competency.Therefore, this study addressed the following questions: 1. What changes, if any, occur in students’ abilities to display global competency when using role-playing simulations in a transnational engineering course? 2. How do students change their abilities to display global competency when using role- playing simulations in a transnational engineering course? 3. What are students’ perceptions about the use of role-playing simulation to change their abilities to display global competency in a transnational engineering course?MethodologyThis mixed-methods study used observations, interviews, surveys, and portfolios to addresswhether and how students display global competency using role-playing simulations, if at all,in a
formalcooperative education, internships and research experiences for undergraduates, leads toenhanced self-efficacy, augmented learning, and an increased likelihood of retention, particularlyamong minority students who are historically under-represented in engineering. Self-efficacy,defined as the confidence built on one's prior experiences, has been shown to contribute tostudents' success in undergraduate engineering programs. The current study proceeds to furtherexplore the self-efficacy of three racial/ethnic groups of students, (Caucasian, Asian, andBlack/Hispanic) in terms of three domains, (1) the work environment, (2) career development,and (3) academic success. Multiple discriminant analysis was used to study the separation of thethree groups and
, facilitating the assessment of social integration and assisting the analysis of the departurepuzzle’s factors and informing policy making processes in education. Page 23.1211.2IntroductionEducators of engineers are facing the declining interest of potential students for the field 1, a lackof diversity of those who study engineering 2, and the need to assure that programs effectivelyprepare the graduates for the current engineering challenges 3,4. These conditions motivateeducators to be interested in the understanding of outcomes of engineering programs, and inparticular, persistence of engineering students and its relations with factors that can be
theseprojects, instructors serve as engineering advisors and students are responsible for definingand implementing their projects. Therefore, the success of the projects depends on thestudent.This paper will first assess the extent to which students in the latter final year course adoptand apply the design process skills that were taught in the second year course. It will thenevaluate the impact that adoption of these techniques had on the success of their projects. Tothis end, the benefit of teaching the design process in the second year course can bedetermined.1. IntroductionAlthough engineers perform a wide range of functions including research, test, analysis and
-semester design expo for industry and the public. Team projects range from designssuch as toys or educational modules to assistive technologies with actual or theoretical clients(See Table 1). Project topics are chosen at the discretion of individual professors and differacross the many sections of the course each semester. Students in all sections engage inreflection on their learning in a variety of ways, including journal assignments, an end-of-semester final report, and open-ended post-survey questions. Each section of the course iscapped at a maximum enrollment of 32 students. Table 1. Sample projects in FYEP Project Category Sample ProjectsLocal Community Client Assistive
professionalorganization.Survey Methods/ResultsSurvey questionnaireThe leadership team wanted to begin to understand the involvement of women in the disciplinarysocieties and professional organizations. At the start of the grant, a survey was distributed totenure stream women faculty in Engineering, Natural Science and Social Science. The purposeof the questionnaire was 1) to collect data on the levels of disciplinary involvement of femalefaculty who are tenured and compare those to early career faculty, and 2) identify women whoare leaders in their disciplinary society (elected, appointed roles). All of the women invited toparticipate were promised a summary of the findings. Part of the ADVANCE leadership team’sgoals was to also use the results of the survey as an
status, but not between time and TAs’ discipline affiliation.Recommendations for increasing TA self-efficacy and preparedness are provided as aredirections for future research.1. IntroductionAt large, research-intensive universities, many graduate students receive funding for their studiesthrough assistantships that involve research, teaching, or some combination of the two 1. Thosegraduate students who are funded as TAs are typically asked to become involved in a widespectrum of teaching activities ranging from grading undergraduate student work to serving asthe primary instructor for an undergraduate course1. Teaching opportunities are critical tograduate student development as those who plan to pursue careers in academia are likely to
writtendocumentation. On average about 40% of the total coaching episodes related to professionalskills. Most of these episodes were nested within the context of core disciplinary content andconcepts. The types of feedback given to students included affirmative and corrective feedbackwith specific techniques of elaboration and revoicing. In addition, some discussion was found tobe neutral. When student teams were given directive feedback regarding their written workproducts, this feedback was taken up by the teams almost immediately.IntroductionWhile few studies have actually examined “everyday” engineering practice, professional skills(e.g., teamwork and communication) are believed to be a critical aspect of an engineer’s job 1, 2.Providing students with
learned a lot on thisproject; I didn't get a lot out of doing the project (reverse scored); My understanding of coursematerial was strengthened; I learned a lot by presenting it to others"). The items were rated on a7-point scale (1-strongly disagree, 7-strongly agree), and ratings were averaged to create acomposite self-perceived learning score.To complete the data set, general data was compiled on the student participants including age,citizenship, performance indicators including ACT/SAT scores, AP credit, course grade, GPA,and self-reported gender and race-ethnicity. These three data sets (video analysis, survey andgeneral data) were merged into a single database for analysis.Analysis was performed examining the roles adopted by each student
made without considering theoperational context of the vehicle system 1-5 . These decisions can have significant impacts on theoverall design, the subsequent life-cycle costs, and the safety of stakeholders. Thus, it is criticalto examine how to better incorporate stakeholder requirements and context considerations earlyand throughout the design process.In the final year of most undergraduate curriculum, aerospace engineering students participate ina senior (also known as capstone) design course, which aims to provide an authentic designexperience for the students and to prepare them to overcome design-related challenges duringtheir careers. This authentic experience must introduce students to not only the technical andperformance components
.1 It is often referred to as a transition for the instructor from being a “sage on the stage” to a“guide on the side”.2 The inverted classroom approach has become increasingly common withthe improvement of online educational resources, which are often considered a criticalcomponent.3,4,5 Faculty have described experiences implementing the flipped classroom, mostlypositive.6,7,8 However, little has been reported regarding the effectiveness of the invertedclassroom in a first-year engineering setting.First-year engineering classrooms would appear to lend themselves well to the invertedclassroom approach for several reasons. First, most students do not have previous post-secondaryexperience. Thus, they enter the course with fewer expectations
renewablepower generators. A news report in Britain in the early 2000s cited the dire danger to the Page 23.1222.2emerging renewable energy industry that results as purchasers of power generators experienceperformance and cost recovery far below advertised levels. An informal survey by a high schoolstudent at our lab, conducted in the summer of 2011, studied the advertised performance (ratedpower), rated windspeed and capture area of wind turbines over a large range of sizes. He foundthat for wind turbines with power levels on the order of 1 MW, rated power claims were quiteconservative when viewed against the wind energy contained in the capture area
meetthe Criterion 3b without incorporating any classes in statistics in their curriculums. See for examplethe excerpts from the rubrics created for the Criterion 3b by two programs, in the Table 1a and 1b.Neither of the programs makes any mention about education in statistics. The engineering educatorswho prepared these rubrics seem to miss the point: engineers need training in statistics to be able toplan efficient experiments, analyze data and interpret results.The result is, nearly 85% of graduates from a typical college of engineering (of course, with a fewexceptions) are not trained in statistics. Table 1a: Example 1 of a rubric created to evaluate student accomplishment against Criterion 3b Outcome
education..Figure 1 illustrates th he many opp portunities th hat online edducation can enable whenn strategicalllyenvisioneed, designed d and implem mented. Entiirely new deegree or certiificate progrrams can becreated, reaching r new w students with w new targ geted, authenntic learningg experiencess. Programss thatare well designed d to meet m markett needs and are a effectiveely marketedd can providee new sourcees ofrevenue. More fundaamentally, su uch programms can providde educationnal leadershiip in advanciingthe qualitty of teachin
Page 23.1225.22010-2011 and 2011-2012 academic years.1-10The Curricular Review ProcessUnder the leadership of the Advisory Council for the Engineering School (ACES) consisting ofthe Dean, Associate Dean, and Program Chairs, the faculty completed a thorough review of eachof our four ABET-accredited undergraduate degree programs (CE, CS, EE, and ME) during the2011-2012 academic year. In addition to making sure that our new curricula satisfy the latestABET criteria, including the Student Outcomes (SOs), we followed the guidance provided byour recently developed Program Educational Objectives (PEOs), stated as follows: The School ofEngineering prepares graduates who will: 1. Be successful as practicing professionals in diverse career paths or in
facet of modern life, and they alsohold the key to meeting many of humanity’s most pressing current and future challenges. Yet toofew U.S. workers have strong backgrounds in these fields, and many people lack evenfundamental knowledge of them.” 1 (pg. 1). This quote echoes the sentiments of recent nationaldocuments that have called attention to the need to improve K-12 science and mathematicseducation in order to motivate more students to pursue STEM fields and to ultimately remaincompetitive in this increasingly global economy1-3. As we look to the future prosperity of ournation, we need to be preparing students for the complex and multidisciplinary problems thatface our society today and in the future, and we can help to address this issue by
AdvisingThere were nearly 500,000 undergraduate engineering students in baccalaureate programs in theUS in Fall 2011 1. It is expected that fewer than half of them will have earned engineeringdegrees by 2016 2. This low graduation rate is costly to institutions and has serious implicationsfor our ability to compete in the global economy. Furthermore, matriculation as well asgraduation rates are lower for the country’s growing minority population, particularly AfricanAmerican and Latino students 3. To compound such issues, public universities, often the post-secondary destination for students who are the first in their family to attend college, areundergoing drastic budget cuts, tuition increases, and loss of staff and full-time faculty. Thisreduction
students’ ability to create solid models when givenan assembly drawing and their spatial visualization ability. Students were administered thePSVT:R and the MCT and were then given an assembly drawing and asked to model as many ofthe seven parts as possible during a 110 minute class period. The parts in the assembly ranged incomplexity from a ball to a valve body. Students were given a ruler to measure parts on the B-size drawing and determine sizes of features based on the given scale (2:1). Relationships wereexamined between the PSVT:R, MCT, modeling activity, final project and the final exam. Thispaper will present the results of this study and discuss implications for future research.IntroductionWith the reduced amount of instructional time
distinguish the main successful players in this market and studytheir experience in order to duplicate and multiply it.Kazan National Research TechnologicalUniversity (KNRTU) is one of 29 RussianUniversities with the status of NationalResearch University. Situated in theRepublic of Tatarstan, one of the regionsof Russia with advanced industrialdevelopment and innovations, KNRTU isthe leading Russian university in chemicalengineering. Its history dates back to 1890when the Ministry of Public Education ofthe Russian Empire enacted the resolutionto establish the Integrated Industrial and Figure 1 The Republic of Tatarstan is located 500Technical College. Great attention is miles east of Moscow as shown on the map of thegiven by the
Paper ID #7251The Search for Strategies to Prevent Persistent MisconceptionsDr. Dazhi Yang, Boise State Univeristy Dr. Dazhi Yang is an assistant professor in the Educational Technology Department at Boise State Univer- sity. Prior to coming to BSU, she was a postdoctoral researcher and instructional designer in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her main research interests are (1) instructional strategies and instructional design for teaching difficult concepts and subject areas in STEM education, specially sci- ence and engineering, and (2) learning theories and models, and their roles in the
advancedvideos on calculus and other university-level courses are also available. There areno advanced social networking capabilities other than posting comments on thevideo link itself. Not all of the videos have online exercises linked to them, andthere could be some errors in the videos themselves, which are sometimesannotated with corrections. There are no certificates offered, although there are"energy points" that are given to spur students' motivation in completing videosand assignments. Figure 1 shows a screenshot of the Khan Academy onlineassignment for calculus. One of the advantages of the videos is that they are shortand self-contained, with duration often not exceeding 10 minutes in length.However, more complex topics require several videos
, and (iii) creating many more stakeholders.4What are the standards skillsets that all graduates must know?In 2003, a group of industry engineers and educators formed Standards in Education Task Forcewithin IEEE to find the knowledge and skillset in standards that engineers and technologistsmust acquire before graduation. The process included faculty and student surveys to identify thecurrent state of standards education. The task force made the following recommendation:4 1. Engineering and technology graduates should receive a comprehensive introduction on standards. This includes information on how standards are developed, how they impact the development of product, process, or service and how they benefit a country’s economy
reportStandards for K-12 Engineering Education?7 defines engineering design as an “iterative processthat begins with the identification of a problem and ends with a solution that takes into accountthe identified constraints and meets specifications for desired performance” (p. 6-7). Dym,Agogino, Eris, Frey, and Leifer 11 define engineering design as "a systematic, intelligent processin which designers generate, evaluate, and specify concepts for devices, systems, or processeswhose form and function achieve clients' objectives or users' needs while satisfying a specifiedset of constraints" (p. 104).From the above definitions, engineering can be seen as involving certain traits such as 1)problem identification and understanding of the nature of the problem
natural and formal ordering systems are a good prelude to structural systemsand as such should be emphasized within the Level 1 studio.NCARB requires an introductory understanding of structural systems in Level II Design Studios,a general proficiency in the complete design of simple buildings in Level III and a generalproficiency in the total synthesis of complex buildings including structural systems in Level IV.Since these studios take place in the undergraduate architecture curriculum and in years two,three and four, respectively, it is logical that structures should be taught in years two and three ofthe undergraduate architecture curriculum. Once students understand the basics of statics andstrength of materials, the typical design studio
Post-TestGroup A Out of 8 out of 8 Difference Group B Out of 8 out of 8 Difference 1 3 8 5 1 3 3 0 2 2 7 5 2 1 6 5 3 3 8 5 3 0 5 5 4 1 8 7 4 1 5 4 5 3 8 5 5 2 6 4 6 1 8 7 6 3 5 2 7 3 8 5 7 1
answering the questions that will be asked (from students oradministrators) of any instructor who implements a T-shaped course. Section 1: Practical BarriersCreating a T-shaped course comes with many practical hurdles; there is pressure frompost-graduate needs, ABET requirements, departmental and institutional requirements,and even the politics of faculty load allocation. But, in the spirit of engineering design,constraints are always present and can in fact aid in the development of a T-shapedcourse. As examples, I will provide details on two courses that were offered in atBucknell University in Fall 2012: a required signals and systems course, driven by thedesign of biomusical instruments; and a technical elective co
technology and engineeringcurriculum for Junior and High school aged students in developing countries. Thecurriculum has been developed over a two-year period and was recently implemented forthe second time in the Dominican Republic. Eleven technology and engineeringeducation (TEE) college students from the United States taught the curriculum to fourdifferent grade levels (students were grouped into four courses based on their age: 11 –12 year olds, 13 – 14 year olds, 15 – 16 year olds, and 17 – 18 year olds) during a 5-weeksummer internship program in the Dominican Republic. Various donors, the COSOLAprogram, and the U.S. University sponsored the program. This paper will: 1.) Outline and discuss pre and post findings of the DR studentsfrom a
theparticipants agreed to serve as a control group. Because these eight faculty had applied to theTeaching Circle, we consider selection-bias to be only a minor issue. Further, at the start of theprogram, the attitudes and behaviors of the treatment group faculty were comparable to those ofthe faculty in the control group, so comparing changes in attitude and behavior over the termoffers an indication of the impact of the Teaching Circle. Demographics of faculty in thetreatment and control groups are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Demographics of treatment and control groups Treatment Control
Syllabus1, a cross section of engineering faculty was surveyedand asked to identify professional skills needed and most lacking. The two professional skillsthe faculty identified as needed but lacking in their undergraduate students are TimeManagement and Perseverance to Learn. Time Management is all the skills necessary toorganize work, deliver results on time and generally be viewed as a responsible student.Perseverance to Learn are the skills encompassing a lifelong desire to learn, a willingness and acuriosity to challenge oneself beyond the scope of class.There were a total of 17 categories of skills identified by faculty as lacking. The top six,including the two previously described, were: 1) Time Management 2) Perseverance