thesis significantly transformed from these reciprocities. Writinggroups such as these have been shown to create a “community of discursive social practice” thatsupports peer learning and peer review (Maher et al., 2008, p. 263). Through this process ofcollective learning via dialogue and relationships, I explored and built on greater complexitiesand theories in my final thesis than I would have been able to achieve as an individual. But itwent beyond the theories, I also gained confidence in being able to do this paradigm shiftingwork with others—in knowing that, regardless of the pushback and the number of uphill battles Ihad to fight, that I wasn’t alone in this work.And an amazing thing happened: I began to learn through writing. I never
summarizethe lessons learned from each hands-on assignment. If students are assigned to read a textbookbefore coming to class, it may be helpful to have them summarize their reactions to the readingin writing. Writing critiques of student presentations in-class also encourages the development ofcritical thinking, which is a valuable life-long learning skill. It can be time consuming forinstructors to grade large numbers of reflection documents, so this effort can be reduced bymaking use of peer evaluation strategies or allowing the submission of group reflectiondocuments.GamificationGamified learning or the gamification of learning has been defined as the use of game designelements in non-game settings to increase motivation and attention on tasks [40
. Students were required to use several library resources. They referenced journal articles, technical books, and internet sources, and were required to demonstrate proper technical citation using the IEEE citation style. For most students, this was their first experience with technical writing. They quickly realized that it was different from the writing they had done before in high school English, history, and other non-technical courses. Furthermore, they went through a writing revision process in which their paper went through three iterations of review: self, peer, and instructor review. All reviews were done prior to the final grading of the paper. Individual Oral Presentation: The second project, early
: this topic focused on reliving a special moment of achievement and recognition; • Introduce your readers to a mentor who supported you: this topic often highlighted the contributions of a teacher, parent, or other mentor who helped to guide the student.Students wrote a different story every week, first as a draft (followed by a review session withstudent peers and the instructor) and then as a revised text. Students did not receive a grade fortheir weekly writing; instead, the course focused on writing feedback that could allow the studentto develop their own writing process.In a required junior-level Thermodynamics course and in two upper-level elective courses inCivil and Environmental Engineering, students were asked to write
the strengths and weaknesses of various team members including theirown, etc. [13 – 15].Communication skills included the ability to engage with different stakeholders (e.g., peers andfaculty), being able to create and present information orally and in writing and being mindful oftheir own verbal and non-verbal cues [16 - 19]. The third group of skills are largely consideredentrepreneurial and includes various skills related to making connections to a variety ofcontextual issues, being engaged in creative thinking, being curious, and striving to add value to Proceedings of the 2024 Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration Copyright ©2024, American Society for Engineering Education
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
of Biomedical Engineering. I am involved in mentoring students in both the laboratory and in the classroom and have research interests in peer feedback, team dynamics, and incorporating more translatable skills to my classes. Currently, I teach senior capstone, research and experimental design, and medical device design. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Work in Progress: Towards Self-reported Student Usage of AI to Direct Curriculum in Technical Communication Courses1. IntroductionThe use of AI by students in biomedical engineering courses has rapidly grown in the past year[1]. Courses that prioritize critical thinking and technical writing have seen students relying
work is to to understand factors that inhibit full participation of students who identify with historically marginalized groups and investigate evidence-based strategies for mitigating these inequities. In addition, she is interested in technology and how specific affordances can change the ways we collaborate, learn, read, and write. Teaching engineering communication allows her to apply this work as she coaches students through collaboration, design thinking, and design communication. She is part of a team of faculty innovators who originated Tandem (tandem.ai.umich.edu), a tool designed to help facilitate equitable and inclusive teamwork environments.Rebecca L Matz, University of Michigan Becky Matz is a Research
and Supportive – instructor invites students to set and reach their learning goals and supports student success through constructive feedback, mentoring, advising, and listening [10-11] • Structured and Intentional – instructor plans course well, describes course clearly, aligns learning objectives activities and assessments, instructor clearly communicates expectations and what students need to do to meet them [12-13]Multiple measures are needed to provide a clear view of effective and inclusive teaching[14]. For example, student feedback forms may provide insights form the learner but maynot provide a clear view of instructional quality. Similarly, peer feedback and self-reflection may not fully measure effective and
.” • “Literally seeing this information at any point in time is amazing. Practice writing some of the statements was very good as well.” • “The written assignments along with the feedback from peers and teachers helped quite a lot. It was especially helpful to get feedback from the instructors as they have more of a sense as to what the application materials should contain. Guest lecturers were also helpful because they provided different perspectives from which we could learn.” • “Discussions, assignments targeted towards real-application material. Broadened understanding of job roles, responsibilities and how to apply as a graduate student to these jobs. Examples of application materials shared…helped to
Paper ID #42483Students’ Metacognitive Regulation Strategies in Written Reflections withinThird-Year Introductory Environmental Engineering CourseAnu Singh, University of Nebraska, Lincoln Anu Singh is a Ph.D. student in Engineering Education Research at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She completed her M.Tech in Digital Communication and her B.Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering in India. Her research interests include self-regulation, metacognition, reflection, and argumentative writing in engineering.Prof. Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, University of Nebraska, Lincoln Heidi A. Diefes-Dux is a Professor in
human experiences, values, and emotions. 8. Building Confidence and Resilience: Provide a supportive environment for students to experiment with creative expression, take risks, and overcome challenges, thereby building confidence and resilience in their academic and professional endeavors. 9. Cultivating Aesthetic Sensibility: Cultivate an appreciation for the aesthetic aspects of engineering design and innovation by exploring the beauty and elegance inherent in both poetry and technological solutions. 10. Facilitating Collaborative Learning: Promote collaboration and peer feedback by engaging students in group discussions, workshops, and constructive critique sessions to refine their poetry writing
for instructors to maximize student learning andcommunication skills in a third year mechanical engineering course that uses computer aideddrafting (CAD) for a design project. The current framework mirrors the review process thattakes place in industry and motivates students to keep up with major deadlines. Students need tolearn how to accept feedback, review other’s work, and communicate their designs to besuccessful in industry. The framework has been developed over three semesters and incorporatesscaffolded milestones, (peer) design reviews, and reflection. This paper presents instructorobservations of lessons learned and graduate TA observations from lab with the goal of makingthe framework accessible to other instructors of design. The
a working prototype and poster presentation.All three of these modules incorporated problem-solving, peer reviews, reflections andassessments. Graded submitted work from students included creating and updating anengineering notebook during the design process, work plans, detailed designs, and bills ofmaterials. Technical communication skills were additionally addressed through the preparationand delivery of oral presentations and through the technical writing of precise problemdefinitions and poster presentations. Students were introduced to fundamentals of CAD modelingand technical drawing along with basic fabrication skills, including 3D printing, and the safe useof band saws, drill presses, and other fabrication hand tools. Finally
a set of two short writtenreflections in a follow-up homework assignment. Overall, this topic is given most of the classtime during one class week in a semester-length one-credit course meeting once per week for anhour and twenty minutes. In the author’s context, this class contains about 60 students who areexclusively engineering majors and is facilitated by a single instructor and two or moreundergraduate peer mentors but could be scaled for larger or smaller classes without largechanges. This set of activities is usually run late in the semester when a rapport has beenestablished between the students and the instructor, time-sensitive academic success content hasalready been addressed, and the students are less self-conscious speaking in
. Whileparticipation in the mentoring program was not required, the instructors of the introductorycourses in each of the three majors emphasized the importance at the start of the semester andincorporated a small portion of the class grade to participation in mentoring. For example, theinstructor of the AST introductory course asked students to write a short reflection on theirparticipation in the mentoring program. The BE introductory course has specific points allocatedbased on participation in the program. In retrospect, some consistency across the courses wouldhave been preferable. Feedback from peer-mentors also highlighted the importance of a morestructured implementation of the peer-mentoring program within the context of the
improvestudent achievement, engagement, and have helped students develop conceptual understandingand problem-solving skills [4] - [14]. Additionally, when students are asked to write short-answer responses to explain their reasoning to concept questions, it has been observed toimprove student performance, engagement, and prepare students for group discussion [15], [16].These responses provide instructors and researchers with a wealth of information regardingstudent thinking [17]. Still, often, it is difficult for instructors and researchers to process all ofthis written information. Machine learning researchers have applied natural language processing(NLP) and large language models (LLMs) to automate the grading and scoring of textualresponses from
to Conceptually Challenging QuestionsIntroductionThis NSF Grantee Poster Session paper describes work on an NSF-funded collaboration betweenengineering education and machine learning researchers to automate the coding of short-answerexplanations written by students to conceptually challenging questions in mechanics andthermodynamics [1], [2]. Concept questions, sometimes called ConcepTests [3], are challengingmultiple-choice questions that allow students to practice utilizing conceptual knowledge in newscenarios. These questions have been used within multiple active learning strategies to promoteconceptual understanding and student engagement [4] - [11]. Furthermore, students can be askedto write short-answer explanations
engineeringstudents with ASD that offers peer mentoring to help with the transition to and engagement incollege life. The mentors offer guidance in honing executive functioning skills, identifyingessential resources, fostering social connections, developing self-advocacy skills, and effectivelynavigating the campus environment. Through an undergraduate research initiative, undergraduateengineering researchers have immersed themselves into this program, conducted research onneurodiverse learning and communication skills, and developed a prototype applicationspecifically for the peer mentoring program. Initially the student researchers developed surveysto determine the needs and interests in a customized application. Using the survey results, theydeveloped a
Students grouped by math placement, Common first-year courses, and access to Peer Mentoring and Academic Coaches Learning Communities Engineering fraternity/STEM sorority Collaborative Assignments and Projects Open-ended, real-world, class-based projects Undergraduate Research Honors Research and Innovation Experience and Symposium Diversity/Global Learning Project-based learning and Drill seminars ePortfolios Honors Research Experience Course Internships Drill seminarsHIPs not in FEP (Capstone, Writing Intensive Courses and Service Learning) have been excluded from Table
) – collaborated to develop a micro-credential on professional ethics for PennState’s College of Engineering. The micro-credential is targeted towards engineering students asearly as their first year of post-secondary study. The draft micro-credential notably includedseveral historical case studies – notably, the Boeing 737 Max crash, the Space Shuttle Challengerexplosion, Apple intellectual property misappropriation, the Volkswagen diesel emissionsscandal, and the Ford Explorer and Firestone tire tread separation incident – with additionalfurther modern cases inspired by recent engineering industry events. In this work, our qualitativeimpressions on the micro-credential development process originated via memo-writing (Saldana,2012), were further
prior experience in design and the UCD process. In suchinstances, working with an ideation tool to generate blue sky ideas and build upon some or ruleout others [43] augmented the learning experience and paved the way for them to come up withthe design ideas they would initially use. For students who might not have had much experiencewith the UCD process prior to C1, ChatGPT served as a tool for providing them equitable accesssuch that they could keep up with their more experienced peers and not fall behind the class. Additionally, ChatGPT was used as a writing assistant by students, especially in C2, whopossibly were struggling with the heavy writing load that the course provided. Such a writingload is uncommon within the courses in our
feedback provided by the instructor after reviewing their third draft. • Peer evaluations: Students complete three peer evaluations throughout the semester, using the CATME software [7].Individual learning assignments (ILAs)The different ILAs that were submitted throughout the semester are below. ILA1 and ILA2 arebased on assignments since before the author took over this course; the remaining ILAs weredeveloped by the author. With the exception of ILA5, which was expected to be a 300-500 wordsubmission, all ILAs are expected to be 600-1000 words. • ILA1: Students write about a WP of their choice, explain the characteristics of the problem that make it a WP, provide two examples of stakeholders for this problem, and
rate, and graduation time needed are significantly better compared totheir peers. This study shows that, the scholarships and various academic supports provided tothe talented but financially needy minority students had significant impact on student success,retention, and graduation.1. IntroductionIn an increasingly competitive and technology driven global economy, the future prosperity ofU.S. to succeed depends in a large measure on a STEM educated workforce. During the nextdecade, U.S. demand for scientists and engineers is expected to increase four times compared toother occupations [1],[2]. Yet, only 32% of undergraduates in the U.S. receive their degrees inSTEM while the corresponding figures for Japan, China, and Germany are 55%, 59
is planned to enhance the incoming transfer student’s sense of belonging, to prepare their career development (resume writing, interview), and to review the bottleneck course contents (Surveying and Statics).3) Faculty development activities To help in developing and offering more lower-division engineering courses at the three partnering institutions, the project hosts the Faculty Learning Community (FLC) with the faculty from Cal Poly Pomona and community colleges. Then, the faculty from Cal Poly Pomona shares teaching materials (lecture notes, assignments, quizzes, and exams) with the other faculty for their reasonable amount of workload to develop and offer lower- division
once a week throughout a 16-weeksemester. Lectures were structured to promote active-learning through brief warm-ups, frequentdiscussions, and in-class activities that promoted small group collaboration. The instructorspromoted an inclusive, safe environment in which students could share with peers their thoughtsand trepidations about their professional careers. This was done through write-pair-sharediscussions and activities, personal examples of professional successes and failures shared by theinstructional team, and allotted time for questions and comments.Guest speakers who were experts in specific areas were utilized for multiple class sessions,including: the lectures in understanding personal values (faculty member in education) and
European, Black or African, Hispanic or Latino, Middle Eastern or North African, Asian, Native American, Slavic, or I prefer not to say. • Technical_Talent: Assessed technical skills. Range: Terrible (1) to Wonderful (5). • Learning_Process: Learning style. Range: Visual, Auditory, Reading/Writing, or Kinesthetic. • Learning_Approach: Learning method. Range: Collaborative, Experiential, or Observation. • Early_Adapter: Whether the student tends to adopt new technologies early. Range: Yes or No.The target variable, Test_Group, categorizes students into those who review with AI, review withthe internet, review with a peer, contemplate on their own, or choose any method they like.We then asked a set of 10 to 12
the college, alongwith newly developed monthly financial wellness seminars and trained peer mentors, studentsare equipped with the tools, resources, and connections necessary to excel not only in theirengineering studies but also in their broader academic and professional endeavors.Recognizing the transformative power of education, particularly in fields where students fromdiverse backgrounds remains underrepresented, this program is committed to dismantlingbarriers for students who desire to achieve an undergraduate engineering degree.Current Student CohortThe first Lattice Scholars cohort entered college in fall 2023 and is comprised of 55 first yearstudents. Fitting with the program eligibility requirements, all 55 students are State
communicate 4. Write your team’s goals from this week and indicate if it was accomplished. If you did not reach your goals, please explain why 5. Was your team able to equally divide the work this week a. Yes b. No c. Other (with comments) 6. Do you have any concerns about your team going forward? Please detail them belowTeam Evaluation Questionnaire for Final Assessment (Required) 1. How would you assess yourself and each of your group members on the effort they put into this project? Write down every group member's name (including your own), give them a rating from 1-5 (1 being the worst) in terms of their effort. Explain as needed. Effort is defined as: Preparation and Readiness to work