pounds is eight out of ten. The class averagecontinues to be lower than eight per Figure 2. This indicates the levers were not failing above 30pounds and they were also heavier than necessary. If the students were achieving the specifiedtolerance, the success scores would be nine or higher.ABET Outcome 3a was met but not improved. The student outcome is improved because thescores went up per the assessment. However, the T-test reveals the scores were not significantlydifferent. In fact, there is a 95% chance they were the same.The difference between Lab 6a and 6b labs was not obvious. It was unclear if this was due tolack of understanding in applying FEA or if their assumed failure mode was not reflected in theirchosen orientation properties
Applications” innext phase of the project.AcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1935646. 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] G. Giffi, P. Wellener, B. Dollar, H. Ashton Manolian, L. Monck, and C. Moutray, “Deloitte and The Manufacturing Institute skills gap and future of work study,” 2018.[2] S. A. Ambrose, M. Lovett, M. W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, and M. K. Norman, How learning works : seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: US: Jossey- Bass, 2010.[3] S. A. Ambrose and L
conditions and more restrictedmobility than their white, male, Canadian educated counterparts.23, 24 Her study providesimportant evidence to support the claim that engineers’ career mobility and workingconditions reflect existing socio-political disparities in the province.Our literature review highlights three critical dimensions of engineering career pathresearch. First, administrative decisions do not reflect the full range of human experience.In more concrete terms, we cannot assume that engineers’ lived realities will conform tothe dual track model proposed by human resource managers. Second, not all career pathsare made equal. It behooves us, as critical engineering education researchers, to examinethe full range of mobility patterns, working
Total =Reflections This was an elective course which did not have a set curriculum yet and was run as atrial. We got to experiment a little with the course presentation. The authors were trying tobase this module on the Montessori method of education. The Montessori method is based onthe principle of auto education. When a proper prepared environment is built, the eager mindteaches itself. The learning happens through play, and the result is that the child learns in away that cannot be forgotten at the end of the semester. This method was developed by Dr.Maria Montessori to teach preschool age children and is a popular method of education inyounger children. Recently there has been some use of this method in EngineeringEducation[2
(UndergraduateResearch Experience and Creative Activity) program to work on an extension to the summerresearch project during the academic year. Four participants from summer 2020 received a teamURECA grant ($4000) to continue working on an extension of their summer project for the2020-2021 academic year. While these post-summer activities were encouraging, they wereperformed by non-scholars and therefore may not be reflective of the potential positive impact ofthe summer research program on S-STEM scholars.4.3 Conference AttendanceSending college students, especially underrepresented students, to attend a professionalconference like the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing and the Richard TapiaCelebration of Diversity in Computing has become more and
student body is 44% Hispanic/Latinx, 19% Asian, 17% African-American, 11%Caucasian, and 6% Two or more races. The college’s student body is 60% female and 39%male. 48% of students received Pell grants. In this project, we explore the effects of providinglow-income, underrepresented, and female students with hands-on research experience in STEM.In doing so, we hope to encourage them to continue their studies of science and technical fieldsand to give them practical context for applying what they learn in their classes. In this paper, weexamine the role of project-based learning on student retention in the technical fields. Theultimate goal is to have scientists and engineers with ethnic backgrounds better reflecting thepopulation in the
a specific project, thereby enablingthe acquired knowledge application [15-30]. PjBL goes beyond the relationships betweenknowledge and thinking, helping students to know and to do. In fact, it is focuses on doingsomething and learning on the way. PjBL main features from the student learning viewpoint are:1. In PjBL or PBL the focus is on the student competencies to design and to reach the solution,around students’ concerns and skills, the end product being a reflection of them.2. In PjBL the students solve problems, through self-management, project management, andcritical knowledge are enhanced, as they manage the work, offering frequent feedback, self-assessment and consistent opportunities for students to learn from experience.3. PjBL
workshops(e.g., NETI, ASEE section meetings, the ASEE National meeting, CW workshops), and haverecruited six participants in our Action Research Fellows program. By studying the context inwhich instructors adopt and utilize the CW, we will be able to provide recommendations forencouraging use of the CW and of other pedagogical innovations.AcknowledgmentsWe acknowledge the support from National Science Foundation (NSF) through grants DUE1821439, 1821445, 1821638, 1820888, and 1821603. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views ofthe NSF.References[1] S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth, “Active
improve their problem solving skills and to address their misconceptions.Acknowledgements:Portions of this project were supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) IUSE Grant(DUE-1504730). Any 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.References:[1] ACT, INC. "Profile Report-National."[2] Jacquez, R. B., et al. "Building a foundation for pre-calculus engineering freshmen throughan integrated learning community." Page 10 (2005): 1.[3] Seymour, E., and Hewitt, N. Talking about leaving. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1997.[4] Santiago, L., Coolbaugh, A.R., Veeramachaneni, S.S., and Morris, M.L., Board# 129
which 21 werehigh school students, and 37 Solutions Architects including 10 high school students.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1801024. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] S. Fayer, A. Lacey and W. Watson, A. “BLS spotlight on statistics: STEM occupations-past, present, and future,” U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistic, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/science-technology-engineering-and- mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and-future/pdf/science
performance criterion considered, often withanchored details at each level [16]. For subjective or summative artifacts, like reflective essays ordesign reports that may not have specific required components, a holistic rubric may align betterwith the desired outcomes. Often, a holistic rubric has performance criteria defined within asingle rating system for the entire work and doesn’t provide much performance feedback as partof the rubric itself [16]. For either type of rubric, performance criteria must be developed. Forthis project, students would not be gaining any feedback and would be scored based on theirapplication, placing it in a summative category rather than formative. Student essays would nothave specific required components and instead
and third goalsoutlined above. This relates to finding future success in the workforce and confidence indeploying 21st century workforce skills such as teamwork. The results suggest that students inYear 3 had more fully reached these goals than any previous year of CT CLICKs, reflecting astrengthened and continuously improving program. The improved results in Year 3 are attributedto a restructuring and redesign of faculty training materials which are presented in the trainingmanual delivered in fall 2019. In early fall 2019, workshops and associated resources wereredesigned to include a greater focus on student goals, the student and team building experience,and creating ways to develop workforce skills within the CT CLICKs classroom-based
each FLC meeting, there is also an opportunity for faculty to reflect, take notes,and consider assessment techniques when implementing these strategies.Faculty receive individual support through coaching and timely feedback from the FLCfacilitators. Twice a year, a facilitator meets one-on-one with each participant. The first session isat the start of the program, and it focuses on getting to know the faculty member and their goalsof the FLC. The second session is in the spring as they begin to plan their KEEN Card. Thefacilitator provides feedback during and outside of the FLC meetings, particularly for theirasynchronous work of these small implementations and their KEEN Card plans.Data Collection and Analysis
. Theauthor will not remain onsite during the entire 10-week program, so the initial on-site meetingswill be replaced with one-on-one video conference mentorship meetings that occur weekly forthe remainder of the summer. Prior to each of these meetings, the student will send an emaildetailing their accomplishments for that week and experimental plans for the upcoming week.Additionally, the student will be asked to share a personal reflection about their time abroad inthis weekly email update.Additional personalized training It is recognized that even with this training program, some students may still strugglewith aspects of their research projects. As such, additional one-on-one training will take place onan individual basis as needed. This
for the lab assignment or for the course. We would like the information to be accurate and correctly reflect your experience within the lab environment, so the surveys will be 100% anonymous. The instructors will not know who completed/did not complete the survey nor will the instructors know how a particular student answered the questions. The surveys may be completed on a voluntary basis, but we hope that you will take the time to provide feedback for our research. Thank you in advance for assisting with our research! _______________________________________________________________________________________________ * Number of labs included in study was reduced due to COVID-19 instructional changes.Figure 5: Invitation to students to complete
eventwas over, students reflected on their design and design process. The activity was structured sothat all students were challenged, and few were able to complete all parts of the activity.The remote instruction environment of 2020 necessitated changes to the activity structure. Theobjective shifted from introducing students to problem solving and design, to providing anactivity where students would get to know their classmates by working in groups. The overalltime commitment was the same: 2, 8-hour days, 1 week apart; but the task was very different asit had to be completed at home. For 2020, students were instructed to purchase an AdafruitCircuit Playground Express microcontroller, and used MakeCode and MakeCode Arcade toproduce a video game
principles and adapts thepractices to the online environment [1].” In the summer 2020, DoIT continued to provide various forms of the training creatingPIVOT+. In this professional development, faculty are welcomed to participate eithersynchronous/asynchronous engaging in ten modules over 10 days. Participants “review contentand complete reflection activities asynchronously in a Blackboard course while preparing theircourse materials for online delivery [1].” Effective practices for using technology, teachingonline, and key essential tools are discussed. Additionally, experienced faculty were asked toserve, during the two weeks, as peer mentors. As a part of PIVOT+, the College of Engineering and Information Technology (COEIT)invested
or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. This work was completed within the framework of University of ToledoIRB protocols 300853 and 300721.DisclaimerOne of the authors may receive royalties from sales of the zyBook detailed in this paper.Bibliography[1] K. E. Chapman, M. E. Davidson, and M. W. Liberatore, "Student success and attempts on auto-graded homework across multiple cohorts in material and energy balances," Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 43-50, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.18260/2-1-370.660-123169.[2] P. S. Steif and A. Dollar, "Study of usage patterns and learning gains in a web
design experience as well as improved skills ininteracting with domain experts and understanding customer needs. Expected benefits for thenursing students include critically thinking through the elements and use of an emergency room,reflection on their clinical experience, and learning to articulate their professional insights. Thebenefits were not only met but exceeded as demonstrated by the student feedback statements.Some students experienced the additional benefits of boosted confidence, while others feltempowered to consider how to be a change agent to better their work environment.References[1] Ann Saterbak, Mark Embree, Maria Oden, “Client-based Projects in Freshman Design,”ASEE Annual Conference, San Antonio, TX, 2012,[2] Ann Saterbak
or likelyfuture jobs within the firm (due to a lifetime employment culture, Lorriman, 1986), whereas self-marketability was observed to be more common amongst American engineers.3. Cultural values underlying problem-solving and creativityShifting lenses to the specific educational goal of fostering creative design capability, there is arise of creativity research in engineering design education, as reflected in growing research incurriculum design (Zhou, 2012), creativity-facilitating intervention (Hawthorne, et al., 2014) andcreative behavior and cognition (Toh & Miller, 2014). However, we lack a deep understandingabout different, and possibly conflicting, cultural beliefs and practices around creative problemsolving amongst students
required changes as these models arenonlinear in nature. The descriptive nature of these models provides a platform to use the designer’sprinciples/beliefs in developing the curriculum, and during the process of decision making this leadsto deliberation which eventually results in curriculum design. On comparing the three models ofcurriculum design, we found that the Weinstein and Fantini’s Humanistic model only concentrateson the learners’ needs and interests. However, Taba's Instructional Strategies model and theEisner’s systemic-aesthetic model focus on all aspects that may affect the teaching and learningprocess. Taba's Instructional Strategies model and the Eisner’s systemic-aesthetic models are morebalanced and integrated. They reflect on
,themodelidentifiestwoobjectsofinterest,drawsboxesaroundthemshownin red,assignsthelabels“1”toidentifythefirstcategory(sharks,inourcase),andindicatesa confidencefactorforeach(verycloseto1.0,whichmeansthemodelisquitecertainthatthe objectbelongsintothecategoryidentified).Whiletheresultsarenotalwaysasclearasinthis example,theoverallperformanceofthemodelisverygood,especiallyconsideringthe challengesofrecognizingsmallobjectsinoftenmurkywaters,withwaves,foam,reflections, andotherdistractions. Results Forbasicresults
on one-day career exploration eventstargeting a wide variety of career paths – both within and outside academia – in general, and inthe context of a research traineeship in particular.2.3. Multidisciplinary coursesMultidisciplinary and interdisciplinary are often used interchangeably to describe an integrativepedagogy that moves away from siloed academic disciplines that occur “naturally” withinacademia. A multidisciplinary pedagogy provides students with an academic experience thatmore accurately reflects the complexity of problems that cannot be solved within the confines ofone discipline [19]. Epistemologically, a multidisciplinary approach to research and learningproduces knowledge that integrates insights and practices from both similar
. In thearea of model validation, students have a purely simulation-based lab where they compare firstand second order models of the device, to determine under what conditions the motor inductancecould be neglected, and are given the Qube’s inductance and asked to justify their choice ofmodel for it. In the next lab, they utilize the device itself, and compare experimental data to thetheoretical performance that they expect, then are asked to reflect on the reasons fordiscrepancies. In a later lab, students develop a controller for the Qube. They are given a set ofspecifications that the controller should achieve; these differ from one term to the next, buttypically involve parameters such as overshoot and settling time. They are then asked
recommendations for how to make HIEP more accessible to all E/CS students. 4. Recommendations will be provided on which HIEP are most effective, how much participation should be encouraged, and interventions for removing potential barriers to participation.Acknowledgments This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant No. 1927218. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References[1] G.D. Kuh, “High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter,” Washington, DC: Association of American
Capstone course sequence was created to meet the increasing student demand for projectswith a humanitarian engineering context and to develop the global competencies required for studentsto successfully complete these projects. The demand was created due to the number of OSU studentspursing a Humanitarian Engineering Minor and/or the Global Option distinction. Students in theseprograms are required to participate in a capstone design experience that involves a global orhumanitarian focus.This paper will: 1. outline the Global Capstone course sequence development process, 2. describe the structure and learning outcomes of the Global Capstone course, 3. reflect on the challenges associated with managing a program focused on complex real
activities; and (4) opportunities for reflective learning regarding their leadershipexperiences. As seen in the graphic of Fig. 1 that depicts the central elements of RAMP, thisprogram supports the first two of these conditions through students interacting with professionalsfrom industry, building a community of peers who look like them, and creating social networkswith faculty, staff, and administrators in the new environment they are transitioning into. The facilitation of FGs by women (including both women of color and White women)and their reflections on this activity as discussed in this study are among the co-curricularprograms being designed to promote leadership roles and the formation of engineering identities.It is also of interest
important that engineers are prepared to face ethical dilemmas in their work before theygraduate from college. However, ethics instruction is a challenging task given the myriadsituations that may be encountered and variability in the extent that students are motivated tolearn about engineering ethics. One challenge in student motivation is the perception that ethicaldilemmas are uncommon and unlikely in most engineering work. Thus, student perceptions ofthe quality of the ethics instruction that they received may be skewed by their lack of foresightinto the future importance of these topics. A retrospective reflection of working engineers ontheir college ethics education can overcome this limitation and may provide perspectives that aredifferent
discussed thenegative health impacts to the locals cited by LYG (38%). Few students discussed the more‘emotional’ side of LYG in relation to the situation.Overall, requiring the students to tie the code of ethics to the situation described by LYG on theTampa highway system seemed to work moderately well. If the instructor had time to read thestudent reflections in the homework prior to class, a richer discussion could have been facilitated.It was interesting to see what elements students picked up on. For example, some misinterpretedor seemed to minimize the situation.The ethics assignment was followed by a lecture and homework assignment on JEDI. JEDI wasintegrated into the course as a required CU101 topic for all first-year students. The