Paper ID #22813Using Gamification and Cyber Learning Environment to Improve Students’Learning in an Introductory Computer Programming Course: An EmpiricalCase StudyMrs. Mourya Reddy Narasareddy Gari, North Dakota State University I am Ph.D student at North Dakota State University. My research work is to see how different Learning strategies affect the student learning.Dr. Gursimran Singh Walia, North Dakota State University Gursimran S. Walia is an associate professor of Computer Science at North Dakota State University. His main research interests include empirical software engineering, software engineering education, human
'digital thread' to link every phase in themanufacturing lifecycle, from early stages such as design through to sale and service. The goalof digital manufacturing is to provide manufacturers with better insight at critical decision pointsto avoid costly errors, gain efficiencies and be able to respond to customer and market demandsin a more agile manner” (Digital Manufacturing, 2016). At present, there is no clearly definedcareer or educational pathway for preparing technicians with DM skill set(s). Hence, there is aclear and imminent need to educate and train our future workforce with the skills required toavail the opportunities from the DM boom. An economic and efficient way to accomplish thiswill be to train the trainers that deliver
) develop and implement aplatform for student involvement and interaction in safety audits, (2) determine background andmotivation of students who volunteered, and (3) measure any major changes in attitudes ofstudents participating in audits.Collaboration and Requisite TrainingThe audits were developed in collaboration with a student-led organization, the EngineeringSafety Club (ESaf), and the University of Arkansas Department of Environmental Health andSafety (EH&S), and specifically the Laboratory Safety Compliance Coordinator. ESaf hosted atraining session and helped recruit student volunteers. Professionalism was emphasized andclear expectations were communicated during the session. The EH&S coordinator provided aone-hour training
Distribution of Themes in RICHES Stage 1 Research Theme Frequency Example Quote (type of (%) (from interviews) pedagogical practice) College Attending 72 (40.9) “At our campus, we have career counselors that Support double as transfer counselors. They provide financial aid information and other information for students. They are not content specific.” Program Planning & 53 (30.1) “The STEM advisors stick with our s STEM Execution Support Academy students from the day they arrive until
such anintegration of ethics into engineering education.Background and MotivationThe rules of professional practice in engineering until the early 1900’s were conditionedby the fact that engineers looked on themselves as loyal to a firm or a larger entity such asthe military or public works that employed them. Historically, engineering as a field –rather than a “profession” --and then as an academic discipline, originated from theseroots in the late 1740’s with the establishment of the first “civil” (as opposed to“military”) engineering department in France in the École Polytechnique in 1794 [1], [2].The American Society of Civil Engineers was founded in 1852 and is the oldestengineering society in the United States. The professional ethics of
neural engineering concepts (100%), more confident inteaching these concepts (85.7%), and more aware of how to communicate with their studentsabout neural engineering (92.9%). After the RET experiences, the teachers reported moreconfidence in their interactions with neural engineering research scientists (100%) and weremore aware of neural engineering careers (92.9%). Qualitative data were collected to further understand the outcomes of the program. Thefollowing teacher quotations are the most significant for student learning and curriculum design. Thisadditional information adds to the validity of the quantitative data. What are the strengths of the curriculum unit(s)? ● “The curriculum is hands-on, related to real-world
[1] President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, “Engage to excel: Producing one million additional college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics,” Science (80-. )., vol. 2, p. 130, 2012.[2] B. E. . 1960- Lovitts, Leaving the ivory tower : the causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield, 2001.[3] R. Sowell, J. Allum, and H. Okahana, Doctoral initiative on minority attrition and completion. Washington, DC, 2015.[4] A. Godwin, “The Development of a Measure of Engineering Identity,” 123rd Am. Soc. Eng. Educ. Annu. Conf. Expo., p. 15, 2016.[5] J. C. Hilpert, J. Husman, G. S. Stump, W. Kim, W. T. Chung
pressure on teachers to include engineering as part of their curricula. Learning toteach engineering involves a different way of approaching curricula than what many teachers areused to. As Brophy et al. [5] points out: when a teacher approaches teaching engineering design and what engineers do, the ‘answer in the book’ system breaks down. [S/He] has no list of correct answers (i.e. a design solution) because ill-structured and open-ended problems are designed to have multiple ‘correct’ answers. Teachers must become comfortable and proficient with the engineering process and learn to quickly recognize where learners are in the process…Many teachers lack the content knowledge and experience to make such an
, no. 98, pp. 1-12, 2004.[4] C. Furse, N. Cotter, and A. Rasmussen, “Bottlenecks and muddiest points in a freshman circuits course,” in 2018 Annual Amercan Society for Engineering Education Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, June 24-27, 2018 (in progress)[5] S. A. Ambrose, M. W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, M. C. Lovett, and M. K. Norman, How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.[6] National Research Council. How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004[7] E. Mazur, "Farewell, lecture." Science 323, no. 5910, pp. 50-51 2009.[8] R. B
designed to prove.Understanding what fact(s) about the world a proof is trying to establish is a crucial first step,especially for a novice. It helps the student organize his thoughts and evaluate different possiblepaths if the end goal is clearly defined in his mind. In the same vein, understanding the purposeand value of education is a crucial first step towards long term success in Computer Science. If thestudent understands the long-term benefits, he or she is much more likely to devote the time andenergy needed to master complex technical skills.2.2 Strategies in Upper Level Undergraduate ClassesThe issues in the lower level classes all still apply but there is another issue that is unique to theupper level classes: the need to build on an
. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/colleges-offer-retirement-buyouts- to-professors/487400/Cawyer, C. S., Simonds, C., & Davis, S. (2002). Mentoring to facilitate socialization: The case of the new faculty member. Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(2), 225-242.Chun, J. U., Sosik, J. J., & Yun, N. Y. (2012). A longitudinal study of mentor and protégé outcomes in formal mentoring relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 1071-1094.IMPACT MENTORING PROGRAM
R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Perspectives on motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 237-288). Lincoln: university of Nebraska Press.Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational psychologist, 26, 325-346.Ediger, Marlow. (2000). Vocational Education in the Elementary School. (ED442979) Opinion PapersGibbons, S., Hirsch, L., Kimmel, H., Rockland, R., & Bloom, J. (2004). Middle School Students Attitude
of papers implementing surveys started in 1994by Todd and Magleby et al. [4] that was followed up by Howe. S. et al. in 2010 [5] and 2015 [6],[7] respectively. The work from Howe, which can be found in the ASEE database, is more recentand relevant to this work. In 2015 Howe did both a qualitative and quantitative analysis ofsurvey results from 256 ABET accredited institutions executing Capstone projects in 464 distinctdepartments for a total of 522 respondents. This work looked at many aspects of the Capstoneexperience. One interesting reported observation was how various programs and institutionsvalued “process vs. product” in the final outcomes of a Capstone experience. Howe alsoexamined the number of semesters to complete, age of Capstone
, making their Interests, Qualifications, Experience,Expertise, and perhaps most importantly, their contact information viewable to potentialteammates. Students use the website to schedule and attend team formation meetings where theynot only learn more about the project(s), they also help to formulate its deliverable and thusdictate project direction. Once students have more or less settled into teams, they update theirstatus to “joined” and seek instructor approval, usually around week eight. The project modulesare then utilized by instructors to track team progress and host all project documentation throughthe end of the year.In this way, teams are self-selected and self-aggregated; students must justify their presence totheir peers and show
STateAcademic Redshirts (WA STARS) Program at University of Washington (UW) and WashingtonState University (WSU) suggests that the “redshirt in engineering” model is a successful tool forimproving outcomes for students who would be otherwise excluded from engineering. Theexpansion of the model to three additional schools -- University of California, San Diego(UCSD), Boise State University (BSU), and University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) --will allow for an examination of its malleability and potential for further dissemination. Lessons1 Note: much of the information in the introduction was drawn from the NSF S-STEM proposal to fund theRedshirt in Engineering Consortium.learned from existing redshirt programs and the first two years of the
unfamiliarwith the topic at hand can understand was a highlight from both cohorts of students, and thedevelopment of preparation, presentation, and public speaking skills, were among the parts oftheir experience that students in the second cohort felt were applicable elsewhere. Students in thesecond cohort stated that they learned the importance of considering their audience in choosingthe best way to conduct their presentation and instruct the adolescents during the activity portionof the presentation, from creating their physical presentation, to choosing their language, toselecting an appropriate hands-on activity for their audiences’ age group. They specificallyhighlighted the use of “PowerPoint” and “visual aid[s]” as tools that allowed them to
overall timetable for our Mentoring Trial is provided inTable 1.Table 1: Mentoring Trial ChronologyDate(s) ActivityEarly August Release requests for expressions of interest to potential mentors and mentees2016Mid August 2016 Develop sets of expressions of interest; close off requests when fullMid August 2016 Develop materials to give participants; develop on-line resourcesMid August 2016 Develop entrance and exit surveysLate August 2016 Match mentors and mentees; release entrance surveyEarly September Develop training session exercises and presentations; organize venue2016Mid September Mentor training session2016Mid September Meet-and-greet session2016Mid September to Series of Mentor/Mentee
impact of the JTFD project is best summed up in the response to thewrap up summary where 100% of faculty agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that, “Thetools, strategies, and interaction I experienced throughout the JTFD project will be of value to myfuture instructional practice and career success.”AcknowledgmentThe authors gratefully acknowledge support of this work by the National Science Foundation un-der Grant No. 1524527.References[1] Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Michelle, K., Smith, B., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wen- deroth, M. P., (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics, PNAS, 111, 23-30.[2] Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus
. Developing Shared Vision seeks to engage stakeholders in collectivelydeveloping new environmental features that encourage new teaching conceptions and/orpractices.Henderson et al.’s framework does not imply that all four change strategies are equally effective.In fact, Henderson identified two approaches - testing “best practice” curricular materials andmaking these materials available to other faculty and “top down” policy-making meant toinfluence instructional practices - as ineffective change strategies in STEM education(Henderson et al., 2011). Additionally, their review found that effective change strategies arethose that are aligned with or seek to change beliefs of the individuals involved, involve long-term interventions, and recognize
task of verifying the theoretical description of circuit performance is definitelyfound in the lower three Bloom’s levels. When the students were asked to predict the cause(s) fora given fault in the observed circuit behavior and then simulate as validation, they were workingin the upper three levels. Both of these tasks can also be done experimentally, but it may not bepossible to fully identify the cause of the fault using only one approach. Finally, the time andfrequency dependent data obtained for circuits using either method have similar formats and,thus, involve similar issues in doing them correctly. For example, triggering a scope (akadeciding when to start collecting data) and specifying time and voltage scales require verysimilar
process. In future, we plan to offer these as regularcourses in affiliation with local schools where a K-12 teacher can take the role of the instructor.Finally, one week for each course did not seem to be sufficient to expose participants to manyimportant concepts of either AI2 or OOP. Hence, running the two course over an entire semesteror two consecutive semesters might allow instructors to cover more programming concepts whichare required to solve problems in the real world.8. REFERENCES[1]. S. Kurkovsky, “Making computing attractive for non-majors: a course design,” Journal of Computer.Science Coll. Vol.22, No. 3, pp. 90-97, Jan 2007.[2]. A. Forte and M. Guzdial, M”otivation and nonmajors in computer science: identifying discreteaudiences for
based on something personally interesting to them. The associated research investigates how an interest-based, human-centered approach to engineering design in Makerspace learning environments can appeal to a broader group of students.Chanel: My work and research takes place in informal settings with high school aged students to elderly persons. Typically, people I am working with are underrepresented in the field of engineering or completely disconnected from engineering s a profession or identity. My research primary asks participants to reflect on their experiences and think systematically about changes they would like to see and problems they observe. In general, I attempt to make
Engineers Without Borders, Germany(Ingenieure ohne Grenzen e.V.).LiteratureAllen, Deborah E.; Donham, Richard S.; Bernhardt, Stephen A. (2011): Problem-BasedLearning. In: New Directions for Teaching and Learning (128), S. 21–29.Belu, R.; Chiou, R.; Ciocal L.; Tseng, B. (2016): Incorporating Sustainability Concepts andGreen Design into Engineering and Technology Curricula. In: Journal of Education andLearning 10 (2), S. 93–102.Boyle, C. (2004): Considerations on educating engineers in sustainability. In: InternationalJournal of Sustainability in Higher Education 5 (2), S. 147–155.Buys, Laurie; Miller, Evonne; Buckley, Mathew; Jolly, Lesley (2013): The “Engineerswithout Borders” Challenge: Does it engage Australian and New Zealand students
Paper ID #22785Citizen Scientists Engagement in Air Quality MeasurementsProf. Anthony Butterfield, University of Utah Anthony Butterfield is an Assistant Professor (Lecturing) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory and freshman design laboratory. His research interests focus on undergraduate education, targeted drug delivery, photobioreactor design, and instrumentation.Katrina My Quyen Le, AMES High School
, Roland D, Mashaw, Lane H., and Northup Larry L., Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving, 3rd ed., McGraw Hill, 1997.2. ABET Engineering Accreditation Commission. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, June 2012. http://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/eac-criteria-2012- 2013.pdf3. McKenzie, Larry J., Trevisan, Michael S., Davis, Denny C., and Beyerlein, Steven W., “Capstone Design Courses and Assessment: A National Study,” Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition., pp. 9.286.1 – 9.286.17, 20044. Kirschenman, M. D. & Brenner, B., “Civil engineering design as the central theme in civil engineering education curriculum,” Leadership and Management in
. 199-218, 2006.[5] C. Evans, "Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education," Review of Educational Research, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 70-120, 2013.[6] V. J. Shute, "Focus on Formative Feedback," Review of Educational Research, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 153-189, 2008.[7] J. Hattie and H. Timperley, "The Power of Feedback," Review of Educational Research, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 81-112, 2007.[8] M. A. Creasy, "Measuring the Dynamic in Learning," presented at the 123rd ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, LA, 2016.[9] S. Narciss, "Feedback Strategies for Interactive Learning Tasks," Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, vol. 3, pp. 125-144, 2008.[10] A. Blair
writing behavior, educators can support graduate students throughthe critical and necessary process of writing up their research in disciplinary discourse. In additionto better understanding writing, we also feel that this work has large implications for other real-time and time-resolved data in educational settings. References1. Leydens, J. A. Sociotechnical communication in engineering: an exploration and unveiling of common myths. Eng. Stud. 4, 1–9 (2012).2. Paretti, M. C. & McNair, L. D. Introduction to the Special Issue on Communication in Engineering Curricula : Mapping the Landscape. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 51, 238– 241 (2008).3. Ross, P. M., Burgin, S., Aitchison, C