3 during the periods. Them-POGIL laboratory practices require the students to work for meaningful learning activities bythe guided inquiry and thus, students think about what they are doing in the activity assigned.These positive attitudes for active learning environment reflected the effectiveness of learning invarious lab activities. The m-POGIL method expects students to use knowledge to solve any kindof problem. The average of learning outcomes increased from 67.0% to 92.9% during theperiods. The study reported an increased level in all areas surveyed and provided strongconfidence to use a proper skill level in practices with growth.In the results of the assessment and evaluation, the study found that the process cycle proposedin Figure
faculty to motivate them to continue to participate [21]. Facilitators must alsocontinually ask the reflective questions that will that will help maintain the focus and keep theseminars in the context of the Baylor University mission [19]. The research does support thatthere is a relationship between faculty attending development activities that focus on teaching andthe willingness of a faculty to use non-traditional teaching methods [20]. As long as the seminarsand workshops continue to fill a need, they will be a part of the ECS culture with improvementsand assessment to be made each semester.References[1] Pro Futuris, Baylor Univeristy, https://www.baylor.edu/profuturis/ accessed on January 31, 2018.[2] M. Khedkar, “Role of Universities in
technical writing through the use of laboratoryreports or term papers. These types of writing are able to highlight the technical writing style butoften lack the context of the professional work environment and its most common reasons forcommunication. Many employers within the co-op program at Grand Valley State Universityhave indicated that students could benefit from additional experience communicating their ideasin writing when proposing or justifying a project or change.In this case study, several members of a small curriculum development team reflect on theaffordances and constraints imposed by the decision to develop the academic component of onerequired co-op employment term (specifically the second of three) into a writing-intensive
, however, IE teams were much less likely to use quality references and write effectivebackground literature reviews. For both disciplines, project management proficiency variedwidely term by term. This may reflect variations in coordinator, project type, or other factors.Table 3. Capstone 1 Report: Percentage of teams achieving each component.75%=acceptable, shading code: 70 < [ ] < 80 < [ ]The averages and standard errors shown in Figure 2 below outline some patterns for eachof the writing components in the Capstone 1 report, illustrating that overall both majors weresimilar in their project management competencies. While the average of the IEs was much lowerfor abstract composition, a single class from Spring 2014 brought the average
specific analyses for passive voice are describedin the next section. In addition, civil engineering practitioners conduct holistic scorings ofsamples of student papers so we investigate whether there is overall improvement in addition toany specific language changes. Students' reactions to the materials are also gathered throughsurveys, reflective writing, and interviews.3. Practitioner and Student Use of Passive VoiceIn phase one of the Civil Engineering Writing Project, we investigated the use of passive voice in60 workplace reports, 60 student reports and 50 journal articles. The student reports mimickedthe workplace context: they were written to specific clients for specific projects (usually realpeople and real projects, such as in capstone
of improving students’ development along one or more of the patterns. Additionally, we believe CSR is a particularly appropriate method for this study because the method permits teaching practices to be studied in the context of a real classroom. The classroom setting within our case study contrasts the laboratory setting used by a large number of studies that have informed the development of the matrix (e.g., [6][9]). The controlled conditions of these research studies do not accurately reflect engineering practice which often requires engineers to work on teams over long durations to solve complex problems. Additionally, the clinical setting does not reflect an educational setting in which a teacher is available to help guide and
efforts on Mathematics Socialization and identity amongst pre-service elementary teachers, an effort at understanding the reasons for lack of interest in the subject with a view to proffer solution and engender/motivate interest amongst this group that will eventually reflect in their classroom practices. She is currently a Graduate Assistant with UIC Engage, a commu- nity focused project that provides help for less-privileged students from K-8 in mathematics, reading and writing. She continues to work as a substitute teacher occasionally to keep abreast with current practices within the school system. Her work as a Research Assistant for the BEST program has turned out to be one of her best experiences as a
(less than $10K), several provide scholarships(a few in the $5K-$10K range) and a few provide donations or research funding (< $10K).Research does not appear to be a major issue for ET programs as far as their IAB is concerned.Involvement in funding and tech transfer is low. The open feedback reflects that overall this type of involvement meets the program’sexpectations. Frustrations expressed largely reflect practical issues (EG scheduling). This suggests that overall ET programs are content with the status quo in the use of theirIABs. Only occasional remarks indicate that some would like to see a greater involvement infundraising. For this to change there would need to be a vision and model developed todemonstrate how the IAB
something that iscomputable. It can be reflected through system design; the human thought process in problemsolving; understanding the difficulty level of a given problem; understanding the quality of aproposed solution to a given problem; systematically assessing and selecting from amongalternative solution strategies; understanding the fundamentals of mathematics, engineering, andcomputational models; analysis of findings obtained through hands-on activities; understandinghuman behavior; etc. Computational thinking is recursive and parallel thinking. Moreover, it is theability of a person to judge a solution not only for being correct and effective, but also for itsaccessibility and aesthetics. Computational thinking affords appropriate
framing the learning objectives as compelling questions and thenend class by making sure that everyone can articulate the answer – or at least the main takeaway.I’ve also seen instructors start class by checking in on what students know so far through a visualactivity like a concept map. At the end of class, students revise and add to the concept map,allowing them to see connections between material and to think reflectively about the learningthey have accomplished during the class session.37 One of my favorite resources for thisquestion is James Lang's book, Small Teaching, which emphasizes quick meaningful teachinginterventions, including activities that can be done in the first and last five minutes of class.38How do I determine what
order toidentify where these conceptualizations converge with or diverge from imaginaries of“mainstream” engineering; what social order they might promote; what values they might reflect;and what impact they might have on LTS engineers’ work and, by extension, relationship withsociety. In the end, we aim to gain a better understanding about whether the branch of theengineering profession called LTS cultivates imaginaries that echo LTS’s articulated values ofequity, justice, empowerment, and transformation and bring engineers closer to the publics theyaim to serve. Ultimately, we are interested in determining whether LTS aligns itself more closelywith diverse publics’ articulations of their own visions, definitions of their own needs, andvisions
suggestion of bias againstunderrepresented groups in STEM fields (for which there is ample evidence in the literature) isdismissed, mocked, or met with shock and outrage. STEM diversity researchers, often insiders toSTEM themselves, are misrepresented as outsiders launching attacks on STEM itself.Rochelle Gutiérrez, 19 in a commentary on her own experience of alt-right harassment, reflects onthe positionality of the math education community in relation to rightwing attacks on diversityscholarship in the academy. She notes that she herself had been publishing without backlash fornearly two decades, specifically calling out White supremacist capitalist patriarchy, building onfive decades of math equity scholarship in her discipline. She asks, why now
goals [11], struggles in the transitions from secondary to postsecondary education[2], or lack of social and cultural integration [12]. We move away from this approach and insteadseek to highlight assets first-generation college students bring with them into an engineeringprogram. Our prior work has shown that first-generation college students demonstrate greaterfuture career satisfaction for inventing/designing things, developing new knowledge and skills,applying math and science, and supervising others when compared to continuing-generationcollege students [13]. The future career satisfaction measures in our prior study reflect the futureoutcomes students desire in their careers [14], which can be a source of motivation for learning[15], [16
and attitudes thatmight not be otherwise documented in company records.As this was an exploratory study, our recruitment practices reflect a sample of convenience. Werelied on contacts of our team members. An initial introduction email was sent to contacts atseveral government and industry employers via email, who then further shared our recruitmentemail with others at their workplaces.Individuals who agreed to participate were interviewed via videoconferencing or in person at atime and location convenient to them. One researcher conducted all six interviews. Interviews alllasted approximately 30 minutes each. Participants were compensated $50 for their time. Theinterviews were audio recorded and later transcribed. To protect their identities
/false/unsure). This measure reflects pilot studyfeedback about the measure’s validity and reliability: students were likely to know, with greaterconfidence, whether or not they would carry some substantive amount of student debt comparedto knowing about their exact student loan value or about specifics of their family’s wealth. Thequestion on athletics asks: “have you participated in a collegiate varsity athletics program?”(yes/no), and, “if yes, how many seasons will you have participated before graduating?” We thenconstructed a dichotomous variable of varsity athletics participation based upon 2 or moreseasons of participation. The Greek Life participation question asks: “as an undergraduate, wereyou a member of a fraternity or a sorority
for universities toidentify methods for attracting and retaining students, particularly women, in computer science.Interactionalist theory which suggests student retention to a degree is based on personal andenvironmental factors provided the framework guiding our study. In addition, career certaintymodels allowed us to investigate how experiences at the undergraduate level influenced careerinterest in computer science. Questions included prompts to reflect on environmental andpersonal factors that sustained or diminished interest in continuing within a computer sciencedegree and ultimately a career. Significant results suggest that females and males have a similarundergraduate experience and our results indicate that across institutions
team’sproject partner was prioritized as the primary stakeholder. However, students clearly consideredother additional stakeholders in reflecting on who the project was being design for or impactingon some level, and this in general related to the aforementioned feeling of responsibility as anengineer.From a collective standpoint, when asked to further describe the team interactions specificallythroughout the design process, Samantha discussed the difference between previous groupexperiences with her team: You just need to have teamwork skills in each team that you are involved in. The difference is just the project that you’re working on, that you serve the community, so you need to ensure that your team is working on that. You are
, I'd say that that sense of that - that technical social dualism is reinforced throughout the curriculum, but especially in the – in two large areas of the curriculum in engineering science courses and humanities and social science courses. So, while the technical engineering science courses focus and - and privilege the technical, the humanities and social science courses in many universities do just the opposite.The separation of technical and social within the curriculum reinforces the perceivedseparation in students’ minds, which is not reflective of engineering practice where the twohave to be considered simultaneously.Requirements vs. electiveSome interviewees also commented on the challenges associated with teaching ESI inrequired
), LCM(difficult), and CoM (very difficult) lessons, and the corresponding performance score of the fourgroups of students. Table 1 shows that there is direct relation between teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy and student performance in quizzes for both sets of students for each lesson. Resultsindicate that the higher the teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy score were, the more favorable thestudents’ performance. In fact, when TPACK self-efficacy scores between the teachers differedgreatly the more this was reflected in the normalized difference in scores of the quiz (studentperformance). Our classroom observations indicate that in the robotics-aided lessons teachersdifferentiated by engaging students with diverse learning styles differently, used
environments with the goal of improving learning opportunities for students and equipping faculty with the knowledge and skills necessary to create such opportunities. One of the founding faculty at Olin Col- lege, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from science to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creating curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests, motivation, and desire to persist in engineering. Through this work, outreach, and
takeaway from the junior-level course comes in a personal reflection of thestudent’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (also known as a SWOT analysis).The discussion in this particular module begins with an analysis of skills (personal strengths) thatare valued by potential future employers [12]. Then, the focus shifts to a discussion on whyidentifying strengths alone is insufficient when considering what the students can offer futureemployers. The SWOT analysis is meant to imbue a stronger understanding of the externalfactors in students’ lives that can help, or perhaps hinder, them in the future.In the senior year course, the focus is on professional development: students revisit their careerplans, study ethics, learn responsible
difficult2 – Not very difficult3 – Somewhat difficult4 – Moderately difficult5 – Very difficult To develop the skill-set of researchers involved in this project who were new toqualitative methodology and to identify features of our presentation that facilitated or hinderedthe experts understanding the exam questions and coming to a consensus, we decided to conducta beta version of the focus group. In the course of the beta focus group and upon reflection, we decided to make thefollowing changes to our procedure for the official focus group: 1. Because the experts often ranked questions as being between two levels of difficulty, e.g. between a “2” and a “3,” we determined that a scale of 1 - 10 would be more useful for
, concept generation,concept selection, design argumentation, design testing, evaluation argumentation, reportdevelopment, and reflection and discussion. Essentially the entire process each EDT involvesactive student engagement in science and engineering practices. Depending on teacherimplementation (e.g., number of design iterations), each EDT takes 300-400 minutes tocomplete.Table 2: EDT stages. EDT Stage General Components Introducing the problem Provide design challenge Identify needs and constraints Concept generation Research the problem
of collaborative lessons, focus on student reflection, importance of intrinsicmotivation).(Jonassen ,1991). However, any learning pedagogy has its limitations. For example, Problem-basedlearning(PBL) has been criticized as a curriculum that is often poorly designed and implemented, and apedagogy that lacks objective-aligned assessment methods (Boud & Feletti, 1997). Other research found,without proper scaffolding, consistent feedback, or context, students in PBL classrooms have shown lessprogress than students in traditional classrooms ( Savery, 2006,Norman & Schmidt, 1992;). Most supporters ofdiscovery-based learning acknowledge the main critiques of the pedagogy as fellow: a lack of teacher support,teacher guidance, content focus
presentation and research paper).The discussion boards allow students to have time to reflect more on the topics while serving tobuild students’ interest on developing their entrepreneurial mindset. The discussion boardsprepare students for group discussion in class while understanding the motivations andperspectives of their classmates before meeting in class.In Figure 2, the word ‘aware’ found in the introductory description will be deleted and thesentence will focus on the development on entrepreneurial skills. Students will have morefamiliarity with the entrepreneurial mindset in other courses. The word ‘aware’ was first usedsince this entrepreneurial approach was presented to the senior students for the first time.Students then performed learning
their appInquiry properly accomplish it. through surveys. A project having a real-world impact A class partnering with a local non-profitAuthenticity that creates a context beyond the to develop apps to help organizer their classroom. volunteers A project that allows students to A class in which students pitch app ideasStudent Voice have obtain ownership by giving to their professor and develop them forand Choice them judgement on the solution they the final project. wish to implement. Having students informally and Having students writing blog posts onReflection formally reflect on what, how
for this study, because racial identity is notdeeply explored, it is associated more broadly with engineering identity (and simply referred to as“Saviour Complex”). While these two aspects of engineering problem solving may be present in senior designprojects, the intent is not simply to criticize but to understand and correct these features ofengineering design. Preparing students to understand the social contexts of the technologies theycontribute to, requiring students to define problems by listening to stakeholders, and promptingthem to critically reflect on their work, can all reduce their Saviour Complex and the unintendedconsequences of their designs [19, 20]. Our study codes for instances of both unintendedconsequences and
developed additional SMK activities, we have generally substituted them for thewhiteboard problem solving in the overall mix of class activities, thus keeping the overallfraction of class time devoted to active learning approximately constant. Students prepare foreach class session by completing an example calculation and reflective writing assignment basedon assigned reading from two open educational resources (OERs) [16], [17]. To illustrate thisapproach we will next describe how the SMK1 activities outlined above fit into the first week ofclass sessions. The second class meeting begins with a series of ABCD questions assessingstudent comprehension of the reading reflection assignment on position vectors and Cartesiancomponents. The question
. He said, “…because I was always afraid I’d be, like, no, I’m going to becalled stupid and stuff like that.” But Troy found that he enjoyed the small group size at camp,and the friendly students as people he could relate to. When asked about the theme of the camp,he primarily focused on teamwork and cooperation. He appreciated the groupwork and time spenton sharing and reflecting at the start of each day’s session.Content AwarenessTroy was very excited to talk about rockets. He displayed a high level of understanding aboutrockets and NASA’s missions. His musings included the following comments expressed in ananimated matter: “Most of the rockets right now at this era are meant to go to the space station torefill fuel, or to resupply it, or to
between product and process is deliberate and designed to roughly follow a generalized“V-model” for systems development [13], figure 1. Figure 1: Representation of the V-model on which the capstone class is loosely based.The V-model has two phases, validation on the left and verification on the right. The validationphase focuses on effectiveness, do the design decisions reflect the right thing to do, while theverification phase focuses on efficiency or whether the planned design is being executed the rightway. The top of the Vee represents broader more contextual elements of design while thebottom of the Vee represents detailed design. In this model as student teams move from left toright through the design course they first represent their