, 2021, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00479.[51] M. Miletic et al., "Student retention barriers in a chemical engineering program," Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2020, doi: 10.18260/1-2--35239.[52] C. Hubka et al., "A writing in the disciplines approach to technical report writing in chemical engineering laboratory courses," Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2019, doi: 10.18260/1-2-- 32019.[53] C. Hubka, E. Chi, and V. Svihla, "Peer review and reflection in engineering labs: Writing to learn and learning to write," Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering
students to show theyunderstand were first developed by National Academic Advisory Board member Denny Davisand then revised with feedback from other board members, faculty, the TCE Industry AdvisoryBoard and students. Figure 2 is the poster shown on Twin Cities Engineering walls andpresented to all students during incoming student orientation. It is also used as the cover pagefor student portfolios, so is revisited through each of their four semesters as they gather portfolioevidence for each outcome.In gathering portfolio evidence, students go beyond the straightforward administrative task ofgathering copies of work they have done and write a brief statement that reinforces theirlearning. The statement should assert in what way this particular
this hypothesis, wehave developed a novel pedagogical strategy called UnLecture that uses concepts from activelearning and peer instruction to fully integrate students' co-op experiences into their classroomactivities. This technique can also be applied in courses where students have worked ininternships.UnLecture Overview An UnLecture consists of a reflective writing component and a participant-driven discussion.Each UnLecture session is based on a theme directly related to one of the course topics.Typically, an UnLecture on a topic is scheduled after that topic has been covered in an in-classlecture. A rubric is provided to the students a few days prior to the session. The rubric is thecentral element facilitating various components of
write a literature review in the social sciences and engineering, how towrite a research publication, how to select a peer reviewed journal, where to look for funds fortheir research, how to write a research proposal, and science communication. For more see courseschedule in Table 1.Table 1: NRT capstone schedule spring 2021 Week Day Topic Lead M Welcome- interdisciplinary teams formed Engineering faculty 1 W Working in interdisciplinary teams- team goals Education faculty Working in interdisciplinary teams- Engineering faculty M 2 communication W Team work day M
. Theprogram content and products are designed to meet the needs of graduates entering the academy.Second, our goal is to develop a scalable model for working the pipeline issue nationally. Thepeer facilitated structure is cost-effective because it does not require institutional commitment offiscal or human resources. Third, engineering graduate students are more likely to participate ina program that has “face-validity.” Our program is product-oriented and designed to help prepareparticipants for the academic job search. Finally, the program reflects our commitment andenthusiasm for individual writing and peer review as an effective process for balancingindividual reflection and social learning.Our work has not been without challenges. For example
of ● Outline of metacognitive ● Implement yourLearning videos (Teaching possible student activity (logistics, metacognitive activityExperiences: Metacognition to Help responses and identify content) - brainstorm list ● Write short review at theHomework Students Own and metacognition in those of other possibilities; completion of yourBefore Next Improve their Learning: responses focused description of implementationWorkshop Parts 1 and 2) and ● Watch pre-workshop activity showing ● Complete peer complete the provided video on assessing alignment
– The First ExperimentAs previously reported (Peterson, 2001) in the winter semester of 2000 I was assigned to teach agraduate seminar in engineering management for the first time. The course was an elective intwo overlapping master’s programs – one in industrial engineering and one in engineeringmanagement. The course was offered off-campus over a 12-week period. Each class was a threehour and twenty minute block that was to start at 6:00 PM. The catalog’s course description(Western Michigan University, 2000) of the course was as follows: “ISE 622 Industrial Supervision Seminar (3-0) 3 hrs An analysis of the writings, literature, and philosophy concerning line supervision and employee direction in manufacturing industries
stories pertaining to the curriculum to each other, the industry partners, and the VT-PEERS implementation team.Student Reflections: At the closing of all lessons and activities, students are asked to reflect onwhat they learned about the content and about engineering in general. Unfortunately, these oftenbecame rushed in many of the sessions. While an open-ended questions generally invite thegreatest variety of answers, we learned that it also provides difficulties in extracting answersfrom 6th grade students. Some of the challenges included the reading and writing level ofstudents, the time allotted for students to write their reflections, and the understanding of thereflection question itself. While some student answers showed a direct
Initiatives. After graduating in 2015, he joined the BEARS Lab (B&E Applied Research and Science) in the nuclear engineering program at the University of Florida as postdoctoral researcher where he investigated spent fuel storage and cancer treatment. Throughout his graduate and postdoctoral experiences he participated in teaching, student mentorship, and faculty development as an instructor and advocate for learning inno- vation. He joined the Temple University faculty in 2015, where he focuses on Engineering Entrepreneur- ship, Social Networking and Connections in Higher Education, Peer-to-Peer Mentorship, and Open and Inclusive Education.Pete Watkins, Temple University Pete Watkins is an Associate Director in
students in the U.S. come from developing and newlyindustrializing countries, most notably China2. Many students believe that the prestige of adegree from a foreign, especially an American, degree is greater than one from a local institution.Also, with the tremendous growth of U.S. companies setting up manufacturing facilities inChina, a technical degree from an American university is extremely desirable3.In the classroom, many performance studies have been completed. Oakland4 documents thatChinese students are more organized than American counterparts. Chinese students exhibithigher achievement in mathematics than their American counterparts. However, Turner5 foundthat aptitude in critical thinking skills is below their American peers
emails. Poor English writing skills were a commonly cited problem bygraders. There was a dramatic drop in the average grade and a very high standard deviation.The average grade for the peer-graded assignments was a 66.5% versus an 82.5% on the auto-graded assignments. A solution to increase the effectiveness of the peer-graded assessments wasnot adequately found therefore in the subsequent offerings of the course all six weeklyassessments were turned into automatically graded assignments. Thought was given to bringingthe peer assessments back for the campus-based mini-MOOC but the idea was dismissed in favorof the improved assignments that have taken their place.Planned assignments for the Spring 2014 mini-MOOC, and their respective percentage
Content Analysis Guidebook. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC, Melbourne: SAGE, 2002.[20] M. W. Ohland, H. R. Pomeranz, and H. W. Feinstein, "The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness: A New Peer Evaluation Instrument," in American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Chicago, IL., 2006.[21] N. Kidd, T. Parry-Giles, S. Beebe, and W. Mello, "Measuring College Learning in Communication," in Improving Quality in American Higher Education: Learning Outcomes and Assessments for the 21st Century, ed: Jossey-Bass, 2016, p. 189.[22] C. Griffin, "Programs for Writing Across the Curriculum: A Report," College Composition and Communication, vol. 36, pp. 398-403
cohorts through a series ofproject-based learning (PBL) courses. Furthermore, this attempt is enhanced by the introductionof incentives that encourage student involvement in undergraduate research as well as on-campusengineering organizations. The specific focus of the mentorship is on student-studentrelationships in addition to the conventional faculty-student relationships. These relationshipsallow students to learn from each other since they are able to strongly relate to each other’sexperiences among their peer group. The mentoring model proposed in this paper formulates alearning community that allows the student to form a support group and a mechanism forpreventive intervention, as discussed in other studies on mentoring programs. Such
Simulation Trainings. Toanalyze students’ presentation skills improvement through the VR-activity, the authorsconducted peer evaluations for pre and post-activity presentations. Additionally, after the VRactivity, the authors conducted an exit survey, obtaining the students’ perception of theactivity. The data obtained from the different surveys and evaluations allowed the authors to(1) develop an ordered probit regression model to understand the influence of several factorssuch as academic level, gender, first-generation and international status; (2) identify themajor deficiencies in CM students' communication and presentation skills; and (3) assess theeffects of VR-based presentation simulations on CM students’ presentation skills. The
minority students in STEM related fields. The proposed modelspans the educational engineering spectrum, impacting high school students and teachers,undergraduate and graduate students through structured education, research and mentoringactivities. The main components of the present model are: 1) Teaching Teachers to Teach Engineering (T3E) program 2) Peer Undergraduate Mentoring Program (PUMP) 3) Optimization Models for Engineering Research Class 4) Summer Research Experiences for Undergraduates in Engineering Optimization 5) Speaker Seminar Series & Graduate School SeminarFirst, through the participation of high school teachers in the Teaching Teachers to TeachEngineering (T3E) program, teachers benefit by having a tested set of standards
evolved over the past decade focusingon professional skills, such as ethical awareness, and from the reports by the National Academyon the attributes of the engineer of 20202 3. While most engineering students have presumablybeen exposed to an engineering Code of Ethics, it has not been established that this exposure hasa great impact on their future decision making. The ideal outcome, presumably, is that allstudents would be able to recognize a situation, in professional or personal life, that presented anethical dilemma, would be able to analyze the challenge from a variety of perspectives anddiscuss it with relevant peers, and make an informed decision, recognizing the ways in whichthey were adhering to some codes of ethics but perhaps not to
in Norway has collaborated with faculty fromPennsylvania State University to pilot a national workshop (given in English) forNorwegian Ph.D. students on communicating scientific research. Funded primarily byNorwegian industries, the 3-day workshop was divided into three segments: (1) makingresearch presentations to a technical audience, (2) writing research papers anddissertations to technical audiences, and (3) making research presentations to generalaudiences. The first two segments, on making research presentations and writing researchdocuments to technical audiences, were based on a workshop series that was developed atnational laboratories in the U.S., taught to more than 1000 professionals and graduatestudents, and formally
curriculum materials to create a learning environment where all students canfully participate in engineering design? What kinds of classroom norms do we need to establishfor productive engineering work to take place? These questions may be especially important inschools where students do not frequently have opportunities to engage with their peers in thekind of collaborative decision-making required by engineering design. To begin to answer these important questions, we are conducting a multi-year design-basedresearch project investigating engineering language and literacy demands, resources, andsupports in economically disadvantaged urban U.S. elementary classrooms using the EiEcurriculum. This work involves identifying more and less
equations, drawn on chalkboards or whiteboards. In capturing lectures on video however, these traditional props become liabilities: the presenter must turn away from the audience to write or draw on the board, and the presenter’s body often obscures the material. We developed the Lightboard to create visually compelling videotaped lectures, to avoid the liabilities of chalkboards, and furthermore to be able to produce upload-‐ready video segments with no post-‐production. The Lightboard is a glass board, carrying light internally from LED strips along its edges. A video camera captures the presenter and his/her writing by viewing through the
anexpressed interest in ethics, a willingness to participate, and openness about sharing materialswith departmental peers. During the first year, participants hailed from our School ofEngineering and Industrial and Technologies (engineering, engineering technology, andbusiness). The second year drew from the School of Health and the Arts and Sciences(communications, social sciences, mathematics, physics, natural sciences, dental hygiene, andmedical imaging). And for the past two years, faculty were invited from all of these fields. Inaddition, administrators have attended, including the deans from both schools as well as theprovost. Conspicuous administrative involvement has lent support to the whole venture andgiven a tacit seal of approval.I have
, showing interrelationships distinguish, examine, experiment, identify, inventory, justify, organize, present, question, resolve, select, separate, test Synthesis - bringing together Alter, argue, arrange, assemble, change, collect, combine, compose, parts of knowledge to form a construct, create, derive, design, develop, discuss, expand, extend, whole and solve a problem formulate, generalize, manage, modify, organize, plan, prepare, propose, rearrange, recombine, reconstruct, regroup, relate, restate, reorder, set up, summarize, synthesize, write Evaluation - making Agree, appraise, argue, assess, assume
theirreading and writing in class discussions. In addition, scholastic conversation among peers inmore informal settings is encouraged during casual get-togethers. Students often don’t knowhow to create opportunities that allow them to get excited about discussing ideas. A selection ofvideos on appropriate engineering topics (Building Big, To Engineer is Human, Miracles ofDesign, NOVA) is already available at the Loyola-Notre Dame Library, which makes anexcellent starting point for such discussions.Engineering decision-making is practiced under conditions of uncertainty, risk, and moralambiguity. It is therefore natural for controversies to surround both engineering successes andfailures. Critical understanding of the technical and non-technical
to timeconstraints of a school term, and to bring the course more in step with industry approaches by thefollowing:• educating students on techniques for defining a vision of the product (what is it doing and for whom),• placing greater emphasis on the client’s and user’s perspective, the interface design, and interface’s effects upon the rest of the code, and• conducting iterative usability testing, starting early in the project cycle.From inception to completion of the software, these important issues are addressed by teachingstudents to write well-reviewed specifications and user documentation, by beginning this early inthe term, and by using these documents to inform the design.Problem With Software Design CoursesIn the computer
formats acrossheterogeneous computer systems. RPC integrates well within the course framework.The second project is an extension of the local programming paradigm. The students built anapplication to provide remote file service with functionality similar to that of NFS. It includedprimitives for remote file manipulation: open, read, write, and close. Like NFS, the applicationis stateless. This project helped them appreciate the need for a network representation and thesimplicity and power of stateless servers. Further, they realized that the classroom instructionprovides practical concepts useful in building real world applications comparable to popularservices like NFS.3. A Client-Server Project in JavaClassroom instruction provides the
sessions. Assessment is underway to ascertain optimum strategy in incorporating peer-mentoring.Student SupportEnrichment/Research workshop for pre-engineering students is offered every summer. Itis designed to reach out to engineering majors who are academically not prepared toenroll in the science and mathematics courses of engineering curriculum. The motivationis to strengthen students’ academic skills and therefore increasing the likelihood of theirretention in engineering.The five-week long workshop focused on improving students’ Physics, Chemistry andVisualization skills in an inquiry-based/active-learning environment. Upon completion ofeach module in the workshop, students were required to write reports about their subjectmatter. It
inkey capstone exercises, including a mid-semester, peer-based design review as well as a final symposium.This student engagement and undergraduate networking has far reaching benefits, as the studentsinvolved enrich their own experiences and become resources to pass information and critiques along toone another.Our plan for assessing this program and its students involves following the participating studentsthroughout the sophomore, junior and senior years. Students, at varied stages in the curriculum, alongwith their mentors and industry sponsors, will be interviewed to assess the effectiveness of theintroductory course and the influence of early exposure to the capstone experience on their capstoneprojects. Project performance will also be
majors and career fields. The factors that havebeen studied fall into three broad categories: individual attributes(17-20), environmentalconditions(7,21-28), and learning pedagogy(19,23,25,29-31). The academic and career experience forwomen in STEM has been characterized by isolation, a lack of mentors, and a shortage of rolemodels(26). Faculty and peer interactions have substantial influence on the satisfaction andretention of students(2,3,32). Specific faculty influences include the frequency of interaction withfaculty, the quality of teaching by faculty and TAs, and the availability of female faculty and TArole models. Peer interactions affect the classroom climate and influence women’s confidenceand sense of belonging(29). Peer interactions
succeed.Outside-of-class activities that involve online communication tools already familiar to studentslike social media, blogging, and video sharing platforms, are extra useful for breaking the ice andgetting students to know each other. Peer-created content is also useful for fostering community[2]; students can write a blog or post an instructional or response video on a shared drive that thewhole class has access to.Materials made by the professor, such as videos or notes, are more personal than third-partymaterials like textbooks or YouTube videos. Posting original content demonstrates acommitment on the part of the instructor and makes the class unique and memorable. Surveyshave shown that students use virtual office hours not just for content but
– essentially a time & motion study project during their first semester in the MFGE program, every student is on the same footing as none enter the program with prior experience. Whereas we used to assign groups randomly, we now use the rank in class method to motivate underperforming students and give them one final chance to demonstrate subject mastery. • Computer applications project – a project that requires students to develop an Excel spreadsheet to solve an assigned set of engineering problems, write a training & operations manual for the spreadsheet in Word, and present their efforts to their peers using PowerPoint. Because students in the computer applications class come from multiple
Engineering Education"Researchers conducting studies in engineering and science classrooms and laboratories havevalidated many of the techniques used in the learning model. Extensive use of a combination oflecturing, active learning exercises, collaborative learning exercises, and peer instruction is foundthroughout the learning model.The longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention performed at NorthCarolina State University in the Department of Chemical Engineering 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. In the study, acohort of students took five chemical engineering courses taught by the same instructor in fiveconsecutive semesters. There were more than 100 students in the cohort. For this study, thefocus was placed on analyzing: (i.) the success