librarians now "believe that‘understanding some ethical, legal, economic, and socio-political information issues’ is anelement of IL" [9]. This approach is reflected in the ACRL’s Framework for InformationLiteracy for Higher Education [4].IL instruction for graduate students takes various forms. It can be integrated into a graduatecourse or delivered as a stand-alone workshop. It can also be offered as a one-shot session or as aseries of sessions. The latter offers the opportunity to establish a relationship with students,compared to the one-shot session, and appears to have a much greater impact on studentretention [9, 10]. The course-integrated sessions have the advantage of strengthening the linksbetween librarians and professors and are directly
opportunity for student-driven feedback. The specific questionsare included in Appendix A. The response rate was 57% (19/33 students). Results confirmed thatthe instructions and purpose for the exercises were clear: all students either agreed or stronglyagreed with those statements. Students spent less than 45 minutes on each activity, with themajority (17/19 respondents) spending less than 20 minutes. Open feedback was quite positive.Representative comments include: • “I think the "Creativity!" exercises are a great way to challenge students. They not only get us to think about things in a non-linear fashion but they also allow us to reflect on other parts of life where we go with "the norm" and fail to exercise creativity
engineering curriculum atUniversity of Illinois at Chicago since Fall 2018. In particular, "electrification" of studentprojects and learning outcomes has been front and center in the department's latest strategicplanning. Leveraging recent literature and faculty expertise, an increasingly deeper integration ofArduino has since taken place, while attempting to maintain the core of team-based mechanicaldesign using morphological methods. The focus of this paper is to identify the challenges andpitfalls in such an endeavor by reflecting on the process of change over three semesters ofimplementation, including the deployment of both top-down and bottom-up approaches. Inparticular, this paper will examine course content development, teaching staff
/assignments. Therefore, as part of this study, the participating faculty regularlyengage with two social science research experts in engineering education who serve as mentorsfor survey, focus group, evaluation, and reflection best practices in course design andassessment.In sum, the unique features of the HEPE offer the following features: (i) students working inteams, (ii) students working across disciplines, (iii) students working on an open-ended problem,(iv) students having access to professors from multiple disciplines, and (v) students havingaccess to external expertise and critique. The next section (section 4.2) describes the details ofthe course offering.4.2 Course implementation structureTwenty-one students are enrolled in the initial
one. They design and build it as aprototype. Then they test and revise it to meet the needs of their client successfully. Finally,student groups present their solutions and ideas in the whole class, and they are given time forself-reflection and final revision of their models.3. Implementation of Security Modules with Model-Eliciting Activities3.1 Incorporation of Cyber Security ModulesFor each of the 9 lessons introduced in the CS 1 course, an explanation is provided of how thatlesson was incorporated into the course curriculum. Table 1 presents the lessons and the MEAproject in relation to the chapter of the textbook that is covered at the time that lesson is introduced.The book used for the course was Starting Out With Java: From Control
, and was motivatedby the obvious fact that boosting students with non-thriving behavior earlier in the semester yieldsmore time for them to make substantial adjustments for success. Specifically, identifying andboosting non-thriving students at the end of week four provides each of them with over a week tomake changes before the first exam, which accounts for 15%.The first step in this analysis was to manually calculate an adjusted final grade for each student.This adjusted grade only accounted for scores on each of the homework assignments and twoexams. This adjusted final grade reflected each students’ individual ability compared to the actualfinal grade which accounted for ≈ 50% of group project work, the discernment paper, andparticipation
mentors to create a network of support; iii) reflect on the past to learnmore about oneself and others; and iv) develop new ideas through critical thinking and questioning to becomestronger each day. In effect, EduGuide seeks to develop one’s mind-set, confidence, knowledge, skills,resilience/grit, and self-control, to enhance one’s personal development, understanding of the college culture andwhat it takes to succeed in college.The EduGuide program is used by each STEMGROW student intern throughout the summer and evaluated on theeffectiveness of both the program itself and of the mentors that act as coaches through the online platform. In thismanner, each intern can get coaching and mentoring from all the graduate, undergraduate and faculty
implementing the certification of specialty areas within the civil engineeringprofession.DisclaimerAlthough two of the authors of this paper are corresponding members of the ASCE Committeeon Preparing the Future Civil Engineer (CPFCE), we have developed this paper independently,for the purpose of contributing to the future deliberations of the CPFCE and its TCC. Thus, thispaper reflects only the authors’ personal perspectives and should not be regarded as an officialproduct of either the CPFCE or its TCC.Brief History of Credentialing in the Medical ProfessionIn considering the use of board certification as a tool for advancing the civil engineeringprofession, we begin with a brief examination of why and how credentialing was developed andimplemented
empathized with each other, and teachers’actions and language. Observations also include student notebooks which have lesson reflectionquestions as prompts for connecting lessons, empathy and real-world connections. The thirdmeans of data collection is interviews with students. Participants are asked interview questions atthe end of the program reflecting on the lessons and how they connected empathy andengineering. The interviews consist of questions such as: was there a time during the day whenyou connected with a peer or teacher and learned about how they felt about their project or thetopic at the time? If so, how did this connection affect you? and think back to a time today whenyou were faced with a challenge. What did you do to try and tackle
essential for the creation of attitudesrelated to solving social problems as well as for developing the abilities that could help them. This vision has been appropriated for American engineering curricula considering thatengineering can have a humanistic approach through specific courses or methodologies, theassessment of their activities from a perspective of the ethics, and the reflection about therelationship between engineering and technology, including its impacts [8]. In that sense, themain objective is deconstructing engineering from a utilitarian perspective, based on effectivityand loyalty to institutions, to reconstruct it in a libertarian or communitarian perspective based
could have been used to simulate its real-world applications in a moreauthentic and meaningful manner. Another student reflected as below. Student 1: I was an AP Physics student. So, this wasn’t anything new to me, I guess. But just the way that it [the worksheet] was formatted - I understood the equation - but I know that some of the students had a lot of trouble, since it was a bioengineering class. A lot of kids have a lot of interest in biology, so this wasn’t probably the easiest thing for them to understand.Similarly, it can be seen that while the EV3 brick performed well up to its mandate, it was unableto provide sufficient scaffolding for students for whom the concepts were completely new. Whileat the end, all students were
and reflection in engineering learning, and student development in interdisciplinary and interprofessional spaces.Dr. Nicola W. Sochacka, University of Georgia Dr. Nicola Sochacka is the Associate Director for Research Initiation and Enablement in the Engineering Education Transformations Institute (EETI) in the College of Engineering at UGA. Supported by over 1.5M in funding, Dr. Sochacka’s research interests include systems thinking, diversity, STEAM (STEM + Art) education, and the role of empathy in engineering education and practice. Her work has been recognized through multiple best paper awards and keynote presentations at international and national conferences and workshops.Dr. Stephen Secules, Florida
N N Couple y-component Y N Y N Couple z-component Y N Y NThe last section of the worksheet prompts students to analyze how the reactions must change tomaintain equilibrium when they remove either hinge. Students explore how a reaction couplemust develop when only a single hinge is present and reflect back on how the two hinges worktogether to generate an equivalent couple in the previous configuration. They also consider anddiscuss how changing the direction of the cable tension would affect the system. Figure 5. Activity 3: Two and Three-Force
layouts. To further deepen the learning effect, we allowadjusting parameters for a subset of the layouts so that users can gain instantaneous feedback.P4: Comparison. When studying multiple related concepts, it is often helpful to compare their respective strengthsand weaknesses. For graph visualization, the primary choice lies in the selection of a particular layout to draw agiven graph. GraphVisual supports simultaneous visualization of two different graph layouts of the same data set intwo side-by-side display panels, allowing students to make easy comparison through brushing and linking (i.e., theselection made in one view is dynamically reflected in the other view). Furthermore, the two display panels reactsynchronically to interactions such
voices in computing ensures oursociety grows and develops accordingly.My participation in BPC efforts has benefited me in many ways. It has strengthened myemotional intelligence; developed my capacity for mentoring; and increased my knowledge ofresources available to students, curriculum development, and new technologies for CS education.It encouraged me to reflect on how my career might best align with my passions. I reasoned thatI could have a bigger impact training the voices of the future than being a singular voice that wasnot reflective of a larger community. My participation in BPC efforts expanded my professionalnetwork; it gave me access to many mentors who helped facilitate my transition from industryand into academia as a tenure-track
-2020 - -Surveys were deployed in Fall 2019 to students at every academic level in the civil engineeringundergraduate program (Seniors: 2016-2017 cohort, Juniors: 2017-2018 cohort, Sophomores:2018-2019 cohort, and Freshman: 2019-2020 cohort) to better understand their attitudes andperceptions (STEM confidence, Major Desirability and Reward, and Student Community) to seeif the retention data reflects their perceptions in these dimensions.Table 7 shows the synthesis summary of the students’ favorite and least favorite parts of thecourse. In aggregate, the peer mentored project-based engineering design activity was rated asthe students’ favorite part of the course (53%). The CAD Fusion 360, EXCEL, and MATLABmodules were rated
of their learning experience [4]. The primary objectives of activelearning are to promote student activity and to engage them in the learning process [5], with themost extreme version being project-based or experiential learning. Project-based learningprovides an open-ended project with a variety of problems to solve over the course of anextended period of time. The primary advantage of project-based learning is the opportunity forstudents to experience the activity. However, to classify as experiential learning, students mustalso have an opportunity to reflect and apply what they learn. A survey [6] was sent to approximately 240 civil engineering programs to determine theextent of active learning use in upper-level courses and to
Thinking Process, teamwork skills, andcommunication skills.One limitation of this evaluation is that the findings reflect only the perspective of studentparticipants. This was done deliberately in 2019 to allow the evaluation to focus on gatheringself-reported data from students. However, future evaluations of the Summer Accelerator shouldinclude data collected from multiple sources, including students, program instructors, andparents. This will provide richer information from multiple perspectives on the outcomes forstudents participating in the Summer Accelerator. Additionally, program instructors cancontribute information on the experience of implementing the K-12 IP program over the courseof one week. This information will provide further
officially began in Guthrie on Christmas Eve 1890 in the McKennon Opera House whenTerritorial Governor George W. Steele signed legislation providing for the establishment of anagricultural and mechanical college as well as an agricultural experiment station in PayneCounty, Oklahoma Territory, effective December 25, 1890 [5]. At long last, Stillwater wasdesignated as the location for the college by the designated commission. On May 15, 1957,Oklahoma A&M changed its name Oklahoma State University of Agricultural and AppliedSciences to reflect the broadening scope of curriculum offered. However, the name was quicklyshortened to Oklahoma State University for most purposes, and the "Agricultural & AppliedSciences" name was formally dropped in
fifty or something that’s not reflective of the effort, put in, that would just be discouraging and I think it would probably make me try less, because if I know a hundred percent effort is gonna give me fifty percent of the grade, then I can scale it down, right? I can do less and get about the same. [135_Interview_Lam_M4_2010]But, another found these negative experiences served as fuel to fire their desires to do better inthe course: And for someone to tell you, 'I feel like you didn't—you weren't really as—as on point with the situation as you should have been.' So now that kind of helps me to sit back and think outside of the box and analyze every problem that I'm faced with
engineering knowledge and contribute in a classroom setting.In recalling negative interactions with faculty, students reversed the professor’s role in the struggleagainst the content of the course, positioning faculty as an obstacle rather than a support.Participants described their instructors as making their courses difficult, meticulous, or unfair. Incertain circumstances, students simply described their instructors as being bad teachers. Forexample, Charlie described how the faculty who were adversaries were professors, not teachers.This finding reflects the tension faculty experience between research and teaching, as Alpaya andVerschoorb identified how teaching accomplishments are not perceived as high as other aspectsof their role as faculty
differentiating featureto this PhD degree versus the traditional PhD advertised at University, the Transition Zone™,this degree’s bespoke training program supporting the researchers’ development as the leadersand entrepreneurs of the future, positioned the degree as an attractive option for those pursuing aHigher Education degree. Amongst the non-PhD topic-related skills sought when consideringthis degree, the top three sought-after skills were: • Self-management skills: being able to set SMART objectives for themselves, reflective and reflection on the task (i.e., a past experience) and in the task (i.e., during an experience), record-keeping, sense of ownership as a motivator, leading and motivating oneself. • Business acumen: how to
character test7 Communication8 Case study 19 Critical path and lean concept10 Evaluating and terminating the project11 Guest lectures: invited speakers12 Reflective writingAssignments, due dates (Friday 5:00 pm) and Assessments Due Percentage Assignment Points (pts) (Week) (%) 3, 8, 10, Homework 10 10 14 Midterm 7 25
Junior Year Participant Comparison Discussion and Conclusions We are grateful to the National Science Foundation for supporting the SustainableBridges project. Please note that any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation. The data presented here on the first three cohorts of theEngineering Ahead first-year bridge program for pre-major Engineering students is part of thelarger Sustainable Bridges project (#1525367). The preliminary results are promising for the first three cohorts of the first-year
compact layer), transparent layer, and scattering layer.The following procedure is adopted to produce these layers: i) Titanium diisopropoxidebis(acetylacetonate) solution (with anhydrous ethanol) is deposited on the clean FTO substrate andis subjected to sintering at a temperature above 400 °C to form a compact, electron blocking layer.ii) Then, the transparent layer of TiO2 nanocrystalline (10-15 μm) is screen-printed. iii) to increasethe backscattering, a reflective layer at about 5 μm thick is deposited on the transparent layer; thefilm is further treated with an aqueous solution of TiCl4 to increase the roughness. As the last step,the film is loaded with dye sensitizers to make the photoanode ready for use. Similar to thephotoanode, the
clear, long term goals to complete tasks.11. I had confidence in each team member to contribute his/her fair share of what was required.12. This team helped me understand the material presented in this course.13. Deleted – incomplete question-14. Our team did not function well as a team; we did not establish any process to hold one another accountable nor did I ever know what individuals were responsible for. (Reverse)15. Working on this team made me realize that some things about myself (e.g., communication ability, leadership) that I was not aware of.16. My team reflected upon its goals in order to plan for future work.17. My team used a process/method (e.g., code of cooperation) to hold each member accountable.18. This team
& Exposition, pp. 26.15109.1-26.1519.16, 2015.[10] D. W. Hess, Leadership by Engineers and Scientists: Professional Skills Needed toSucceed in a Changing World, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley/AIChE, 2018.[11] D. W. Hess, “Leadership Skills Awareness and Development via Interactive EngineeringCourses or Workshops”, Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 53(1), pp. 33-41, Winter, 2019.[12] D. Hess, Leadership by Engineers and Scientists: Professional Skills Needed to Succeed ina Changing World, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley/AIChE, 2018, pp. 40-42 and Appendices A and B.[13] A. N. F. Versypt, “Self-evaluation and Reflection for Professional Development of ChEStudents”, Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 53(3), pp. 157-161, Summer, 2019.[14] Kolbe Group: https
amanner that the grades themselves will reflect the students’ mastery of the learning objectivesand that higher levels of collaboration during study can be encouraged.The second-chance examThe second-chance exam varies in two aspects from the first-try exam. Of the nine questions,typically two of them will pivot upon one learning objective or shift to an entirely differentlearning objective within the material to be assessed. Also, in the second-chance exam, the helpsheet is removed as a crutch. Students are asked to depend upon memory through practice for therecollection of basic circuit formulae. The remaining seven questions continue the samerandomization procedures as in the first-try exam. In the fall of 2019, each midterm exam wasfollowed