experiment(s) were clear to 2 5 2.67 1.11 1.22 me at all time. 29 I have had many difficulties with the server and 1 4 2.5 0.96 0.92 technical re- VISIR. strictions 30 The response time of the system was adequate. 3 5 4 0.82 0.67 31 I found it difficult to find time to carry out the ex- 1 4 2.67 1.11 1.22 periments allocated. 32 VISIR worked without any problems. 3 4 3.5 0.5 0.25In addition to the closed questions presented in Table 1, the students were asked to
interpersonal behaviours of leadership for early-career engineers,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. In Press, 2019.[4] R. Agarwal, C. . Angst, and M. Magni, “The performance impacts of coaching: A multilevel analysis using hierarchical linear modeling,” Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag., vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 2110–2134, 2009.[5] L. Ratiu, O. A. David, and A. Baban, “Developing Managerial Skills Through Coaching: Efficacy of a Cognitive-Behavioral Coaching Program,” J. Ration. - Emotive Cogn. - Behav. Ther., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 244–266, 2016.[6] R. G. Hamlin, A. D. Ellinger, and R. S. Beattie, “Coaching at the heart of managerial effectiveness: A cross-cultural study of managerial behaviours,” Hum. Resour. Dev. Int., vol. 9
doctoral level to developtheir communication skills are relatively lacking. Furthermore, the basic realities of doctoralprograms make it difficult for students to make use of available resources to help them improvetheir writing and oral competencies.This research paper presents results of an exploratory survey of Ph.D. students and identifiesseveral communication-related needs that should be addressed in their programs to enable themto function as independent researchers. The ability to communicate effectively supportsengineering Ph.D.’s ability to fully participate in the many communication-related aspects oftheir scholarly community such as the exchange of ideas, informal and formal collaborations,and collegial interactions. They need
Limited, 06 2015, pp. 243–250. [3] C. Zilles, R. T. Deloatch, J. Bailey, B. B. Khattar, W. Fagen, C. Heeren, D. Mussulman, and M. West, “Computerized testing: A vision and initial experiences,” in 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, no. 10.18260/p.23726. Seattle, Washington: ASEE Conferences, June 2015, https://peer.asee.org/23726. [4] R. F. DeMara, N. Khoshavi, S. D. Pyle, J. Edison, R. Hartshorne, B. Chen, and M. Georgiopoulos, “Redesigning computer engineering gateway courses using a novel remediation hierarchy,” in 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, no. 10.18260/p.26063. New Orleans, Louisiana: ASEE Conferences, June 2016, https://peer.asee.org/26063. [5] B. Chen, M. West, and C. Zilles, “How much
not easily altered without someimpetus to make the change. The introduction of individuals into the industry that are moreinclined to act collaboratively could act as a catalyst for change.Purpose of the StudyGender diversity has been connected to increased profits across multiple industries.8 Thesefindings have led to the creation of the value-in-diversity perspective, which contends that adiverse workforce has a distinct benefit to business.8 However, these benefits are not limited toincreased earnings.8 For example, there is evidence that the inclusion of women in CM maydecrease conflict and increase collaboration. Brahnam, et al.’s study suggests that women maypossess more effective conflict resolution attributes than their male
Conference, June 14, 2014,Indianapolis, IN, USA. 3. Next Generation Science Standards, http://www.nextgenscience.org/implementation, accessed on 12/10/2014. 4. F. C. Berry, P. S. DiPiazza and S. L. Sauer, “The future of electrical and computer engineering education," IEEETransaction on Education, Vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 467-476, 2003. 5. G. Gross, G.T. Heydt, P. Sauer P. and V. Vittal, “Some reflections on the status and trends in power engineeringeducation, IERE Workshop: The next generation of power engineers and researchers”, Montreal, Quebec, Canada,10 Oct. 2003. 6. G. Joós, “Training Future Power Engineers”, IEEE Power and Energy, Jan./Feb. 2005, pp 38-47. 7. D. Ray, and F. Wayno, “Collaboration to Facilitate Research and Education in a
Science.Dr. Susan Niki Ritchey, Texas A&M University Dr. S. Niki Ritchey is an Associate Professor of Practice at Texas A&M University. She earned BS and MS degrees in Nuclear Engineering at Texas A&M University and a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University. She worked as a Research Engineering for Heat Transfer Research, Inc. conducting experimental research on condensation in heat exchangers. She currently teaches students how to program using Python in the first year engineering program. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Work in Progress: A Project-Based Learning Alternative for First Year Engineering StudentsAbstractSome
teachersto explain their drawings by answering open-ended questions at the end of the DAET. Infuture, expanding the number of researchers who conducted the analysis would improvethe inter-rater reliability of the study. Finally, it should taken into consideration thatparticipants might provide positive results after the intervention because of being in aresearch study and receiving attention from the researchers [23]. References[1] X. Chen, S. National Center for Education, and R. T. I. International, "STEM Attrition: College Students' Paths into and out of STEM Fields. Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2014-001," ed: National Center for Education Statistics, 2013.[2] A. M. Ortiz, L. R. Amaya, H. K. Warshauer, S. G. Torres, E
, Reflecting backwards, reflecting forwards,” The Open University. [Online]. Available: www.open.edu/openlearn/.[4] J. Dewey, How we think. Mineola, N.Y: Dover Publications, 1997.[5] D. A. Kolb, Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall, 1984.[6] D. A. Schön, The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books, 1983.[7] S. Martinez-Conde et al., “The Storytelling Brain: How Neuroscience Stories Help Bridge the Gap between Research and Society,” J. Neurosci., vol. 39, no. 42, pp. 8285–8290, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1180-19.2019.[8] P. Deane, S. Somasundaran, R. R. Lawless, H. Persky, and C. Appel, “The Key Practice
., Snyder, “Manufacturing Career Pathways”, Society of Manufacturing Engineers, pp. 101-103, 2010. 7. Craft, E.L., Chrislip, D.K., Parr, R.A., Sauber, V.A., “Aligning Workforce Skills with Industry Needs Through Problem Based Learning Environments”, ASEE, pp. 26.168.1- 26.168.12, 2015. 8. Alaraje, N., Sergeyev, A., Matar, B.H., “Digital Technical Education Collaborative: Report on NSF-ATE Project on Reconfigurable Electronics Workforce Development”, Proceedings of the ASEE National Conference. 2017. 9. Sala, A.L., “Expanding Photonics Education in the International Year of Light”, Proceedings of the ASEE National Conference, pp. 26.714.1 – 26.714.7, 2015. 10. McCormack, S.L., Zieman, S., “Technological
placement, career progression, and leadershipresponsibilities as compared similar graduates not in the leadership program. In addition, followup work will aim at better understanding where improvements can be made within the leadershipdevelopment curriculum.ReferencesABET (2020) Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. Retrieved from: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting- engineering-programs-2020-2021/.Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive, R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 1086–1120.Avolio, B. J., Reichard, R. J., Hannah, S. T., Walumbwa, F. O., & Chan, A. (2009). A metanalytic review of
. Educ., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 4–10, 2013.[7] G. Mountrakis and D. Triantakonstantis, “Inquiry-based learning in remote sensing: A space balloon educational experiment,” J. Geogr. High. Educ., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 385– 401, 2012.[8] N. Mathers, A. Goktogen, J. Rankin, and M. Anderson, “Robotic Mission to Mars: Hands- on, minds-on, web-based learning,” Acta Astronaut., vol. 80, pp. 124–131, 2012.[9] R. Fevig, J. Casler, and J. Straub, “Blending Research and Teaching Through Near-Earth Asteroid Resource Assessment,” in Space Resources Roundtable and Planetary & Terrestrial Mining Sciences Symposium, 2012.[10] S. R. Hall, I. Waitz, D. R. Brodeur, D. H. Soderholm, and R. Nasr, “Adoption of active
genes and bimodal grades. ACM Inroads, 1(3), 16–17. 2. Patitsas E., Berlin, J., Craig, M. & Easterbrook, S. (2020). Evidence That Computer Science Grades Are Not Bimodal. Communications of the ACM, 63(1), 91-98. 3. Robins, A. V. (2010). Learning edge momentum: A new account of outcomes in CS1. Computer Science Education, 20, 37–71. 4. Robins, A. V. (2019). Novice Programmers and Introductory Programming. In S. A. Fincher & A. V. Robins (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research (pp. 327–376). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 5. Margolis, J., Estrella, R., Goode, J., Jellison-Holme, J., & Nao, K. (2008). Stuck in the Shallow End: Education, Race, and Computing
Society of Engineering Education (ASEE 2018), 2018. [5] Cynthia Bolt-Lee and Sheila D Foster. Examination retakes in accounting: increasing learning by writing after the exam. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 4(2): 40–46, 2000. [6] S. K. Carpenter, N. J. Cepeda, D. Rohrer, S. H. K. Kang, and H. Pashler. Using spacing to enhance diverse forms of learning: Review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24:369–378, 2012. [7] I. Clark. Formative assessment: Assessment is for self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24:205–249, 2012. doi: 10.1007/s10648-011-9191-6. [8] J. C. F. de Winter and D. Dodou. Five-point Likert items: t test versus Mann-Whitney
: Programs, best practices, and recommendations," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 89-122, 2011.[2] M. Bussey, M. Mei Song, and S.-H. Hsieh, Anticipatory Imagination as a Tool for Rethinking Engineering Education. 2017.[3] R. S. Adams and R. M. Felder, "Reframing Professional Development: A Systems Approach to Preparing Engineering Educators to Educate Tomorrow's Engineers," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 239-240, 2008/07/01 2013, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00975.x.[4] R. M. Felder, D. R. Woods, J. E. Stice, and A. Rugarcia, "The future of engineering education II. Teaching methods that work," Chemical engineering education, vol. 34, no
, concise, and straightforward; being sure thatthe item was directly assessing what needed to be assessed; and considering the relevance of theitem to the student experience [22]. Items were all written to be statements that students couldrate agreement with on a Likert scale, where 5 = strongly agree and 1 = strongly disagree. Thesurvey developed now provides the foundation for a future pilot study, in order to analyze thesuggested constructs and determine factor loading to pick the best survey item(s) that relate toeach theme.Results: Survey Items to Assess Women’s Dissatisfaction in TeamsOne goal of the survey is to be able to use the resultant data to determine whether themesidentified in the interviews are related to the gender makeup of the
. Given that student perceptionswere generally positive toward the different interventions, the instructors will continueimplementing these practices but will examine ways to clarify the utility or improveupon the techniques with lower ratings.References[1] H.J. Passow, “Which ABET Competencies Do Engineering Graduates Find Most Important in their Work?,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 101, pp. 95-118. 2012.[2] L. K., Alford, R. Fowler, and S. Sheffield. “Evolution of Student Attitudes Toward Teamwork in a Project-based, Team-based First-Year Introductory Engineering Course,” in ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014.[3] B. Oakley, R. Felder, R. Brent, and I. Elhajj, “Turning Student Groups into Effective
leadership theoryin engineers’ professional identities,” Leadership, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 351–373, 2015.[10] G. Warnick, J. Schmidt, and A. Bowden, “An experiential learning approach to developleadership competencies in engineering and technology students,” presented at the ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition, Indianapolis, 2014.[11] O. Pierrakos, M. Borrego, and J. Lo, “Assessing learning outcomes of senior mechanicalengineers in a capstone design experience,” in American Society for Engineering EducationAnnual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, HI, 2007.[12] K. S. Cameron, R. E. Quinn, J. DeGraff, and A. V. Thakor, Competing Values Leadership,2nd ed. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2014.[13] K. A. Lawrence, P. Lenk, and R. E
research and to aid in thebetterment of engineering educator’s approach to teaching MOS courses.Current State of Research Data is currently being collected as per the above methodology. Preliminary data analysiswill be available in time for the 2018 ASEE Annual Conference. References[1] K. Ryan and A. Kirn, "Active learning and engagement in mechanics of solids," in 2015, .[2] J. Liu, "The Analogy Study Method in Engineering Mechanics," International Journal ofMechanical Engineering Education, vol. 41, (2), pp. 136-145, 2013. Available:http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.7227/IJMEE.41.2.6. DOI: 10.7227/IJMEE.41.2.6.[3] D. Montfort, S. Brown and D. Pollock, "An Investigation of Students
Classroom in a ComputerProgramming Course”, Journal of College Science Teaching, 2018.[4] D. Berrett, “How “flipping” the classroom can improve the traditional lecture,” The Chronicle ofHigher Education, 2012. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/How-Flipping-theClassroom/130857/, Last Accessed: February 04, 2018.[5] E. Huber and A. Werner, “A review of the literature on flipping the STEM classroom:Preliminary findings,” In S. Barker, S. Dawson, A. Pardo, and C. Colvin (Eds.), Show Me TheLearning, Proceedings ASCILITE 2016 Adelaide, 2016. pp. 267-274.[6] “Flipped classrooms turning STEM education upside down.”Retrieved from http://news.psu.edu/story/413452/2016/06/06/academics/flipped-classrooms-turning-stem-education-upside-down Last
averages. For the ID category,students in both Class Sections performed very well (minimum 81.5%) with 2.9% difference.Moreover, the Foundation Systems (FS) category assessment suffered in both sections, wheremany students did not place any foundation system for their structure. While some studentsplaced the foundation, it was incomplete, and/or the standards and codes were not adequatelyreflected. For the Floor Systems & Reflected Ceiling Plan (FSRCP), 3.3% difference in theaverage was evident. Moreover, it must be noted that many elements in this category wasmissing from both Class Sections. For the Roof/Roof Plan (RRP) category both class sectionsperformed very well (93.5%, minimum). For the Section (S) category, at least one student in Cl
biomedical engineering capstone design sequence at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Glen’s educational research interests include student learning styles, increasing student engagement with hands- on activities, and more recently, creativity & design. He has received an NSF CAREER award and served as a Fellow at the National Effective Teaching Institute. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 A Foundational Engineering Science Course and Its Impact on Those Who Teach ItCurricular innovations are difficult to implement and sustain. Many innovations were developedthrough the NSF-funded Engineering Education Coalitions in the early 1990’s
toConstruction Material tab for them to acquire related knowledge. Similar to what hasbeen discussed above, only if students have both questions correct and click the“Construct” button, two illustrations for simulating the construction sequence of thebottom layer of a sluice gate appear on the right (Figure 11b).The Construction Process Simulation – Middle Layer, Construction Process Simulation –Top Layer, and Construction Process Simulation – Finish tabs follow the same pattern asthe Construction Process Simulation – Bottom Layer tab, where there are two Textboxesfor displaying questions, two Combo boxes for displaying multiple options, and one ortwo illustration(s) for simulating the construction sequence of a sluice gate (Figure 12).“Recommendation
doingspatial reasoning tasks, so it is possible that this extra time is a contributing factor in the reportedgains. On the other hand, students gained substantially simply by taking the class, so the benefitsof the app on its own are not clear.Another direction for further research should focus on additional development of the app.Possibilities include adaptive presentation of lessons based on student progress, further use ofgamification to enhance motivation and engagement, and building assessment into the app itself.References[1] S. Sorby, B. Casey, N. Veurink, and A. Dulaney, “The role of spatial training in improvingspatial and calculus performance in engineering students,” Learning and Individual Differences,vol. 26, pp. 20–29, 2013.[2] O. Ha
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1984.[5] J. N. Harb, S. O. Durrant, and R. E. Terry, ”Use of the Kolb Learning Cycle and the 4MAT System in Engineering in Education,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 82, April 1993, pp. 70-77.[6] J. N.Harb, R. E. Terry, P. K. Hurt, and K. J. Williamson, Teaching Through the Cycle: Application of Learning Style Theory to Engineering Education at Brigham Young University, 2nd Edition, Brigham Young University Press, 1995.[7] L. E. Ortiz and E. M. Bachofen, “An Experience in Teaching Structures in Aeronautical, Mechanical and Civil Engineering, Applying the Experimental Methodology,” 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
opportunitiesManagement construction site Assignment requiring research on Industrial Construction-related surveying Project examplesReferences[1] Overstreet, S., “Developing America’s Next Generation of Electric Utility Professionals,” presented at2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. https://peer.asee.org/28138[2] Anderson, M. S. 2001. “The complex relations between the academy and industry: Views from theliterature,” Journal of Higher Education (72:2), pp. 226–246.[3] Taratukhin, V., & Kupriyanov, Y. V., & Becker, J. (2016, June), “Towards a Framework forEducational
expressed in thispaper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References:[1] Crawley, E.F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D.R., and Edström, K., "Historical accounts of engineering education", Rethinking engineering education, pp. 231-255, Springer, 2014.[2] Nicholls, J.G.," Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance", Psychological review Vol. 91, No. 3, pp. 328, 1984.[3] Weiner, B.," An attribution theory of motivation and emotion", Series in Clinical & Community Psychology: Achievement, Stress, & Anxiety, 1982.[4] Schunk, D.H.," Introduction to the special section on motivation and efficacy", Journal of
Paper ID #21590Applying Active Learning to an Introductory Aeronautics ClassDr. Kenneth W. Van Treuren, Baylor University Ken Van Treuren is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering at Baylor University. He received his B. S. in Aeronautical Engineering from the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado and his M. S. in Engineering from Princeton University in Princeton, New Jersey. After serving as USAF pilot in KC-135 and KC-10 aircraft, he completed his DPhil in Engineering Sciences at the University of Oxford, United Kingdom and returned to the USAF Academy to teach heat transfer and propulsion systems
interpretation of the outcomes. A study to compare and contrast preparednessfor math graded events versus that of other subjects would also be useful. Asking similar-typequestions before and after graded events that are more specific to confidence and preparednesswould also provide a beneficial perspective. Finally, alternative classification schemes may beexamined to identify other patterns between confidence and academic performance.7. Acknowledgement: The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors, and do notrepresent the official policy or position of the United States Army, the Department of Defense, orthe United States Military Academy.8. References[1] S. Austin, The paradox of Socratic ignorance (how to know that you don’t know
iteration, but we hope to start converging towards a new instructional modelthat better serves and retains a more diverse group of students, especially students fromunderprepared backgrounds.Traditionally, the first day of classes was spent attending to typical first-day-of-classhousekeeping business as well as speaking about hardware and software and introducing thebinary number system. Next came an introduction to Linux (since in order to minimizeinstallation issues and related troubleshooting, we have students program on our remote servers),more on binary numbers, including the 2’s complement representation, the hexadecimal numbersystem, etc. By the end of the first week of classes, the first program involving simple user input,a computation and