the miuri-ori fold and the students followed. It is a relatively challenging fold tomaster and students needed a couple of hours to complete the fold.Test: The students stacked books on the folded paper and tested to see when it would fail. Thiswas done on zoom and students cheered as others tested their structure.Analysis and Discussion: There was a discussion on why some of the structures could hold up to7 lbs. Other concepts were demonstrated like 1. Poisson’s ratio was negative.breaFig 2. Summary and Reflection Assignment -Student 1 Fig 2
Journal 2: Personal reflection technology 4 Implicit bias, barriers Project 1: Women in engineering profile 5 Imposter Syndrome, engineering Journal 3: Barriers and solutions identity 6 Strategies for students in engineering Journal 4: Pay gap and technology 7 Network, mentors, and sponsors Project 2: Structural and cultural barriers 8 Gendered communication, engineering Journal 5: Elevator speech communication 9 Work-life balance, family support, time Journal 6: Family-work policies management 10 Job-hunting and gender Project 3: Job Search 11 Career path and progress
of engineering designAbstractThis research paper describes the development of an assessment instrument for use with middleschool students that provides insight into students’ interpretive understanding by looking at earlyindicators of developing expertise in students’ responses to solution generation, reflection, andconcept demonstration tasks.We begin by detailing a synthetic assessment model that served as the theoretical basis forassessing specific thinking skills. We then describe our process of developing test items byworking with a Teacher Design Team (TDT) of instructors in our partner school system to setguidelines that would better orient the assessment in that context and working within theframework of standards and disciplinary
student while in their expert groups. Thus, the cooperative Jigsaw group consistsof students with the same numbers but different letters and therefore different readingassignments. The objective of the Jigsaw groups is to learn instructional materials from eachexpert member in the number group by actively listening, intentionally taking notes and askingquestions for clarity (time allowed ~ 20 minutes). The fourth stage focuses on reflection on allthe reading assignments materials. Instructor poses pre-formulated questions to all students toassess comprehension and clarify any misconceptions (time allowed ~ 10 minutes).Figure 1: The four stages of Flip-J process for teaching first-year engineering design course.During the expert group meeting
sets the stage forbeginning their professional careers. Although service learning is relatively common ineducation, few examples were specifically noted in a review of ABET ETAC accreditedconstruction programs. This paper begins with a review of relevant literature to service learningin construction education programs, followed by a description of the two-semester educationalprogram and outcomes we expect students to achieve in the capstone process. At the time ofpublication, four semesters of students have responded to a reflective survey, asking aboutdevelopment of teamwork skills, awareness of the complexity of construction, communityservice, the construction profession, interpersonal skills, construction operations management,and open
2018). 3) Develop an expanded curriculum for a new stand-alone honors course (to be taught in Autumn 2018).The general format of our curriculum is: lecture to introduce topic, pre-assignment includingreading and written reflection, in-class discussion, and post-class reflection. We will sharecurricular materials such as lectures, assignments, reading lists, and in-class discussion promptsat the conference. Please see the honors course schedule in Appendix A.Preliminary AssessmentOver three quarters, we have introduced parts of our curriculum in an introductorybioengineering course through the addition of two class sessions and a reflective assignment. Inaddition, we made an effort throughout the course to explicitly relate ethics and
part of their research experiences. From thislist of potential codes, codes were identified based on what was found in Phase II interviewtranscripts. These include activities such as constructing knowledge that is new to participant ornew to field, collaboration, testing ideas, and dissemination. Some codes reflect students’attitudes and beliefs, such as career goals or plans; challenges they faced when doing research;and aspects of mentoring or supervision. Other codes reflect aspects of students’ experiences,such as recognition, failure, gaining skills, or feeling a sense of gratification. These codes will beparticularly important for Phase III of this project, in which we will identify ways to transfer ourfindings to instructional practice
-term plan for management of updates to the publishedCivil Engineering Body of Knowledge (CE BOK) and the associated ABET accreditationcriteria.1 This plan calls for ASCE to develop a formal revision to the CE BOK and associatedcriteria on a regular eight-year cycle. This regular change-cycle reflects three broadly acceptedconclusions drawn from ASCE’s experience in developing the first two editions of the CE BOK,from 2002 to the present: A professional body of knowledge is a dynamic entity that reflects the ever-changing nature of professional jurisdictions. A given profession (or professional group) can be strengthened by formally articulating and publishing its body of knowledge, but only if the profession is willing
-portfolio preparation, such as the initialreview during the sophomore year, mid-level review during the junior year, and the final reviewduring the senior year. This paper describes the design considerations in the creation of good e-portfolio in the context of reflection and assessment of the effectiveness of a course or aneducational program, and the design considerations that go into the creation of a good portfolio.The framework of e-portfolios depends on the end user of the portfolio.IntroductionElectronic portfolios (e-portfolios) are ‘in’ and the traditional paper-based portfolios are ‘out.’This is due to the internet age, and the web-based technology has made it all possible. Both theAcademia and industry are the beneficiaries of the
participation in thoughtfully organized service” 5Not all see Service Learning as an academic replacement for the pencil and paper calculations orcontrolled lab experiments, but those who support these have had positive results. The Kolb(1984) model for learning aligns well with service learning because it allows for all types oflearners and it involves concrete experience.6 Broader definitions have been used to outline therelationship between the service and the learning. “a type of experiential education in which students participate in service in the community and reflect on their involvement in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content and of the discipline and its relationship