such as student reflections and other worksheets are collected forevaluative purposes. Newly in year two of the program, reflections have been transitioned from apaper activity to a whole class discussion facilitated by the classroom adults to mitigate some ofthe writing communication challenges discovered in the first year [23].Current statusEngagement with teachers and youth. Data collection for year one of the project has come to anend, and data collection in year two is currently underway. Considering student and teacheroutcomes to address research questions 1-3, analysis of the year one data has begun. Forteachers, findings suggest improvement around teacher confidence in teaching engineering aswell as challenges that still remain
Paper ID #12991Building capacity and social capital around interpretive research qualityDr. Joachim Walther, University of Georgia Dr. Walther is an assistant professor of engineering education research at the University of Georgia (UGA). He is the director of the Collaborative Lounge for Understanding Society and Technology through Educational Research (CLUSTER), an interdisciplinary research group with members from engineering, art, educational psychology, and social work. His research interests range from the role of empathy in engineering students’ professional formation, the role of reflection in engineering
onesemester. Student participants were freshmen who were involved in the required communityservice learning projects. Participating students were assigned to the community servicelearning sites, required to provide innovative solutions to the problems they identified on thesites, and facilitated with the designed interventions of question prompts on self-regulatedlearning and creative problem solving, which included metacognitive prompts, proceduralprompts, elaboration prompts, and reflective prompts, as well as prompts for creative problemsolving strategies. The presented results were based on analysis of data collected throughstudents’ process journals and project reports. The students’ utilization of question prompts, andself-regulated learning
attract college STEM majors into the teaching profession and bydeveloping a rigorous middle grades teacher preparation program that reflects core commitmentsof effective middle grades educators. We will present some of our progress thus far related toSUSTAINS development.IntroductionBeginning in 2012, teacher educators throughout Pennsylvania launched programs to prepareteachers who specialize in middle grades (4-8). The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s newemphasis on highly qualified middle grades teachers provides a unique opportunity to impactchildren at a crucial time in their formal education experience, when they are developing a senseof their efficacy as learners, exploring career aspirations, and developing as adolescents alongsocial
junioryear in undergrad through the completion of a master's degree or through the completion of theirqualifying exam within a Ph.D. program, the program provides opportunities throughout todeeply engage students in reflecting on social issues. The goal of the program is to foster theprofessional development of S-STEM scholars to develop socially conscious engineers andengineering faculty who support students and come up with innovative solutions that meet thediverse needs of different populations.Socially Conscious ProgrammingUML’s S-STEM Program is halfway through the second cohort’s first year. The programmingdescribed was offered in the first year for the first cohort and is being offered to the secondcohort during their first year in the
students experience.” Such data can contextualize the design and the delivery ofthe intervention. To examine FOI, an LR-LS fidelity rubric was developed by the research teamto score faculty on five “critical components” [1] of the LR-LS framework: 1) STEM/academicliteracy, 2) affordances for student interaction, 3) orientations to student learning, 4) reflectivepractice, and 5) faculty leadership. Our FOI rubric was intended to capture the extent to whichLR-LS components were enacted during lesson study (quality measure). The five LR-LScomponents were measured using a four-point scale. A score of “0” means the component wasnot present, “1” reflects minimal implementation, “2” reflects moderate implementation, and “3”reflects strong
Feedback e Research from other fields suggests the practice of video recording presentations andreceiving feedback yields even greater gains in communication skills. The use of video to recordpresentations and review for feedback has been referred to as the “gold standard” ofcommunication education, and is widely used in professional education in the “helpingprofessions” such as education, medicine, psychology, and social work[13]. Video recordingallows for students to reflect on their presentation at a distance, and offers a realistic picture oftheir abilities[14]. Furthermore, the video medium offers the ability to parse out specific aspectsof communication, such as
a data-intensive approach to study one of the most fundamental research topics inlearning sciences and engineering education: “How do secondary students learn and applyscience concepts in engineering design processes?” We have collected data from over 1,000middle and high school students in Indiana and Massachusetts through automatic, unobtrusivelogging of student design processes enabled by a unique CAD tool that supports the design ofenergy-efficient buildings using earth science, physical science, and engineering scienceconcepts and principles of design. Data collected includes fine-grained information of studentdesign actions, experimentation behaviors, electronic student reflection notes, and virtual designartifacts. These process data
students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teach-ing decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineeringeducation. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Engineering with Engineers: Revolutionizing a Mechanical Engineering Department through Industry Immersion and a Focus on IdentityAbstractThe Mechanical Engineering Department at Seattle University was awarded a grant by theNational Science Foundation (NSF) Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer ScienceDepartments (RED) program in July 2017. This award supports the development of a mechanicalengineering program where
-specific self-efficacy revolves around social support in the sense ofencouragement and constructive feedback – elements of a community of practice supported by the situatedlearning framework and PBL. This process can be guided by “cognitive apprenticeship,” which is a means oflearning-by-doing where the thinking process underlying complex, problem-solving skills is made visiblethrough teaching methods such as modeling, coaching, scaffolding, articulation, and reflection 10-11.CPBL vs PBLCollaborative Project-based Learning (CPBL) is a revised PBL model developed by Dong and Warter-Perez 12to address the specific learning needs of under-prepared minority students. It has been implemented in severalengineering courses and a positive impact on
andexisting ethical frameworks, which may be expressed emotively. Rather than portraying emotionas a threat to rationality, we outline pedagogical strategies that encourage students to explore therelationship between emotions and feelings, logic and reason, and values and ethics. Thepedagogical strategies presented here are being piloted in an advanced (upper-division)undergraduate seminar course, “Ethics, Engineering, and Society.” This seminar, which was firsttaught during the 2011/12 Academic Year at the University of California, Berkeley, alsoinformed the development of our funded project. This paper describes early student responses tothe new curriculum. Our results suggest that engaging students’ emotions encourages andenables them to reflect
Engineering, Design and Computing at the University of Colorado Denver, afaculty learning community (FLC) is exploring how to apply known pedagogical practicesintended to foster equity and inclusion. Faculty come from all five departments of the college.For this three-year NSF-funded project, Year 1 was dedicated to deepening reflection asindividuals and building trust as a cohort. Now, in Year 2, the FLC is focused on translatingpedagogical practices from literature and other resources into particular courses. This cohort hasexperienced some adjustments as some faculty leave the FLC and new faculty choose to join theFLC. Since this cohort continues to grow, this paper presents key features that have supportedthe FLC’s formation and then transition
to market-driven design approaches and tools in an engineering design course. Thefollowing research questions (RQs) are explored:RQ1: To what extent do undergraduate engineering students’ initial conceptions of design account for the market context, such as competition and consumer considerations?RQ2: In what ways do these design conceptions change after introducing market-driven design techniques and tools in a design course?RQ3: What types of student assessment (e.g., surveys, written reflections, project reports) are significant predictors of evolving design conceptions at a topic level? andRQ4: Does the introduction and use of a market simulator tool correspond with a change in design conceptions?By exploring how current
or presentations. At Rose-Hulman, Sriram has focused on incorporating reflection, and problem based learning activities in the Software Engineer- ing curriculum. Sriram has been fundamental to the revamp of the entire software engineering program at Rose-Hulman. Sriram is a founding member of the Engineering Design program and continues to serve on the leadership team that has developed innovative ways to integrate Humanities, Science, Math, and Engi- neering curriculum into a studio based education model. In 2015, Sriram was selected as the Outstanding Young Alumni of the year by the School of Informatics and Computing at Indiana University. Sriram serves as a facilitator for MACH, a unique faculty development
structure is enhanced through mentoring relationships withpeers, faculty, and alumni who can share experiences and direct students to resources. Finally,students work in teams to complete impactful projects that show them the relevance of theSTEM disciplines to the important problems of the world. Throughout all of these activities,students are given ownership of their experiences through choices in the classes, projects, andactivities that lead to the learning objectives of the program. Additionally, the students areencouraged to reflect regularly on their experiences, becoming more self-aware and better able tocontribute to their society. The ACES program has benefited from partnerships across thecampus of Wartburg College, liberal-arts private 4
totheir academic success. A new Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) is beingdeveloped for the coming year for the mentors. Past mentor assessments have been provided inend of semester presentations and reflections. The SALG will supplement and not replace thepresentation and reflection.CE-MENT Program Components and OperationAt its inception in the first year of the grant, the peer mentor program had seven mentors. Overthe past two-plus years, the program has grown significantly. Currently, there are 25 activementors, many of whom were former mentees. The program is operating on a volunteer basisand credit is not provided to the mentees, so there is a wide range in level of involvement bymentees. On average, this year the mentees had 2
Page 26.771.2moving their progress forward. However, there is no general consensus as to what specificattributes of feedback lead to improved learning, and multiple lines of research emphasize thatappropriate feedback is specific to the learning context of the student and/or task.6 Researchershave advocated that feedback works best when it directs student attention to appropriate goalsand actions,7 and encourages student reflection.8 Others believe that students are most receptiveto feedback when they are sure their answer is correct, only to learn later that it was wrong.9Additional factors include a student’s understanding of and agreement with the feedbackprovided, the motivation the feedback provides, and the limits on the student’s
, device operation,defects, variability, and reliability. Laboratory projects using low-cost fluorescent cameras,visible and near-IR cameras, and laser scanning are used to characterize the grain structure,defects, surface roughness, reflectivity, and photovoltaic effects in common solar cell materials(e.g., monocrystalline and multicrystalline silicon wafers, thin film solar cells, commercialsilicon solar cells, and photovoltaic modules. Captured images can be imported into MATLABor other widely-available image processing software for analysis and interpretation. Topicallaboratory modules and projects can teach across engineering disciplines including materialsscience, optics, quality control, semiconductor devices, and renewable energy.1
smaller private engineering department? Were thesurveys sufficient to capture a more fully informed picture of how students were developing asself-directed learners? Would we have a more complete understanding of how SDL is cultivated?Qualitative investigation was extended into the fourth year for the large public university cohort.Analysis of the transcribed focus groups produced some insights and many questions, includinghow self-direction could be defined in multiple ways and measured across time as an unstablecharacteristic, given to transient and episodic experiences of self-awareness and doubt, reflectionand quasi-reflection5. The ongoing processes of self-assessment and reflection provided repeatedopportunities to reveal how students
guided by learningmotivation, metacognition (thinking about one's thinking, and knowing one’s learning beliefsand strategies), and strategic action (planning, monitoring, evaluating progress, and taking properaction)” 1,2,3. Most educational researchers agree that the self-regulation process is a cyclical process andincludes three major phases: (1) planning, during which learners set goals, make strategic plans,and judge their self-efficacy; (2) execution, which involves learner's performance and control oftheir learning efforts, and use of learning management strategies and self-monitoring; and (3)self-reflection, which involves the self-evaluation of mastery, causal attributions, and reactions tothe learning task and performance after
screening survey. Approximately 70instructor survey respondents have shared their personal experience and perceptions around non-traditional modes of teaching over a series of three semi-structured interviews. Specifically,participants were prompted to reflect on contextual barriers and affordances that impact theirdecision-making processes around active student engagement in the classroom. The second effortconsists of a mentoring component in which participating faculty are continuously engaged inthe innovation and development processes tied to EBIP-implementation in the classroom. Thiscollaborative development has created a supportive space in which faculty are encouraged to testnew EBIPs in their courses and reflect on the challenges and
. Turns, University of Washington Jennifer Turns is a Professor in the Department of Human Centered Design & Engineering at the Univer- sity of Washington. She is interested in all aspects of engineering education, including how to support engineering students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teach- ing decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineering education. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Engineering with Engineers: Fostering Engineering IdentityIntroductionThe Mechanical Engineering Department at Seattle University was awarded
engineerThese questions revolved around the idea of reflecting on what it is like to be an engineer, aswell as reflecting on what they personally did that resembled an engineer. Embodying these traitsand reflecting on them has the function of shaping both, their subjective and objective identities,as perceived by others [6]. The first question was asking about what these children thought thetraits of an engineer to be, and the second part of the question was about which of these traits didthe children display while engaging with the kits. A discussion follows below of the moreprominent responses. Realistic Thinking. Realistic thinking was one of the traits that was recognized asimportant for engineers. Engineers do need to be realistic when
qualitative methods are assigned equal weighting in the interpretation offindings27.The Felder Index of Learning Styles Assessment (ILSA) is a 44-item questionnaire whichassesses students’ learning style preferences which are evaluated on four continua. Felder ILSAresults categorize all respondents’ learning styles in terms of being active/reflective (ACT_REF),sensing/intuitive (SEN_INT), visual/verbal (VIS_VRB), and sequential/global (SEQ_GLO).Each anchor of the continua is assigned a quantitative value of -11 or 11, respectively, and allrespondents are assigned individual values between these extremes. Respondents’ ratings on thevarious Felder ILSA continua served as the independent variables in this research.Dependent variables were a product of
class Faculty Reflection & incorporate Summary changes Review & Final faculty Comment by reflection CTL Faculty review Review & video & Comment by 2
Paper ID #42666Board 362: Reimagining Civil Engineering Graduate Programs: A Research-to-PracticeApproach for Shaping Future Transportation EngineersMrs. Brittany Lynn Butler-Morton, Rowan UniversityDarby Rose Riley, Rowan University Darby Riley is a doctoral student of engineering education at Rowan University. She has a special interest in issues of diversity and inclusion, especially as they relate to disability and accessibility of education. Her current research is focused on the adoption of pedagogy innovations by instructors, specifically the use of reflections and application of the entrepreneurial mindset. Her
first hand experience of theinfluence of learning style or motivation, then questions of understanding, then a tutorial aboutlearning style or motivation strategies, and finishing with reflection questions and an evaluationof the module. The learning style module creates the “first hand experience” by asking studentsto learn material that is presented in different learning styles. The motivation modulemanipulates task value and control beliefs in its presentation of new material to learn.The modules have been implemented in two mechanical engineering classes: a sophomore levelmanufacturing class and a junior level design processes class. To test the effectiveness of themodules, we compare results from a lifelong learning readiness
learned from the hands-onactivities and reflect back on how this can inform their understanding of, and solutions to, theGrand Challenge (Stage 6).This paper begins with a description of the framework including its foundation in contextuallearning theory and the motivation for using the Grand Challenges. Subsequently, theimplementation of the framework in two engineering courses is described. Details of the learningmodules and activities corresponding to the six stages of the framework are presented for eachcourse. Similarities and differences in implementation are highlighted, illustrating how acommon framework can be applied to seemingly very different courses. Finally, the use of theframework is evaluated in terms of its impact on student
, Energy.Theoretical FramingIn order to investigate the impact of the program on faculty identity and motivation, weemployed the Longitudinal Model of Motivation and Identity (LMMI) to frame our research [8].The LMMI combines Self-Determination Theory [9] and Possible Selves Theory [10] to studymotivation and identity development during an experience. This model gives us the capability toobserve how the program has made an impact on individual faculty members as well as seeingthe impact of the program holistically across the participants.The LMMI has previously been used to study graduate teaching assistants’ motivation andidentity development as teachers [8]. For that work, one data collection measure included havinggraduate teaching assistants reflect on
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Engineering Education Guilds: Understanding Their Vision for InnovationIntroductionThe major aim of this project is to understand how, and the extent to which, engineeringeducation guilds (e.g., the Consortium to Promote Reflection in Engineering Education (CPREE)and the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN)) foster propagation and adoption oftheir respective pedagogical innovations. Engineering education guilds like CPREE and KEENseek to work at the forefront of educational innovation by creating networks of instructor changeagents who design and implement a particular innovation in their own context to further theprofessional formation of