• Error, Negligence, Misconduct, Human Subjects in Research • The Basics of Laboratory Safety • Literature Search Skills • Strategies for Reading Journal Article • Peer Review of Scientific Papers • Plagiarism • How to Document Your Research • Treatment of Research Data • How Research Is Funded • Student Research and Intellectual Property • Publication, Authorship, Patenting, Copyright and Trademark • Writing an Abstract • Presentation of Research • REU and Fellowship Opportunities for
paintings found in Indonesia—date back at least 43,900 years (George, 2019).Humans came into being with a set of basic survival needs, in which storytelling played a crucialrole. Storytelling transcends boundaries and disciplines, with fictional and non-fictional storiesbeing depicted and disseminated through art, technology, writing, and speaking. Because storiesplay a critical role in offering opportunities for meaning and connection in our lives, manyscholars and researchers have attempted to harness its benefits through storytelling interventionsand approaches (Pennebaker & Beall, 1986; Sharif et al., 2018; Suhr et al., 2017). Theseapproaches take on an array of forms, ranging from written journal entries to the oral sharing ofstories with
-represented groups who may not have access to college-educated role models within theirfamilies and who may not otherwise have access to professional and academic engineeringmentors. PROMES was launched at the University of Houston in 1974 and incorporates keyrecommended structural elements such as a formal introductory course for new freshmen andincoming transfer students, clustering of students in common sections of their courses, adedicated study center, and structured study groups.1 In addition, peer mentors assist freshmenand new transfer students throughout the first year.There is a second learning community within the College of Engineering that supports successfor a different, although sometimes overlapping, cohort. This second community is
review tools.Unfortunately, few students answered this question, but many provided a wide variety of othercomments concerning the peer review instead.Some students preferred the tablet PC to other tools for peer review while other students did notcare for the tablet for peer review. Those students who indicated in their comment a preferencefor the tablet PC did so because they found the comments to be easier to distribute, save, access,and track changes. “It was easier to have an electronic copy. The tablet was useful for writing by hand on the electronic copy. Because I had an easily accessible electronic copy I was more likely to use the peer review.” --RH 330 student “I could take notes on the document
. One of the aspects of engineering design that sets it apart from design in manyother disciplines is analysis. We wanted to assure that our designs were based on goodengineering analysis and produced a satisfactory artifact.Demonstration of a Successful DesignValidation of the product of the design is an important part of the design process. Weprefer projects that result in an artifact that can be tested (validated). The question is whatto do about artifacts that fail their “test”, about teams that fail to produce a testable artifactand about projects that, by definition, will not produce an “artifact.”Quality Evaluation and Feedback for Writing and Oral AssignmentsGrading assignments is of course required. “Quality” evaluation and useful
Creating and integrating effective graphics Providing clear technical descriptions Providing logical transitions between ideas Unifying paragraphs Providing constructive criticism for peers Writing or presenting effectively as a team Listening and participating productively in a team meeting Thinking critically about political, social, and economic constraints Thinking critically about ethical ramifications Writing effective email Employing audience-appropriate tone and style Using proper grammar, punctuation, and spellingWe then asked our
Use on Facilitating Student InteractionsAbstractThe objective of this study is to examine how Tablet PCs affect the interaction between studentswhen working in pairs on in-class assignments, and to study the effects of shared Tablet PC useon learning. Prior studies have demonstrated that engaging students in the learning processthrough active discussion and/or problem-solving with their peers improves learning. Tablet PCsallow students to engage in learning activities while using unique digital Inking and sharingcapabilities.In this pilot study, significant differences were observed between students working on paper andTablet PCs (“Paper” and “Tablet,” respectively) in terms of the frequency of observations
Maryland, Penn State and the State University of New York (SUNY).On the web, SUNY Teaching, Learning and Technology is at < http://cms.suny.edu/ >.Experiences from the Virtual ClassroomI present these distance learning faculty happenings based mostly upon my own personalexperience and partly based upon the experiences of my peers. (5)My initial distance learning courses were developed and presented for the University ofPhoenix (UOP) Online campus in 1997. These were courses addressing businessapplications of information technology. Later courses in Operating Systems, Statisticsand Computer Programming were prepared and delivered for UOP and RochesterInstitute of Technology.After a rigorous interview process, I was invited to attend a new
encouraged(better required) to attend training and mentoring program prior to the conduct of theirfirst DL course. Page 7.557.1 “Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”Experiences from the Virtual ClassroomI present these distance learning faculty happenings based mostly upon my own personalexperience and partly based upon the experiences of my peers. (5) Not all experiences inthe online teaching environment can be generalized to all faculty and all institutions.Faculty development programs need to be
Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2001, American Society for Engineering Education introductory writing course), Integrated Arts and Humanities, and Integrated Social Science (the latter three course categories are used to meet MSU’s general education requirements. • Enrollment in small sections of the ROSES freshman seminar. • A tutoring program emphasizing math and science courses. • A contingent of peer leaders, typically sophomores who were in the ROSES program the previous year.Living in the same residence hall provides the setting for the above mentioned academicinteractions. ROSES students study together in their rooms, in the lounges, and in
to arrange and often felt riskybecause while sharing thoughts and ideas in the classroom could be viewed as collaboration,doing so in writing could be viewed as cheating. Some respondents noted feeling less isolated than they had prior to COVID-19 becausethey had not developed strong relationships with peers, instructors, TAs and other groups, sothey felt the playing field was more level. Students identified a variety of factors that made them feel most disconnected amidCOVID-19. Many centered around a lack of close interaction with people on campus. Studentsreported coming to campus less, and when they attended in-person classes, being seated far apartmade organic conversation unlikely. An additional outcome was decreased
. From these analyses, twovariables emerged as highly predictive of student performance: scores on peer evaluations andhomework submission timeliness. This relationship remains strong even when the measure ofstudent performance is adjusted so that student peer evaluations and late penalties on homeworkassignments do not directly factor into their adjusted overall score. We discuss potentialexplanations for and practical implications of this result.BackgroundBeginning in Spring 2013 we implemented a new freshman-level chemical engineeringlaboratory course [1, 2]. In this course, students work on open-ended product and process designprojects in teams of three to four. We use many different presentation techniques in order to caterto different
write up or the oral presentation. Really did a lot during the project, particularly with the final Tony Romo 1.05 document. Betty Crocker 1.05 Overall good participator. Note: “Total” must equal the number of rated team members or Total 3.00 3.0 Figure A-1: Completed sample peer evaluation by “Johnny Debb” on his fellow group members. Table A-1: Example of Total Group Assessments and Resulting Final Grades: Johnny Tom Tony
Initiative (WPSI)5. WPSI supports several institutions with diversecourses that all focus on the same wicked problem each year, with WPSI providing a differentwicked problem every year along with shared guest lecturers and infrastructure for inter-institutional peer review and faculty support. (See Hess et al. 6,7 for more information on WPSI).ENGR 1060/2060 centers around three main topics throughout the semester: socialentrepreneurship, sustainability, and wicked problems. In addition to learning about these topics,students complete a semester-long group project to write a business plan for a social enterprisethat will address that year’s specific wicked problem (provided by WPSI). Students also workon five individual writing assignments that they
. The 2010 test results show that nine of the students scored PartiallyProficient on the language arts/literacy test and one student scored Proficient. There are five testsubsets and those scores are reported in percents. It is the expository writing sample score that isof interest in this study because that is the writing genre that the students will use to explain anddescribe their engineering experiences. The scores of the partner students ranged from 40%-60%.The 2011 Grade 5 NJASK scores will be administered in May 2011, but the results will not beavailable to the schools until mid-August.Approach/Methods/MaterialsThe CIESE staff member visits the class twice per month and leads the lessons with theassistance of the teacher. The approach to
rubrics 15 28 3 8 peer evaluation 11 16 37 57 Structured Activities Provide templates/examples 33 56 NA NA Students give presentations 25 73 NA NA Skills are graded 25 48 18 57 Provide writing assignments 46 113 NA NA “we talk about” it 12 20 12 17
# 8: Effectiveness technical writing. A guest lecturer from the technical communication program share presents a program on writing an effective report. Samples of successful reports are used for illustration.Week # 9: Student presentation #2. Students present a progress report on their design projects.Week # 10: Top-down design. Students learn to do top-down design, a new methodology, a new approach used computer-aided manufacturing. Instruction covers writing a behavioral descriptive language, means of simulation, synthesizing, optimizing, and finally implementation with ASIC or FPGA.Week # 11: The electronic manufacturing sector--local and
a reflection are most engaging—can be more helpful to a student’s confidence than evaluative or judgment feedback is. Providing feedback about what works in a piece of student writing reinforces positive behavior. When evaluative feedback is provided, it is vital that the student be in control of that feedback. In P2P, one of the 20 tasks is for students to write a “feedback request” detailing their own questions about their ePortfolio. They go on to share this request during peer feedback
Science Majors at alarge HSI. The approaches included the use of: (1) Collaborative, team-based and pairedprogramming, active learning, in-class exercises, as well as additional external assignments; (2)Active learning classroom environment whereby the physical space enhances and encouragescollaborative, small group interactions; and (3) In-class Peer Learning Assistants(undergraduates) that have undergone specialized training to facilitate discussion and interactionwith students in an active learning classroom setting. We conducted a study in a Programming Ifor Computer Science Majors (CS1) course to test the efficacy of the 3-pronged approachdescribed above. The control group (lecture based) pass rates were found to be 71%, whereas
assessing and improving team function, because these types ofexperiences affect student’s self-efficacy and motivation, which in turn affect their persistenceand retention in engineering.Peer assessments are widely used to both evaluate team function and to understand studentexperiences. Conventionally, they take a top-down approach: the creator of the peer assessmenttool identifies acceptable team behaviors and the students assess each other on those behaviors.They also typically focus on positive aspects of teaming behavior. In this preliminary researchstudy, we take a rather different approach to investigating the engineering student experience onteams. First, it is a bottom-up approach: students themselves describe their teammates and
authors cited their affiliation as the Center for Research inApplied Phrenology; the acronym CRAP, a dead giveaway, was apparently overlooked by themanuscript editor. To their delight, a few weeks later they received a notice of acceptance, basedon a rigorous peer review process, and a bill for $800, with directions to send payment to a postoffice box in the United Arab Emirates.2The incident created a whirlwind of commentary in the blogosphere and is but one of severalrecent, deliberate hoaxes aimed at online journals, particularly open access (also dubbed“predatory”) journals. But it also raises important questions in regards to the integrity ofpublished research in STEM-related fields and the ethics of editors and publishers who resort tolying
development are examples that students may not easilysee, but may be significant issues for projects they will encounter during their careers. Developingan appreciation of such issues should be an important aspect of their engineering technologyeducation.Students InvolvedThe students involved were juniors in a B.S. degree program in Civil Engineering Technology(CET). The course was Soil Engineering, a four-credit course that includes a laboratory. Thecourse is designated as “writing enhanced” by the University indicating that 25% of the coursegrade is based on writing assignments. In addition, feedback and opportunities for revision areprovided by a student peer-review process. 8 There were 25 students in the class.Initial Assessment SurveyPrior to
project, our hypothesis is thatsuch learning is facilitated in an active, peer-assisted environment in which the students areprovided frequent and rapid feedback of their state of learning.Background and MotivationBransford et al.1 point out that “effective learning is its durability and transferability,” whichmeans having a long-term impact on how it influences other kinds of learning or its applicationin other contexts. Furthermore, they state: “Learning must be guided by generalized principles(concepts) that are widely applicable. Knowledge learned at the level of rote memorization ofrules and algorithms inhibit transfer and limit durability. Learners are helped in their independentlearning attempts if they have conceptual knowledge
Series5 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Criteria: 1-Peer Reviews, 2-Philosophy, 3-Micro-teaching, 4-Presentation, 5-Assessment, 6- ReflectionComments from students on the SALG give context to the data that appear in the linegraph. More comments for fall, 2003 and summer, 2004 are in Appendix D.Fall, 2003 I love the micro-teaching idea. I don’t feel that I gained as much from writing the teaching and learning philosophy as I could have. I think it would be better if I
underrepresented minorities in STEM. Dr. Liou-Mark was awarded the 2018 Teaching Recognition Award at City Tech, and she was selected as the 2017-2018 Scholar on Campus. She was awarded the 2017 Best of New York Award for her contributions to City Tech. Her research interest in the implementation of the Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) instructional model in mathematics has won her the 2011 CUNY Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Mathematics Instruction and the Mathematical Association of America Metro New York Section 2014 Award for Distinguished Teaching of Mathematics. She was the former Director of the Peer-Led Team Learning Leadership Program at City Tech, and she has trained over 300 underrepresented minority
andresponses to their peers were graded with feedback following the formative assessment method.This helped students improve their discussion posts and responses in the next discussion topics.The impact of applying formative and summative e-assessment practices in the active learningenvironment was demonstrated in this case. Students who tried to improve their writing skillsfollowing feedback provided by the instructor in the SpeedGrader in Canvas learningmanagement systems were successful in achieving planned learning objectives. Rather thanoveremphasizing summative assessments, more emphasis was given to formative assessmentpractices. It has been found that combining summative assessments and formative assessmentpractices, with more emphasis on
Paper ID #44620Developing Teamwork Skills Across the Mechanical Engineering CurriculumMs. Mary M McCall M.A., University of Detroit Mercy I taught Technical Writing and Business Communication at the university and community college level for more than 30 years before retiring in May 2023. My current focus at Detroit Mercy continues to be the Embedded Technical Writing Program for Mechanical Engineering, now in its seventh year.Dr. Nassif E Rayess, University of Detroit Mercy Nassif Rayess is Professor and Chair of Mechanical Engineering at University of Detroit Mercy. He was part of the efforts to introduce entrepreneurially
retained, additional topics and assignments havebeen included to more completely cover the graduate school experience. A typical classschedule is shown in Table 1.Table 1: Typical Class ScheduleWeek Class Topic Week Class Topic1 1 Welcome/Introduction 8 1 Paper Writing 2 Library 2 Paper Writing 3 Why Grad School? 3 Paper Writing2 1 Holiday 9 1 Ethics 2 Communications Basics 2 Ethics 3 No Class 3 Ethics3 1 Presentations 10
right time)The Right Place: Support on specific job-related needs related to their transitions ● Individual job applications, mock interviews, as they were applying ● Writing groups for own funding and publication developmentThe Right Space: Cohort-based delivery of many activities allowing for peer support ● Transferable skills retreats ● Weekly writing groups ● Scholarly Learning Communities (SLCs)Where are They Now?The following table indicates the discipline, current institution, and position of each cohortparticipant who completed the study. The success of the project outcomes is truly measured bythe success of the cohort members who have undergone the activities listed in the AGEP Model,as listed in Table 1.Table 1. Current
many articles and books on writing in various disciplines, led a number of successful grants on communication in technical fields, and served as the Chair of the Conference on College Composition and Communication. She was previously a member of the faculty at the University of Minnesota.David Bowles, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge David Bowles is a Technical Communication Instructor in the Engineering Communication Studio at Louisiana State University. He earned a baccalaureate degree in English and a Master of Fine Arts in Creative Writing from Virginia Commonwealth University. He is a former assistant editor of Blackbird: an online journal of literature and the arts, and his