development and project iterations. This work presents the initial details ofthe project, faculty observations, and future data collection tools for project-based pedagogicalresearch. The goal of the research is to use this project to identify when students self-identify asengineers and what events contribute to their perceived identities. Self-reflections and designcompetence surveys will be collected from the sophomore and junior students participating inthis project and as seniors when they complete their capstone design course starting in Spring2024.KeywordsSelf-efficacy, Project-based Design, Design Project, Mechanical EngineeringNomenclatureSRU—Slippery Rock UniversityME – Mechanical EngineeringPBL – Project-based learningDBL – Design-based
functionality in the extreme weather conditions of high-altitudeballooning and 2) to test the radio range at a VHF/UHF band utilizing an 8 MHz bandwidth forreal-time video streaming, substantial additional efforts were made to convert what was forterrestrial operations to a battery-powered science payload that could properly operate in extremeweather conditions such as high-altitude balloon flights cruising near space. This paper describes our development efforts and lessons learned, and is organized as follows.An overview and key design aspects of the payload systems are described in Section 2 and Section3, respectively. Section 4 presents student reflections on troubleshooting and Section 5 provides abrief analysis of experimental data collected
-being scores upon survey completion,providing them with insights into their own overall well-being and potentially prompting self-reflection on their life purposes. Furthermore, participants were also provided with informationabout university counseling and psychological services as a helpful resource in case they neededany assistance. Strategies and tips were also shared to support students interested in improvingtheir well-being.1. Meaning in Life Questionnaire The Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ), developed by Steger and his colleagues, has received increasing attention in recent years, and is considered a well-vetted and commonly used measure [13]. It has shown robust psychometric properties across diverse cultural, gender, age
variable student experiences thatmay not be represented within this work. Another limitation in the study can be found within thesurvey design. Initially, the project took a deficit framing and developed the survey instrument tocontain questions related to barriers rather than student experiences. In doing this, results may beskewed more towards sharing frustrations or negatively framed experiences in replacement ofauthentic positive experiences that may not have been elicited provided the question framing.Lastly, the students were asked to reflect on experiences at the end of the course, in which theexperience reflected in a student’s response may not be representative of their authentic as timeand other experiences may have skewed memory of
. Aaron W. Johnson, University of Michigan Aaron W. Johnson (he/him) is an Assistant Professor in the Aerospace Engineering Department and a Core Faculty member of the Engineering Education Research Program at the University of Michigan. His lab’s design-based research focuses on how to re-contextualize engineering science engineering courses to better reflect and prepare students for the reality of ill-defined, sociotechnical engineering practice. Their current projects include studying and designing classroom interventions around macroethical issues in aerospace engineering and the productive beginnings of engineering judgment as students create and use mathematical models. Aaron holds a B.S. in Aerospace Engineering
examination. Following each coding session, reflections, emotions, impressions, andinterpretations were recorded in a memo document to note emerging trends. After thepreliminary coding, a second-pass axial coding was conducted on the Excel sheet to identifycommon themes related to the control/treatment group and the decision to stay/leave. Theseemergent codes were discussed with the second author to refine the claims made from the dataand for coding consensus.The authors of this paper have varied experiences with engineering and as members of thegroups we interviewed. The research team of faculty, postdoctoral scholars, graduate students,and undergraduate students included researchers from higher education and engineeringeducation. Three of the
experience. Eighty-seven percent of Seniors (20+ years) reported reasonswhy standards are important. 11The idea is further reinforced by the shifting analytical categories reported by increasing levels(i.e., more years on the job). First, the trend for reasons of Importance seen in the overall data islargely apparent and is reflected in the analytical category Expectations of the Profession whenanalyzed based on Level. As engineers gain experience, the types of technical challenges theyface change, as does the number of challenges they face and their respective knowledge aboutthem. The free-response data suggests this is due to the changing awareness
engineeringpractitioners. Intuition is a skill used by experts in the decision-making process when problemsolving, and believed to develop alongside expertise largely through experience. Previous worksupports that at least six years of experience is necessary for expertise development. Wesubsequently define early-career as up to six years of post-baccalaureate experience and expectthat this population will not yet have expertise and therefore not use intuition. However,research has shown that early-career practitioners who graduated from a primarily undergraduateinstitution (PUI) prior to the onset of COVID-19 both claim expertise and report using intuitionin their decision-making. This unexpected result may be reflective of the PUI’s emphasis onhigh-impact
, reflection, teamwork, and communication skills [3]. And finally, from [6] “We knowfrom research that the more students engage with other students in the class, as well as withprofessors, the more likely they are going to stay and get their baccalaureate degrees.” Boud [3]also suggests that peer learning suits some students better than learning individually, particularlywomen and students from some cultural backgrounds.The approach here is to use CATE to enhance learning in a peer-learning environment. This isintended to provide the many benefits of peer learning without an increased time commitment forthe instructor.Figure 2. A randomly generated circuit and associated step-by-step analysis. The CATE systemincludes an algorithm to select component
. Students can ask any remaining questions they may have 14 Wrap-Up and Reflection about the program and reflect on what they learned about the nature of engineering practice over the semester.Example Lecture: Week 3 – Differentiating STEM Fields Since the first year of most engineering programs consists of mainly science and mathematicscourses, it was pertinent to explicitly describe how engineering is different from these fields and howtechnology interacts with them. The lecture extended these topics to also cover STEAM, where the ‘A’stands for art. The notion of combining art into these fields that are usually viewed as inartistic hasdiscovered a resurgence in the importance of
, “Possible astronomical alignments at Tsiping, New Mexico, a lateAnasazi site.” Bulletin of the Astronomical Society, 12, 886, Sep. 1980.[8] D. Thomas, “Reflections on Inclusive Language and Indexing.” Key Words, 28(4), 14–18,Win. 2020.[9] D. Thomas, “Another Look in the Mirror: Correction to Reflections on Inclusive Languageand Indexing.” Key Words, 29(2), 26, Sum. 2021.[10] C. A. Metoyer, and S. Littletree, “Knowledge Organization from an Indigenous Perspective:The Mashantucket Pequot Thesaurus of American Indian Terminology Project.” Cataloging &Classification Quarterly, 53(5/6), 640–657, Jul./Sep. 2015, doi:10.1080/01639374.2015.1010113[11] M. Ewing, “Representing Historically Marginalized Communities in Archives: MovingBeyond LCSH to Create
broadly. (2) Do these ECE masters students feel equipped to handle the ethical challenges and dilemmasof AI technologies? As they reflect on their past and current training in engineering acrossinstitutional contexts (including but not limited to their formal engineering education and workexperiences), do these students feel as though they are receiving the training and guidance thatthey need to navigate the complex landscape of AI development and management? Or do theyfeel ill-equipped to face these ethical and professional challenges, even if they have the technicalcapabilities to engage in this work?(3) To what extent do they hold their engineering education programs accountable for(in)adequate training? If ECE masters students express concern
demonstrates aprevalence of studies regarding interactions in the online context. These studies have providedimportant observations of how increased interactions relate to performance for remote and/orhybrid instruction overall [12], [13], [14]. However, we believe that this emphasis on onlineinteraction over f2f interaction may not reflect the scale of research need, but the ease of datacollection for SNA regarding online interactions. Specifically, f2f interactions are a less studied,but major component of students’ interactions.To overcome these issues, our research group, familiar with SNA from small studies, conducteda large-scale (1000+ individuals) SNA study at a large, public university in the United States[15]. This study sought to extend the
opportunity between engineering and the arts through thedevelopment of a “Special Topics: Interactive Fiction” course was developed and subsequentlyapproved by the curriculum committees of both colleges for the 2022-2023 academic year. Whilethe remainder of this paper focuses on this Interactive Fiction course, the authors want toacknowledge the key roles played by the instructors involved in these preceding courses.2023 - Interactive Fiction: Goals and LogisticsThe two primary goals for the Interactive Fiction course were (1) for students to learn how to usea natural language software platform, such as Inform [30], to design an interactive game in a waythat reflects the diversity of cultures and experiences encountered during the era of
from theperceived importance of empathy as a professional skill where the lowest selected importancewas ‘moderately important’. However, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p =0.080). This result is again inline with those of faculty and staff (p = 0.976) with sevenrespondents identifying teaching empathy as slight important or not at all important even though‘very important’ was the most frequent response (n = 12) [40].Figure 2. Graduate students’ identified importance of teaching empathy.This wider range of opinions on the importance of teaching empathy was reflected in surveyresponses where some saw empathy as not important to prioritize in engineering education:“This is an important skill, but not something that needs
help-seeking beliefs among underrepresentedstudents is critical; opinions about pursuing professional treatment for a mental health conditionmay be affected by gender, race, ethnicity, disability status, and socioeconomic status. Further,data was collected from first-year engineering students at the end of their first semester of collegeclasses. Therefore, the results may not reflect the students’ progress through the engineeringprogram. To address this, future directions plan to include a wider range of students from otherinstitutions and a higher proportion of students from racial and ethnic minority groups. As a result,we will be able to learn more about the mental health of marginalized student groups and theeffects of institutional
Matthew M. Grondin1,2, Michael I. Swart2, Claire Huggett1, Kate Fu1, and Mitchell J. Nathan2 Department of Mechanical Engineering1 Department of Educational Psychology-Learning Sciences2 University of Wisconsin-MadisonKeywords: Epistemic Network Analysis, Mechanical Reasoning, Mechanics of Materials,Undergraduate Engineering EducationAbstract:This full paper considers how collaborative discourse can reveal ways upper-class engineeringstudents mechanically reason about engineering concepts. Argumentation and negotiation duringcollaborative, multimodal discourse using speech and gestures helps establish common groundbetween learners and fosters reflection on their conceptual
information and expertisewith their peers, and peers serve as positive role models for social comparison [5]. Additionally,peer mentoring encourages self-reflection and enhances collaboration with others [6]. Reciprocallearning is engendered through improving comprehension and fostering social interactions [7]. Ina study of first-generation college students, peer mentoring was found to contribute to buildingfive practices of exemplary leaders: enabling others to act by strengthening confidence andcompetence, modeling the way by facilitating discussions and sharing experiences, challengingthe process by adapting as pitfalls are encountered, encouraging the heart by recognizing andappreciating personal contributions of peers, and inspiring a shared
conclusions about real-world problems.a The “short name” indicates an abbreviated name of the outcome for use in the presentation of the data.For the student survey, two additional reflective questions were included. These questions askedstudents to reflect on their weaknesses in the lab learning outcomes as well as any weaknessesthey perceived in their departmental curriculum for these learning outcomes. These questionswere included to get the views of students currently in the programs, as these views may differfrom the views of faculty in the programs and alumni perceptions may be skewed by changes tocurricula over time and time since graduation.The survey design was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at University ofKentucky. The
by the SET dean during the program application and approval process,Dr. Dillon had to fine-tune the ME curriculum once she arrived. Then as new faculty were beingadded the second year, she turned over the detailed course design to them, one by one, as theywere brought on board. However, before diving in too far to the detailed course design, the firststep for the new group was to determine a set of program educational objectives (PEOs) alongwith a corresponding set of desired student outcomes (SOs) that could help the program meetthese PEOs. The PEOs were developed with input from the industry advisory board to reflect themission of the new program. Next, the founding faculty mapped the PEOs to the ABET criteriato assure full coverage
should provide good opportunities to learn aboutcomplexities and contexts. Similarly, Merriam [9] reminds that the cases need to be selectedbased on relevant criteria, which means the researcher must first determine what selectioncriteria are essential in choosing the people or sites to be studied [17]. The criteria you establishdirectly reflects the purpose of the study and guide in the identification of information-rich cases[17].Additionally, in case study research, it is important to consider two levels of sampling [9].Firstly, the researcher identifies the case, which can be a person, a program, a university, amongothers. Secondly, within each case exists numerous sources of data, so the researcher needs toselect how to better approach that
. Meanwhile, greater attention should be devoted todeveloping advanced assessment techniques to detect dishonesty and academic misconduct.From the perspective of curriculum design, it also suggests investigating how future courses canbe designed to adapt to the development of such technology.AcknowledgmentThis material is based upon work supported by the Nanyang Technological University under theURECA Undergraduate Research Programme and partially supported by the AI.R-NISTH AI forSocial Good Research Grant at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. Any opinions,findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s)and do not necessarily reflect the views of the URECA or AI.R program. We would like
]. Asset Driven Equitable Partnerships – ADEP in Practice (WIP)Participating faculty from the two IEC Core MSI schools were asked to reflect on theirexperiences in this program by applying the ADEP Rubric (see Appendix for more details on therubric).Petru Andrei, from FAMU, had the following response. “I think this was a wonderful project. Ithas also increased the collaboration between the PIs/universities more than I expected.“The 8 items in the rubric were clearly addressed during the project.“For instance, in our first couple of meetings we identified the strengths that each of the PIscould bring to the project in multiple online presentations and Zoom meetings and we decidedwhat each faculty was supposed to do throughout the project. We did it
descriptions of troubleshooting techniquesmore accurate and reflective of student actions. Tab. 1 summarizes the final codebook.3.3 Exercise DesignFollowing Van De Bogart et al. [17], we designed an authentic troubleshooting exercise with pre-set faults of varying difficulty. We started with a circuit similar to that used in [17], but addedcomponents and faults in an attempt to elicit a wider range of troubleshooting strategies.Fig. 1 depicts the correct circuit diagram. This circuit can be split into three main parts. The firststage is an operational amplifier (op amp) configured as a voltage follower, meaning the outputshould exactly track the input within the limits of operation. When functioning properly, this stagedoes nothing to the input
for wording survey questions inan accessible manner [40]. Our survey instrument consists of three parts, which we explain ingreater detail below.Terminology. Our survey begins with an assessment of participants’ understanding of softwareengineering terminology. This section of the survey begins with the following prompt: This section of the survey asks about how you understand terms from the field of software engineering. To ensure that your response reflects your understanding, please do not look up the meaning of these terms until you have completed the survey. Consider each of the following topics within the context of developing software. What words, phrases, or concepts come to mind?The survey then presents each
previous experience in which Phet Simulationswere introduced under a modified version of the ILD methodology. Figure 1 shows a schematicview of the roles, activities, and modalities for the innovation sequence implemented. Notice thatthis instructional strategy requires both individual reflection and group discussion, takingadvantage of each technique [16]. Instructor Students Small groups •Pose a physical •Students •Students use Phet to situation so that individually work on a practice students can make a analyze the related to their prediction under
Calculus 1A Calculus 2A Calculus 1B Calculus 2B English Sequence English Sequence Computer Science 1 Computer Science 2financial savings, this option facilitates swifter access to advanced degrees, reflecting the program’scommitment to flexibility, excellence, and academic prowess.A. First-Year CurriculumThe first-year curriculum for our Data Science program was designed to closely match both the first yearsof our current Computer Science and Applied Mathematics programs. At Wentworth, students choosetheir major before matriculation. This synchronization of the programs allows students the flexibility toswitch between programs seamlessly
done through interviews with students, thereby generating the version ofthe instrument used in this pilot study.At this stage of the validation process, the instrument's reliability presents a Cronbach's alphaof 0.860, reflecting high item consistency. However, the reliability calculated for the differenttheoretical dimensions of the instrument shows some Cronbach's alpha values that are notsatisfactory (Table 1). Therefore, as the validation work on the instrument continues, resultswill only be reported for the "Developmental leadership," "Conventional-positive leadership,"and "Conventional-negative leadership" dimensions, which are also the most relevantaccording to the objectives set for the current study. Table 1. Instrument
-building workshops so students can put theoryinto practice, improve their confidence and knowledge, and build community.The ITLP intentionally considers how to make the lab an inclusive and safe space, and itsassessments have included non-cognitive aspects of user experiences. At the end of each term,students and faculty respond to approximately 20 closed-ended and four open-ended questions toprovide qualitative feedback about access, usage, satisfaction, the physical spaces, and technicalstaff. One student user noted, “Every year the ITLP strives to make the spaces better.” Otherstudents reflected, “Staff is approachable and friendly”; “I was never afraid to ask for help… [itfelt] like a safe place to fail”; “Inclusive; a very good place to turn
Grant Nos.2024301 and 2130924. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation.References[1] D. MacMillan and M. Laris, “After midair failure, critics ask: Did Boeing learn from Max crashes?,” Washington Post, Jan. 12, 2024. Accessed: Feb. 07, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/01/12/boeing-max-safety-crashes/[2] N. Kallioinen et al., “Moral Judgements on the Actions of Self-Driving Cars and Human Drivers in Dilemma Situations From Different Perspectives,” Front. Psychol., vol. 10, p. 2415, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02415.[3] W. T. Lynch and R