, Walden, & Trytten, 2007; Secules, Gupta, Elby, & Turpen, 2018). Our team has been engaged in the iterative redesign of a pedagogy seminar for engineering peer educators working within a college-level introduction to engineering design course. Using tools of discourse analysis, we analyze how technocratic stances are reproduced or challenged in engineering peer educators’ talk during pedagogy seminar discussions. We study peer educators, in particular, because they are in a unique position to do harm if the ideologies of meritocracy and technocracy aren't challenged. Likewise, they are in a unique position to do good if they actively disrupt these ideologies in
development in chemical engineering at a large publicuniversity. The topical content which has been developed may also be used “À la carte” forincorporating elements into existing engineering courses if there is not room in the curriculumfor an integrated course of this type. The complete course content, including the syllabus,subject matter presentations, assignments, and relevant links, is available on a public web sitefor use by engineering instructors: (www.courses.ncsu.edu/che395). Course evaluationsindicate that students assign high values to this required seminar.IntroductionEngineering departments employ different strategies for introducing soft skills such as writing,oral presentation, teamwork, information literacy, and ethics. A frequently
are their client, and graduates are their final product.There are experiences and skills developed from working in industry that can help a new facultymember in transitioning to an academic position [2, 4]. These include flexibility, trying newthings, having an enthusiastic attitude, and effective time management [5]. Conversely, thereare certain skills that could be helpful to a new academic that are not likely to have beendeveloped while in an industrial position [3]. These skills or experiences include motivatingstudents to learn, assisting struggling students, effective course planning and delivery, starting anindependent research program, obtaining external funding, writing rigorous assignments andtests, handling students in the
Bloom were studied and discussed. An essential component was cooperative and active learning techniques. This included course design for cooperative learning and task design for effective structuring of cooperative learning activities. Students were exposed to a novel method of CL management that has been developed at WPI. For the past three years, we have had a grant from the Davis Educational Foundation to improve educational quality and faculty productivity through peer-assisted cooperative learning. In the Davis model, qualified upperclass undergraduates are hired to serve as peer learning assistants (PLAs) in courses where cooperative learning structures are used extensively. These
- tor in the Office of Research and Sponsored Projects at The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). As manager for the CAHSI INCLUDES Alliance, she works on a national basis to coordinate and motivate regional leads; facilitate CAHSI’s External Advisory Board; and serve as a liaison to CAHSI’s policy team, all so that CAHSI’s 60 partners can collectively realize the Alliance’s vision of Hispanics repre- senting 20% or more of those who earn credentials in computing by the year 2030. In her role in UTEP’s Office of Research and Sponsored Projects, Elizabeth assembles interdisciplinary project teams and em- beds herself within them in order to conceptualize, write, and submit large, institutional grant proposals
are difficult for a variety of reasons, including the lackof preparation and experience that new faculty members have for various aspects of the job.Much advice has been given regarding the use of mentoring and workshops to accelerate theacclimatization period, but these methods may not involve the relaxed atmosphere and opendiscussion conducive to the development and free exchange of ideas and ideologies. In thispaper, we discuss our approach of regular peer meetings of such discussions. Peer meetingspromote the discussion of problems encountered by new faculty as the problems develop. Notonly does discussing problems in such meetings assist in the creation of solutions, but everyonewho participates in the discussion is thereafter prepared
students, and an endorsement of the goals andobjectives of the TiPi program.In Fall 2012, we awarded 25 scholarships to transfer students in the TiPi program. In Fall 2013,we awarded another set of 25 scholarships to new transfer students in our engineering andtechnology programs. This paper describes the characteristics of these 50 scholars, comparestheir academic performance relative to their peers, and their placement in paid cooperativeemployment positions.IntroductionIn March 2012, the National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded our university a four-year grantof $599,984 with the grant period beginning in June 2012 for a project titled TiPi: Engineering& Engineering Technology Pipeline. The TiPi project focuses on students who wish to
their peers, their management, various internal and external customers, and thegeneral public by corresponding, instructing, analyzing, researching, and presenting. Visuals anddocument design features as well as state-of-the-art hardware and software enhance anengineer’s ability to effectively communicate. Effective use of these tools requires knowledge of(1) what tools are available, (2) how to best integrate these tools, and, most importantly, (3)how the reader and listener best grasp written and orally communicated information.This paper describes a systems approach to integrating technical communication with theengineering curriculum. To introduce this approach, the basic theory behind systemsthinking—including systems methodologies and
experience.Successful programs, projects, and research at premier engineering schools around thecountry are equipping students with the advanced creative and cognitive abilities requiredto succeed as contemporary professionals. This paper is a review of the innovative, multi-disciplinary, educational methodology that is manifest in several types of new efforts,including: 1) Engineering design in a studio atmosphere; 2) Engineering courses forcreative problem-solving; 3) Encouraging creativity and insight through journal writing; 4)The agenda for creativity at the UK Centre for Materials Education; and 5) A focus on thepersonal creative process. Research for this review inspired The Creativity, Innovation,and Design Report, a new national publication dedicated
scholarly work involves a team of students and facultymembers from diverse groups, backgrounds, departments, and institutions. The legal andinstitutional consequences of non-conformance can be disastrous for a researcher’s career,profession, and reputation. A clear understanding of proper citation and fair use of sourcesbecame increasingly challenging as reported by finding agencies evidenced by the increase inimproper use of citations.The objective of this work is to develop a systematic process to manage scholarly literature andensure fair use and proper citations in scholarly writing. The paper will consider three importantelements for managing the literature review of prior works: managing literature, fair use, andteam writing. A checklist for
distance delivery at peer institutions isincluded to examine research and writing requirements common in CM programs with distancedelivery. Detail of corrective actions that have been implemented with limited effect areprovided. Finally, the program change for the most recent cohort of students enrolled in theprogram to a guided capstone academic writing activity under the direction of a single facultymember is described.IntroductionGraduate education in Construction Management (CM) has been slow to develop. In the yearssince the American Council for Construction Education (ACCE) was organized in 1974 by theAmerican Institute of Constructors (AIC) and the Associated Schools of Construction (ASC), ithas accredited undergraduate programs that
studies and professional practice, little has been done tointegrate IL to engineering curriculum.Research Questions:Does intentional information literacy instruction impact the quality of research produced by first-year students? Does the type of intervention make a difference?To operationalize these questions, the level of synthesis, quality of citations, as well as thewriting conventions were examined. The writing convention would be the primary level of IL inthe instruction. Can students use proper formatting and write a foundational piece of research.The quality and quantity of the citations, as well as their level of relation to the topic shows adeeper level of understanding and implementation of the IL instruction. The synthesis level ofthe
of eachcourse is reflected in their respective titles. The first course in the sequence is titled,“Engineering: The Art of Creating Change”. The title of the second is: “Engineering Projects:The Practice of the Art”.Both courses use assigned reading followed by reflection, writing, and discussion related to adebatable question (or questions) posed by the instructor. Section size is limited to 25 students.A relatively senior member of the regular faculty and one teaching assistant facilitate classdiscussion using Socratic questioning.Both courses also use design projects as vehicles in developing student understanding of keyconcepts. In the first, the course requirements manage student-team project activities; in thesecond, the student-teams
based physics courses (Physics I and II). This has allowed me the unique opportunity to teach most of the students in Clemson's undergraduate engineering program. I have also taught a few Physics majors courses. Since 2017, I have also participated in Clemson engineering's PEER/WISE experience (PWE) which seeks to prepare incoming freshmen (especially under-represented groups) for the rigors of college life. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com Promoting Women and Minorities in Engineering: A Summer Program for Incoming FreshmenAbstractSince 2017 our institution has hosted, through a special
shares someelements with collaborative learning or peer tutoring4: it provides a “social context” and a“community of knowledgeable peers” (p. 644) that students can participate in, even ifthat participation is simply sitting in the audience or watching a video of one of theirpeers presenting. Participation in the social context and community is not always passive,however. As will be described below in the ‘Results of student surveys’ section, Idol somotivated one of the prize-winners that he organized a series of Idol-preparationworkshops to coach his classmates for the competition.Since students, even those who did not attend the Idol-preparation workshops, seemedmotivated by their peers’ Idol presentations, we became interested in which
the instructors and helping support all thestudents, the assignment of three sub-groups created a clear structure where students had pointsof contact in between sessions, and for subsequent break-out sessions or activities which requiredgroups, it was easy to fall into these mentor groups. It should be noted that all Peer Mentors hadreceived training in the Guaranteed 4.0 Program and were able to check students’ bullet pointnotes and other assignments. In this week, the instructor lectured on the concept of forming goals using the“S.M.A.R.T” technique. Students were tasked with writing down goals for the semester and/oryear, and then reviewing a few ancillary resources online about the acronym of “S.M.A.R.T.”They were then tasked with
open-ended work. This includes writing exercises,13 designproblems, and program code.14 Available peer-review tools include Calibrated Peer Review, PeerScholar, Sword, and the author’s Expertiza15 system. If assignments are done in teams, one cangauge the contributions of various members by having the students assess each team member’scontribution to the project. The CATME application16 is useful for this.New pedagogiesIn the last twenty years, a variety of techniques have been developed for helping students towork in groups. Their purpose is to promote active learning, but they also serve to discourage Page 23.1151.8
two 100-level engineering courses, an algebra-based physics course, and acollege algebra course. Otherwise, all other courses they take are the same as those offered inthe 4-year curriculum. The 5-year program also has the advantage of a lower credit load persemester which allows these students more study time per course. The three main goals of thefreshman curriculum developed for this program are to provide these students with (1) the skillsthey will need to compete with their peers in the 4-year program, (2) immediate contact with theengineering faculty and peer students, and (3) an introduction to the rigor and commitmentrequired to successfully complete an engineering program. The first 100-level engineeringcourse focuses on the
leadership studies at North Carolina A&T State University. Her research interests include multi-criteria decision making, intellectual sustainability in higher education, corporate social responsibility and ethics, and East Asian higher education systems. She has presented numerous workshops on issues related to minority affairs, graduate admissions and funding opportunities, intellectual capital management and investment, core professional development competencies, and graduate research and teaching assistant training and assessment.Dr. Shea Bigsby, North Carolina A&T State University Dr. Shea Bigsby is the Coordinator of Graduate Writing Services in the Graduate College at North Car- olina A&T State
generaldiscussion forum, a Professor Digest (for our own reflections), and a forum focused on studentssharing their creative journeys. For logistical support, we also set up a forum where studentscould self-organize study groups, as well as forums to address technical issues, errors in coursematerials, and suggestions/complaints about the course. The discussion forums served as themain mechanism for peer assessment of projects (for Adventurers), as we will discuss later.The Idea CloudIn addition to our own core content, we also posted supplemental writings and videos in aseparate section within the MOOC site called the Idea Cloud. Some of the videos were invitedguest speakers from our own professional networks, whose expert commentary served asvaluable
., & Kidd, J., “Implementing Peer-Review Activities forEngineering Writing Assignments”, in Proceedings of the 2017 American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference, Columbus, Ohio, 2017. Available:https://peer.asee.org/28483AppendixTable A. Lab 5 Report Assessment Rubric Your lab report score (130 max) = (AA score + CCT score + TC score)×5 + 70 Novice (1) Competent (2) Proficient (3) Exemplary (4) Audience The writer establishes The writer is The writer mentions The writer clearly outlines Awareness no purpose or clear somewhat effective objectives of the report the objectives of the report (AA
needto grow in concert with these technological changes in order to adjust to, and have someinfluence on, what may well be a new social order. It seems likely that we are at the threshold ofyet another period of unparalleled growth and change, and our engineering curricula need toprepare students not simply for the technical work they will do, but for the engineering lifestylethey will live. For some time now, engineering educators have recognized the practicalities of teachingpersonal skills that allow young engineers to practice their craft in a complex work environment.Instruction in ethics, 1,2 management skills,3 critical writing skills, 4,5 problem solving,5 andvalues clarification6 have begun to take their legitimate place in
demonstratedesign knowledge, students recognize the faux nature of these assignments. 3, 4, 5 Numerousstudies have concluded that students execute communication activities with greater motivationand meaning when situated in actual industry settings. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Further, recent quantitativeresearch on the actual writing practices and values of working engineers suggests that the typesand nature of documents most often assigned in typical design courses—proposals and reports—do not accurately reflect current industry practice, and do not fully prepare students for theirwriting tasks after graduation. 9 Thus, both the writing contexts and the writing assignments aresubstantially different in the design course reviewed, and include summaries, meeting
community of practice that embodies professional diversity and excellence and ensures a personal commitment by those selected to participate. • Utilize pre-travel activities to present learning materials, webinars, and required assignments that establish baseline knowledge, foster peer relationships, and build the context for the international experience. This front-end work also helps ensure the best use of valuable time abroad. • Ensure knowledge capture and retention by requiring daily writing exercises while traveling. • Utilize post-travel assignments to support integration of acquired knowledge into participants' professional and instructional practices. Setting personal learning goals prior
American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Effective Teamwork Dynamics in a Unit Operations Laboratory Course1. IntroductionThe Chemical Engineering Unit Operations Laboratory is a unique course that relies heavily on acooperative team effort for successful learning that leads to a compelling laboratoryexperience[1-3]. In this course, team assignments play a critical role in the performance of agroup because every laboratory session involves peer interactions, hands-on experimentationfrom start to finish, data analysis and discussion, and a significant amount of writing time, i.e., aworkload that is intentionally more than one individual is expected to manage. The dauntingworkload for this course should
for Engineering Educationlessons will quell most student anxiety. No matter when the lesson objectives are provided to thestudents, the lesson objectives must be assessed at the conclusion of each lesson.The table usually following each hint presents feedback or assessment from peers and students,as well as self-assessment at the conclusion of a lesson and a block of lessons. Review of theassessments for the team members over the past year provided valuable insight for each hint. Establish Lesson-Learning Objectives Peer Self Student • Always write them on • Important to give the • The lesson objectives
brought about by our redesign, and wouldencourage our colleagues to consider how to center community building within the design ofengineering courses as we have shown in this case.IntroductionPrior to the broad shift to online teaching in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, students whoselected to be online learners were quite different than students who chose in-person courses.Online learners tended to be older [1], [2]–seeking convenience of asynchronous learningenvironments [1] while they balanced work with their education [2]–as compared to residentialstudents who were more traditional aged and sought face-to-face connection with their peers andinstructors [3]. Since 2019, the group of students who are online learners has become larger andmore
, faculty can encounter difficulty ensuring individualgrades reflect the quantity and value of individual work and not just the collective grade of thegroup. This paper outlines the various steps the mechanical engineering faculty took to provide amore standardized, objective, fair grading process in the capstone course. These steps includeuse of a non-numeric rubric for grading briefings, graded peer reviews, a more objective rubricfor grading written documents, and the use of course directors to standardize the grading process.Introduction The mechanical engineering curriculum at the United States Military Academy (USMA)includes a capstone design project as a culminating experience that draws on fundamentalengineering concepts students have
both a large scale, hands-on, team-based curricularcomponent, and a residential-based, co-curricular component. The goal of this program is tograduate engineering students with knowledge, experiences and mindsets that prepare them tofunction in the rapidly changing global engineering world of the 2000s. The development andcomponents of this program, other than the industry engagement described herein, have beenpreviously reported1,2. A brief summary and update is included to provide context for the rest ofthis paper.The engineering education literature has provided many summaries of living-learning programsin recent years 3-6. Common features of these programs typically include scheduling certainclasses in common, tutoring, peer mentoring
Experience in a First-Year Engineering CourseAbstractThis research paper describes the integration of design experience in a first-yearengineering course at University of Michigan-Flint. To develop knowledge and skillswithin first-year engineering students, the integration of design curriculum inintroductory engineering courses is important. A study was conducted among the first-year students who worked in teams with senior students on engineering capstone projects.The primary objective was to provide a comprehensive experience in product design anddevelopment processes such as teamwork, design, analysis, manufacturing, etc. Anotherobjective was to develop a peer-mentor relationship between these students to