poster.FundingThis project is funded by the National Science Foundation under Award XXX- XXXXXX. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] N. Veurink and A. Hamlin, "Spatial Visualization Skills: Impact on Confidence and Success in an Engineering Curriculum," presented at the 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/18591.[2] E. Towle, J. Mann, B. Kinsey, E. J. O. Brien, C. F. Bauer, and R. Champoux, "Assessing the self efficacy and spatial ability of engineering students from multiple disciplines," in
work may include women who were on the verge of choosing engineering but choseanother career path. This work may also investigate other groups within the U.S. and Moroccancultures. A quantitative approach may be implemented to produce more generalizable results thatmay produce a broader impact.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant N.1927125. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] R. A. Ellis, “Is U.S. Science and Technology Adrift,” Science and Technology, 2007. .[2] T. U. . News, “The U.S. News/Raytheon STEM
before beginning any laboratory experience. Students then moveinto the hands-on experience with guidance before given the opportunity to exploreindependently. Through exploration, students have options to investigate which promotesdiscussion and sharing of information with others. Students are asked to reflect on their findingsfrom their laboratory or hands-on experience and make predictions about their understanding.To conclude the learning experience, students are asked to make a final product based on theirnewly acquired knowledge or compare their findings with standard information used in today’schemistry course. Table 1. Proposed curriculum changes. Scientist Units
connected with the developed onlinemanagement system to incorporate more experiments. The authors and colleagues in otherengineering departments will collaborate to share the facilities to achieve a broader impact onmultidisciplinary teaching and research.Acknowledgment This project is supported in part by National Science Foundation award #0817462, #0942807,and #1238859. Opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.Bibliography1. "Leadership Under Challenge: Information Technology R&D in a Competitive World", President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, Aug 2007.2. Jorgenson, D.W.; and
taughtbasic science in a more coherent way. The existence of various learning styles has also been well documented and multipleclassification systems have been developed. For example, the Felder-Silverman model12separates learning styles into four dichotomous categories: student learning can be 1) sensory orintuitive, 2) visual or verbal, 3) active or reflective, and 4) sequential or global. Parallel to thisstudent learning model, corresponding teaching styles are either 1) concrete or abstract, 2) visualor verbal, 3) active or passive, and 4) sequential or global. Evidence suggests that the currentstudent population has a diverse learning style. Therefore, the typical teaching approach(utilizing the abstract, verbal, passive, and sequential
materials.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Course,Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement Program under Grant No. 0837749. Anyopinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.Bibliography1. I.A. Halloun and D. Hestenes, The Initial Knowledge State of College Physics Students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11): p. 6. (1985).2. S. Krause, J.C. Decker, and R.F. Griffin. Using a materials concept inventory to assess conceptual gain in introductory materials engineering courses. in Frontiers in Education. (2003).3. G.L. Gray, et al. The dynamics concept
anexcellent platform for the students to study the theory and explore different designs for the suntracking solar power system. After testing and verification using the simulation, a prototypesystem will be built in the laboratory.AcknowledgementPartial support for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation's TransformingUndergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (TUES)program under Award 1140447. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation. Page
not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography1. Allen, I. E.; Seaman J., “Class Difference: Online Education in the United States, 2010”, Sloan Consortium of Individual, Institution and Organizations Committed to Quality Online Education, http://www.sloan- c.org/publications/survey/staying_course, 20102. Bell, J. T.; Fogler, H. S., “Virtual Reality Laboratory Accidents”, Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference and Exposition, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 20013. Valera, A.; Diez, J. L.; Valles, M.; Albertos, P., “Virtual and Remote Control Laboratory Development”, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, pp. 35- 39, February 2005.4. Chen, X.; Song, G.; and
plans for success will be implemented.Acknowledgment This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. 0807019. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. Page 25.683.6
styles. The index of learning styles include reflective or active learners (processing), sensing or intuitive learners (perception), visual or verbal learners (input), and sequential or global learners (understanding). Personality Styles: A brief overview of different personality styles in terms of strengths and weaknesses. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test is used to provide psychological preferences for four categories with opposite pairs. Defining Purpose and Goals: A brief overview on how to best define your personal purpose and goals to achieve maximum satisfaction. The module looks at the challenges of the 21st century workplace, and helps students to recognize their
andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Page 24.259.5 References1 Genco, N., Holtta-Otto, K., & Seepersad, C. C. (2010). An experimental investigation of the innovation capabilities of engineering students. Proceedings of the 2010 American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.2 Atman, C. J., Sheppard, S. D., Turns, J., Adams, R. S., Fleming, L. N., Stevens, R., et al. (2010). Enabling engineering student success: The final report for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering
project? 2) How do student motivation and goal orientations change throughout their interaction with the curriculum changes? 3) How does students’ self-efficacy for design learning, specifically their comfort with “messy” open-ended engineering design problems and use of higher-level cognitive strategies change as they experience and reflect on errors or failure during prototyping and design activities?The quantitative project evaluation will consist of three previously developed and validated in-struments, the Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS26), the Motivated Strategies for LearningQuestionnaire (MSLQ27), Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI28) and the Learning Inven-tory29, while qualitative data will be
activities that present direct challenges tostudents’ most common misconceptions. Students are presented with physicalsituations or simulations in which the most-common misconceptions will leadthem to make a false prediction of the outcome. For example, predicting that thetemperature of a ceramic floor tile is lower than the temperature of a piece ofwood. Students then actively engage in experimenting with the situation, takingthe opportunity to convince themselves that reality is not as they had predicted.Students then reflect on their experience in order to cement their learning. Thekey aspects of Laws et al’s approach are summarized in Table 1.TABLE 1:Elements of Inquiry-Based Activity Modules [2](a) Use peer instruction and collaborative
works areparticularly noteworthy. First, the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) provided an instrument tomeasure students’ fundamental conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics. 1,2 The Page 25.322.2questions were designed to test a student’s ability to apply the fundamental laws and principlesin a way that does not require computation. Second, Eric Mazur published his book PeerInstruction, which describes the use of ConcepTests to engage students in conceptual learningduring lecture.3 This structured questioning process actively involves all students in the class.Peer instruction encourages students to reflect on the problem, think through
for streaming instrumentation data, and fast client-side,JavaScript based cross-browser graphing/plotting.AcknowledgmentsThis work is partially supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Numbers DUE-0942778, EEC-0935008, EEC-0935208 and HRD-0928921.Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography 1. I. E. Allen, and J. Seaman, “Going the distance: Online education in the United States, 2011.” The Sloan Consortium, 2011. 2. X. Chen, G. Song and Y. Zhang, "Virtual and Remote Laboratory Development: A Review," in Proceedings of Earth and Space 2010, pp. 3843-3852
toolssuggested some necessary refinement for students to get most benefit from the game experiences.ACKNOWLEDGMENTThis work is supported under a Innovations in Engineering Education, Curriculum,and Infrastructure grant EEC#0935089 from the National Science Foundation.BIBLIOGRAPHY[1]. Bowen, B. A., “Four puzzles in adult literacy: Reflections on the national adult literacy survey,” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 314-323, 1999[2]. Klemp, R., “Academic Literacy: Making Students Content Learners,” http://www.greatsource.com/rehand/6-8/pdfs/Academic_Literacy.pdf[3]. Stothard, S. E. and Hulme, C., “A comparison of reading comprehension and decoding difficulties in children,” Cornoldi C. and
27 3.0 1.2 41% crunching 3. Book didn’t complement the problem set 25 2.8 1.4 32% 4. Spreadsheets took focus away from 27 2.8 1.3 26% concepts 5. One group member did the work, but all 27 2.3 1.3 27% got credit 6. Too much repetition of concepts 26 2.3 1.1 11%The feedback from the students regarding interferences provided us with opportunitiesfor reflection and adjustments. Given the size of the class and support budgets for thecourse, it is difficult to see what can be done to reduce class wait time for help. A moreeffective way to run the course, especially given all the other inductive
Page 25.1251.7delivery and teaching pedagogy. Evaluation results show positive learning experiences.Future work includes more pilot-testing in biomedical engineering courses.AcknowledgmentPartial support for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation's Course,Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) program under Award No. 0837584. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.Bibliography1. Y. Guo, S. Zhang, H. Man, and A. Ritter, “A Case Study on Pill-Sized Robot in Gastro-Intestinal Tract to Teach Robot Programming and Navigation”, Proceedings of ASEE Annual Conference and
] frameworks were most appropriate for the developing study.Next StepsThe initial research results will be used to develop the qualitative methods for the secondphase of the research project.Further, the PI will continue to advance her engineering education research capacity byparticipating in additional workshops, such as the Modern Meta-Analysis Research Institute.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under NSFGrant Number 2225399. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Bibliography[1] United States Census Bureau, “The Chance That Two People Chosen at
elicited in the physical mode, while more conceptual practices were elicited in the virtual mode, and approximately the same amount of social practices were elicited in each mode. • Physical and virtual laboratories can be complementary, each targeting a specific set of epistemic practices, creating a learning outcome more reflective of real engineering practice. • The instructional design, instructor framing, and student activity need to align with the affordances of the laboratory modes to produce a complementary outcome. This means implementing the laboratories in a way that positions the affordances of each to be maximally leveraged by students.Broader ImpactsWe have the
a need to strengthen K-12 computing educationresearch (CER) and to ensure that the research holistically is reflective of the students wecollectively teach. This includes increasing the volume and quality of studies, and pinpointingresearch gaps that ensure all students’ learning needs are met. To address these issues, ourNational Science Foundation (NSF) project investigates three key questions: RQ1: How comprehensive is K-12 CER when examined with a specific lens on how it explicitly addresses broadening participation in computing or equity goals? RQ2: What are the barriers that prevent K-12 computing education researchers from conducting research across the four components of CAPE? RQ3: How effective are new
STEM education programs: Reflections on, and implications for, the NSF ITEST program," Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 847–858, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9632-6.[2] The Cochrane Collaboration, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, 2011. [Online]. Available: www.handbook.cochrane.org.[3] The Campbell Collaboration, Campbell systematic reviews: Policies and guidelines. Campbell Policies and Guidelines Series No. 1, Jan. 10, 2019. [Online]. DOI: 10.4073/cpg.2016.1.[4] M. Borenstein, J. P. Higgins, L. V. Hedges, and H. R. Rothstein, "Basics of meta‐analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of
managementfor online learners are highly encouraged for REACH students to address these concerns. Theworkshops are provided at no cost to CGCC students on the platform:www.college2success.com and include: “Online Courses: Staying Motivated & Disciplined”, “10Tips For Success In Your Online Course”, “Study Tips & Note-Taking Strategies”. Aftercompleting one of the workshops, the students are invited to fill out an action plan that includes4 points of reflection: Overcome challenges, Establish a schedule, Know your instructor, andBreak large tasks into smaller chunks. In the next semesters, a question will be added to thesurvey to assess the impact of taking those workshops on the academic integration scores. This preliminary study includes only
method as described above, the preliminary codebook wasapplied to all transcripts and subsequently probed using thematic analysis [34], [35]. Our teamreviewed the codebook and discussed potential modifications while using comments attacheddirectly to the data points to note sections of interest in the themes or other feedback. The firstauthor then modified the existing codes to reflect the team’s discussion, such as combiningsimilar concepts (e.g., Community and Collaboration includes “relationships”, “community”, and“collaboration”) or adjusting code names to be more precise (e.g., “social health” was changed toConnections and Interactions). The revised codes were applied to participant responses anddefinitions of each code were informed by
educators and industry partners. This strategic approach seeks to raise awareness oflocal engineering opportunities, contributing to talent retention within the region and fosteringsustainable growth in the skilled technical workforce. AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1943098. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.
reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation.ReferencesBolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership(4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity, and Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology(2017a). Creating Strategic Partnerships: A Tip Sheet from REvolutionizing engineering andcomputer science Departments (RED) Participatory Action Research. Retrieved fromhttp://depts.washington.edu/cerse/research/current-research/.Center for Evaluation & Research for STEM Equity, and Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology.(2017b). Communicating Change: A Tip Sheet from REvolutionizing Engineering and ComputerScience Departments (RED) Participatory Action Research. Retrieved
, Mankato. She has a Ph.D. in Engineering Education, an M.S.Ed. in Curriculum and Instruction - Science Education, and a B.S. in Materials Science and Engineering.Dr. Michelle Soledad, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Michelle Soledad, Ph.D. is a Collegiate Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her research and service interests include teaching and learning experiences in fundamental engineering courses, faculty development and support initiatives – including programs for the future engineering professoriate, and leveraging institutional data to support reflective teaching practices. She has degrees in Electrical Engineering (B.S., M.Eng.) from the Ateneo de
capital, to provide support for engineeringtransfer students based on individual location and demographic needs. Years 4-5 will supportpiloting, implementation, and iterative improvement of the dashboard.5. Evaluation and Project Outcomes to DateThis CAREER project is guided by a two-phase evaluation methodology. First, an ongoingformative internal evaluation is ongoing integrating the monitoring of research with evaluationthrough assessing achievement of milestones, reflection on project questions, fit-for-purposedata, and sense making. Summative, external evaluation is led by an Advisory Board chair whois an expert in transfer student STEM research is assisted by an Advisory Board of expertsrepresenting key disciplinary areas of study. The
engineering internships. We willshare these insights in our poster.Education PlanThe goal of our education plan is to provide practitioners with data driven tools for them toprovide more responsive support for their students. Our tools are in the form of workshops,where we use our research findings to educate students and practitioners on the possibilities ofresponsive support, and an SJI. We have made considerable progress on our education plan.During year four, we developed and finalized the structure of our SJI [6], which is an assessmenttool containing one sentence scenarios typical to undergraduate engineering and several responseoptions, reflective of typical student behavior.To finalize the structure of our SJI, we had to pilot our initial
with research. 4. A dedicated staff member whose job is to be a student liaison and plan/coordinate and facilitate REU events is a critical addition to the leadership team.Acknowledgements: This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundationunder Grant 2149667. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, Advanced Technologies for Gas Turbines.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2020.[2] National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, Commercial Aircraft Propulsion andEnergy Systems