global labor market. Furthermore, the most talented employees arethe ones with the greatest opportunity to be mobile. In this context, academic mobilityrequires a wide variety of personal qualities: talent to interact efficiently with other people;analytical thinking; communicative skills that include cross-cultural communication; thecapacity for self-awareness and self-reflection; a willingness to act in the cross-culturalenvironment; as well as respect and tolerance. An academically mobile student is ready for life changes. This quality is revealed inspecific socio-psychological attitudes [4]. Among other factors that allow for academicmobility, it is necessary to note a students’ capacity for independent design of theireducational
that was determined to be reflective of increasingly greater ability to deliver successfulprofessional fee-based programs.Criteria of this model included elements such as: Years of applicable experience Academic rank Quantity of scholarship Page 26.428.3 Quality of scholarship Years of teachingUnfortunately, as might be expected, there was disagreement between participatingfaculty/instructors on many of these aspects; example being, is one journal article more reputablethan another, or, are “X” conference papers equal in value to “Y” of something else. In the end,this model proved less effective than
circuit analysis courses, the authors of this paper have integrated Analog Discovery-based in- class and out-of –class group exercises in the course curricula. With in-class experiments, the process that leads to student activity and engagement is “learning”, “doing” and “reflecting”, while out-of-class experiments follow “recall”, “doing” and “reflecting”. Research has shown that introducing activity into lectures can significantly improve recall of information 4. In both courses, students were trained on the use of the ADB, after which they were provided the boards for use throughout a semester. The Circuits I course had 21 students in total over the course of two academic semesters; Spring and Fall 2014, and the activity
was always available whenever a break was neededfrom the main project or if an intern wanted to work on their soldering skills.Methodology: Assessment of Innovation as a ProcessWe assessed the overall impact of the internship as a learning intervention to supportmultidisciplinary group participation in innovation and individual learning achievements byapplying three different instruments: a) an exit survey focused on relationships betweenemergent group-dynamics and evidence of innovation-in-practice b) regular “audio-diary”journal entries recorded by participants in response to a weekly repeating prompt c) focus groupexit interviews that prompted participants to not only reflect on what they had gained from theexperience but challenged them
your students engage in the following learning activities? Defining a problem when given probable scenarios Brainstorming Exploring multiple solutions to a problem Evaluating criteria or constraints to a problem Designing models or prototypes Building physical models or prototypes Testing possible solutions to a problem Communicating solutions to a problem in written format Communicating solutions to a problem in oral format Communicating solutions to a problem by formal presentation Reflecting in a notebook or journal Developing a design portfolio Critiquing their own work Critiquing other students' work Reworking solutions based on self or peer evaluation Listening to
groups are not synced, so times do not line up with each otherperfectly (up to 5-minute offsets are likely). The bottom group, Julian and Alex, only have sixcoded turns; this group was difficult to hear on the camera because they spoke very softly,answered many facilitator questions with “I don’t know,” and spent much of the task time offtask building “launchers.” Even so, they had the most successful designs of any group (threeunique designs, one was tested twice).Note that ideas, factors, and designs are related but distinct. While ideas are often reflected indesigns, designs include a multitude of ideas of varying scale, many of which are not explicitlyexpressed. Ideas may or may not be expressed as factors about a design or the test related
encouraging and showed the benefits of VOLTA. Theeffectiveness assessment showed VOLTA students performed better thanthose of traditional lab students in eleven pairs of similar tests. VOLTA students were taught in asimilar way as the traditional lab students, except without any handouts. Outside the lab,VOLTA students obtained help from VOLTA any time and from TAs during office hours. Thetraditional lab students got help from TAs only. VOLTA students received a greater amount ofhelp compared to the traditional students, which was reflected in the effectiveness analysis.The Spring 2015 version of VOLTA achieved p < 0.001, which was much better than the Fall2014 version.The Spring 2015 version of VOLTA had one new feature “Hardware Help”, which
engage students inlearning and allow translation from conceptual knowledge to practice. We propose to use Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs) to develop students’ representational fluency in the cybersecuritydomain. MEAs are activities that intent to simulate real-word client-driven scenarios. And thesuccess of these MEA activities rely on teamwork and the students’ abilities to apply concepts.Properly constructed and implemented MEAs can increase the use of: (1) student reflection toolsin assessments, and (2) learning technologies. MEAs require students to iteratively build, test andrefine their knowledge by encouraging students to build different forms of representations andconnect and translate among them [3]. These activities focus on
currently included in the CCW framework, such as spiritual capital. Thus,we believe that our work has the potential to extend these frameworks.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF), undergrant number 1463808. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin these findings are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.References1. Frehill LM. The Gendered Construction of the Engineering Profession in the United States, 1893-1920. Men Masc. 2004;6(4):383-403. doi:10.1177/1097184X03260963.2. Pawley AL. What counts as “engineering”: Towards a redefinition. In: Pawley AL, Riley DM, eds. Engineering and Social Justice: In
stand behind morals and ethics (n=2) • You must take into consideration all who might be effected by your work (n=2)From these responses we can see that some students were less influenced by the course when itcame to changing their outlook. It is unclear whether the lack of influence reflects that somestudents came into the course already sharing the viewpoint presented and their views did notchange for that reason or whether some inherently disagreed with the notions communicated inthis course and the course did not change their minds. These results may also indicate that greaterrepetition of these messages is necessary before the ideas take hold and they begin to mold moreclosely held beliefs such as their world views. Some examples of
, promotingracial understanding, and helping others in need) are more associated with personality traits. A T-test did not confirm that any of the changes were statistically significant. Possiblereasons may be attributed to: we were unable to match the results of individual participants fromtime 1 to time 2—all responses were anonymous and we did not include a way to match time 1and time 2 responses for each participant; the sample size at time 1 (n = 84) was noticeablysmaller than the sample size at time 2 (n = 115); the time between surveys was only 3 weeks;apart from requiring field observations and testing prototypes with actual children, no otherinterventions were made to promote self-awareness or social-awareness (e.g. critical reflection
engineer- ing philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Initial Results in Developing an Engineering Reasoning Assessment for General EducationDespite the importance of technology to our well-being and the significance of engineeringprinciples to economic prosperity, limited work has been done measuring the degree to whichundergraduate students possess a broad understanding of the principles, products, and processesof technology. While assessments of learning gains within courses that form part of anengineering major have been developed under ABET
numbers were really so huge, I offered him a story, referencing the film The Matrix, and the overarching goal of our work to save the planet with clean energy. “Remember what the Oracle said to Nemo,” I began, then spoke to him directly: “You’re not The One, kid. Sorry.” He quipped, respectfully and with a lop-sided grin: “But he was The One.” Everybody on the team chuckled. It was a turning point for this student, and his progress accelerated after that and concluded with rock-solid engineering work.Almost every student had some level of anxiety which is reflected in the results of a surveyconducted 6 months after the conclusion of their internship. It is clear that the students did notfully appreciate that
that were (at the time of this paper) informally committed. These experienceshave led us to carefully document and reflect on our recruitment experiences and in what followswe present data and analysis of these experiences. In turn, we speculate about the broadercontext that may be generating the unusual difficulties we have faced in securing fieldworkparticipation.Encountering difficulties in mediated recruitmentIn the first phase of research, we employed a direct recruitment strategy, which involved aresearcher directly contacting potential study participants (i.e. new engineers) and asking them tobe involved. While this process yielded eight engineers who consented to be part of the study,none ultimately were enrolled in the study because
from variousethnicities and cultural backgrounds also reflects my very shelteredness in this corner ofcampus. I don’t...there are no international students who take theater. So I don’t engage in thosestudents very often here on campus. So I think we can’t necessarily put that on the studentseither.” He continued, noting that the students did a reasonable amount of research, but that the“biggest barrier for them right now would be for those people to actually test those things.”This theme was strongly reinforced when a cross-cultural group of panelists were invited toattend and critique the students’ final presentations. Panelists remarked several times that theyknew people from the targeted regions on campus, and wondered why none of the
approachencourages collaborative and multidisciplinary learning for the students and helps them acquirethe knowledge and skills necessary to compete in the global market and to contribute to the NSNTfield in an environment that is reflective of today’s workplace.II CoursesFor this project, the collaborators developed and offered two NSNT courses that satisfy electiverequirements for mechanical, chemical, and electrical engineering Bachelor of Science (BS)degrees as well as for chemistry and physics BS degrees. The first course, “Nanoengineering andNanoscience” (cross-listed course numbers: CHEM 431; EE490; ME490; PHYS492) was offeredduring Fall 2015. It covered the fundamentals of nanoscience and nanoparticles based on theirphysical and electronic
time helping to fill a community need. Service-learning combinescommunity engagement, critical reflection, reciprocity, and public dissemination in an effort tocreate effective partnerships2-3.Studies have shown that service-learning is a high-impact practice that increase student effort ina course through the process of solving real-world problems4-6. The application of service-learning to the classroom allows for students to participate in “active, challenging, learningexperiences, experience diversity, interact with faculty and peers about substantive matters,receive more frequent feedback, and discover the relevance of their learning through real-worldexperiences.”2 Additional benefits of service-learning have been found related to
resistance thatwould become evident shortly after the inception of INTO CSU. Unfortunately, this initialsentiment continued to exist in varying degrees among many departments at CSU for severalyears. In the following paragraphs, we describe the journey of ECE in this new context.The ECE journey relative to INTO CSU. In analyzing and reflecting back on the journey of theECE department since INTO CSU came to be, it is possible to identify the following four stages: 1) Resistance 2) Awakening 3) Collaboration 4) InnovationFigure 1. Sample Standard PW for Engineering—UndergraduateFigure 2. Sample Graduate PW in ECE (old version 2012-2015)The stage of resistance. As it should have been predicted, in any organization (big or small)when
prerequisite for validity, refers to the consistency of assessmentscores; validity refers to the degree to which interpretations of scoring are correct andappropriate [12]. Moskal and Leydens [12] describe three types of evidence to support the validity of arubric: content, construct, and criterion-related evidence. Content-related evidence refers to howmuch a student’s assessment response reflects the student’s knowledge of the content area.Construct-related evidence refers to a student’s reasoning process for performing a task orsolving a problem. Criterion-related evidence refers to the extent the results of an assessmentcorrelate with current or future events. Criterion-related evidence are commonly found inengineering courses where classes
device,such as the government. Also, features were accidentally included such as lifespan which shouldbe captured in the stakeholder/feature model, whereas things that reduce the lifespan could havebeen included. An example would be wild animals that accidentally step on the device due to itsuse in the Savannah or birds that defecate on the device, reducing its reflective properties,ultimately diminishing its capability of purifying water. Students also had difficulty with thedirectionality of various interactions. Next, we had the students develop the logical architecture.It seemed fairly obvious to us that the domain model that was developed would influence theinternal components that comprise the logical architecture; however, the students
colleagues. There is a nice balance between realizing that we are students early in our undergraduate career, in the mini-lectures, and fully capable colleagues in the EBL training or researcher seminars… this program provides a hands-on and personal experience unlike a lot of other opportunities. I like that were running our own projects yet we have a professor or graduate student to refer to.There may be a need for more scaffolding related to experiment and research methodology. Thestudents’ lack of experience led to apprehension and anxiety during the research project in spiteof the advising and mentoring resources as expressed by multiple fellows’ reflections: …my least favorite part of the program has been
the outcomes demonstrated by students viathe evaluative components, grades were assigned ranging from A (attainment of all outcomes ata proficient level) to B- (attainment of 1 outcome at a proficient level).Student ProjectsThroughout the course, students were asked to maintain and continuously update a coursejournal. This journal consisted of entries similar to a diary in which students would reflect uponthe broader impacts topic being discussed and record their level of personal interest andalignment of personal values with the goals and impact of that specific broader impacts (BI)activity. The intent here was for the students to identify an area of BI activity that aligned withtheir interests and motivations right from the beginning
engineering careers.AcknolwedgementsWe appreciate the support of Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education and the FirstYear Engineering Honors Program for their support of this study. The views expressed by theauthors do not necessarily reflect the views of these agencies.References[1] Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387.[2] Bennedsen, J., & Caspersen, M. (2008). Model-driven programming. In Reflections on the Teaching ofProgramming (pp. 116-129). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.[3]Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction,assessment, and
full study includes quantitative and qualitative assessmentsin the form of surveys, focus groups with students, and evaluation of student work (lab reports ororal presentations) for quality and content by two external reviewers. Student learning styles(active/reflective, sensing/intuitive, visual/verbal and sequential/global) were also assessed usingthe Index of Learning Styles Survey (ILSS) by Felder and Solomon. Data was collected at threedifferent institutions: a public, land-grant minority serving institution, a private minority servingliberal arts college for women, and a private, predominantly white liberal arts college. A controlgroup of students experienced a traditional laboratory or seminar and an intervention groupexperienced case
court provided evidence based data tosupport their conclusions and a means to assess conceptual understanding in this PBL scenario.Student reflection and instructor feedback in addition to the three tiered framework rubricfacilitated assessment of the student cognitive learning process. Additionally, it was observedfor a seven contact hour a week course that students were engaged in the project between 10-12hours/week gaining more practical, hands-on experience in engineering materials and theirmethods of deterioration. As a result of this experiential learning, the students involved in PBLprojects (as compared to semesters in which students did not use PBL) produced better qualitywork as demonstrated through increased time on task, improved
Lead the Way? o If yes, would you please list the name of the training?• In what areas do you currently hold a teaching endorsement? (Select all that apply) o Physics; Chemistry; Physical Science; Technology and Engineering; Earth Sciences; Environmental Science; Geography; Middle Level Science; Biological Science; Other.• Would you be willing to attend sponsored and funded professional development training at Utah State University to learn and develop engineering curriculum to enhance your existing science curriculum and to address the new engineering standards?• What is your current gender identity?• What permanent population estimate best reflects the area of the school you teach in
engineering andengineering technology programs. This was a sophomore level course, students are usually notquite familiar with airplane components and reflect difficulty in understanding and applying thetheoretical knowledge of statics. In order to strength instruction, tours of adjacent aircrafthangars were conducted to expose students to real aircraft components. Integrating hangar tourswith theoretical instruction and computer-aided analysis is expected to assist students to betterunderstanding theoretical static knowledge and applications in real aerospace environment.Therefore, students would have better understanding of relevant theoretical knowledge and thefuture application environment of theory, as well as the coursework
]ducation must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience… the process andgoal of education are one and the same thing” [10] . Kolb states that learning is best supportedwhen students are engaged in a process that draws their beliefs and ideas about a topic so thatthey can be examined, tested, and integrated with new and more refined ideas [11]. Kolbdescribes learning as a four-stage process: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstractconceptualization and active experimentation. He contents that immediate experience is the basisfor observation and reflection, which is assimilated to abstract concepts, where new ideas andactions can be generated [12].The Skope applications leverage affordances of AR and VR technologies to
velocity and location of moving objects. Finally, students utilizedvarious modules in the lab to integrate graphical user interfaces into their labs and display datagraphically in real time. Students selected as a final project to develop a “cloud in the bottle”experiment in which they pressurized a bottle that contained some water and then measured thepressure and the reflectivity of the “cloud” that developed once the pressure was rapidly reduced. Table I. The stated objectives of the Python Programming class for pre-service teachers. An appreciation for the enabling role of computers and computational thinking in STEM applications. Operational familiarity with elementary Python programming concepts: program control flow, basic and collection
academia after a 22-year engineering career in industry. During his career, Dr. Hamrick served in a broad range of positions in- cluding design, product development, tool and die, manufacturing, sales, and management. His teaching style brings practical, innovative, experience-based learning to the classroom, where hands-on projects that reflect real-world applications are valued by students. His teaching interests include active learning, robotics, and study abroad.Dr. Lizzie Santiago, West Virginia University Lizzie Y. Santiago, Ph.D., is a teaching assistant professor for the freshman engineering program in the Benjamin M. Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources. She holds a Ph.D. in chemical