. The prevalence of quality media richcontent related to course material has produced an increasing expectation among students thatlearning should be easy and is primarily the responsibility of the instructor. Additionally, accessto report writing services and vendors who will sell homework solutions manuals presents manychallenges to students. Addressing these issues can be frustrating and time consuming forfaculty. This paper presents the experiments conducted in four mechanical engineering coursesspanning from freshman to graduate level courses that lead the authors to discover that manystudents enjoy partnering with the faculty in addressing these issues, the benefits to studentsthrough involvement in the process, and the practical issues
engineering community; and serve as successful rolemodels for some freshmen who may lack confidence and who may perceive engineering asdifficult and unattainable. Freshmen can relate better to upperclassmen who are their peers andwho more recently have experienced what it takes to “make it in engineering.” Upperclassmen,particularly those with a proven track record of academic achievement and leadership, are morecredible sources and powerful role models for engineering freshmen. This assumption formedthe basis for development of a pilot freshman retention program, “Fast Track to Achievement.”The primary strategy of this program is to engage teams of upperclassmen in dialogue withgroups of freshmen in a series of workshops focusing on three themes
group work done by others and write a comprehensive peer-review report ≠ Student will communicate and debate the merits of engineering design alternatives in both written and oral formatsAfter the learning outcomes were specified, the next step was specifying the course structure andcontent. The course would focus on a single major design experience, and the basic structureshould allow for different structural systems to be considered at different years, depending on theexpertise of the main faculty member in charge of the course. Project-based learning is ideallysuited to this course as it is centered on a project that is characterized by a well-defined outcome,or deliverable, and an ill-defined task. This is exactly the
focuses on involving postsecondary studentsto better their experiences at different levels, psychological and physical [1]. Instructors haveinvolved students in 1) individual and collaborative activities with hands-on, experiential,problem-based or inquiry-based components and 2) feedback strategies using peer feedback andinstructor feedback [2],[3]. These active learning and collaborative pedagogies enhanceinteraction and increase student engagement with content and peers and better learning andachievement in in-person, blended, and online STEM courses [4], [5], [3].Even with such innovative pedagogies and resulting higher grades, STEM students may feelunsatisfied with the course experience citing lack of interaction as the main reason [6
,contract grading is associated with building equity and inclusion [9]. However, not all authorsagree on the merits of contract grading [10].Contract grading has been used more often in writing courses and is notably promoted by AsaoInoue [1,9]. In examining existing literature, there are very few examples of contract grading inengineering courses [11]; no published articles from the United States were found. However,contract grading is especially applicable in process-oriented courses, and it may increase studentaccountability since they know the requirements at the onset of the class. In addition, contractgrading systems where students can repeat an assignment that falls below a threshold (i.e.mastery learning) may be advantageous for students in
activities of the module include the Values Affirmation Intervention as a writingexercise, and the Difference-Education Intervention in the form of a student panel.The Values Affirmation Intervention (VAI) was first pioneered by Cohen, et al. in 2006 tonarrow the academic achievement gap between racial and ethnic minority middle school students(Blacks and Hispanics) and their white peers. This writing activity has been proven to promoteself-integrity and self-worth, which can help with better performance on challenging tasks19. TheVAI contains a broad list of values not directly related to academic performance that have beenvalidated by past research20. To complete the activity, students are instructed to circle two orthree values from a list that
exam experiences asstudents with exam techniques used by their peers to arrive at a workable exam. The results maybe unsatisfactory. Knowing a subject and knowing how to write an exam to test knowledge of asubject are two separate matters. The goals of an effective student examination are to understandstudent mastery of course content, minimize grading time to improve feedback ("turnaround")time, and to reduce the potential for arbitration and complaints due to student misunderstandingsand confusion. An effective examination has the following characteristics 1: 1. Samples the spectrum of important objectives 2. Measures examinee's understanding or ability to apply concepts 3. Perceived as a fair test by students successfully
. The second strategy involves the use of a peer-led andinstructor-moderated on-line discussion group.The first teaching strategy to be described is the folder activity. The folder activity was developedto help students elicit and confront their misconceptions in physics in a non-threatening way 44. Inaddition, the folder activity allows students to be creative and use their unique learning stylepreferences. Furthermore, the folder activity allows for direct feedback between the individualstudents and the instructor.As part of their homework assignments, students are required to keep a two-pocket folder.Students receive 5 - 10 writing assignments each semester. Upon collection of the folders, ablock of time is set aside (approximately 6 - 8
instead places it upon the student, allowing students to form theirown questions about topics, develop their own interpretations, and collaborate with their peers[2]. Osborn and Nag claim that this approach aligns better with both Maslow's Hierarchy ofNeeds as well as Bloom's Taxonomy of Thinking, and though limited in their exploration ofthese approaches, they have seen promising preliminary successes.When specifically discussing first-year engineering courses, it is important to consider factorsbeyond teaching and learning styles, such as the ability of students to build relationships withtheir peers. Research from Sorby, Monte, and Hein focuses on developing a common first-yearengineering program at Michigan Technological University. While
and new undergraduates9. However,the categories rated by these groups were part of an existing survey. Specifically, there have beenno studies on using industry-modeled peer reviews to educate students on the professional skills,nor has there been an investigation, to our knowledge, of how student-led assessments mightaffect the educational experience in an engineering curriculum. Page 13.1349.3Developing and Assessing Professional SkillsThe study involved students participating in a year-long senior capstone design course. Typicalclass size is 50 students. Most are traditional students, and nearly 50% have some co-op orinternship experience
active team member. We used CourseMIRROR mobilelearning system to collect students’ reflections during an academic semester. We also evaluatedeach student reflection based on its quality. The reflection quality here refers to specificity orvagueness of reflections. Based on our prior research on the significance of the reflection qualityon student learning [1], we developed a coding schema to specify the degree of reflection’squality. We further used the Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness(CATME) for peer and self-evaluation on five dimensions. Initial findings reveal statisticallysignificant relations between five aspects of CATME and reflection’s quality. We also conductedlinear regression analyses to explore how these five
significant positive effects on students’academic performance (GPA, writing skills,critical thinking skills) and development of civicvalues (commitment to continued civicparticipation).1 Service-learning courses areemerging in engineering colleges as a mechanismto provide engineering students with meaningfulcommunity-based learning experiences throughwhich they develop the values and skills of An Outreach Corps student team leads an in-citizenship and leadership, while maturing their classroom engineering discussion andown communications skills and strengthening demonstration with fifth-grade students.their commitment to the engineering profession.The
mentoring. Engineering Librarianship 101 isdesigned to capture the wisdom and expertise of ELD members and communicate best practicesin the profession.” 1In this paper, mentoring scenarios are discussed and some directions are highlighted that willprovide guidance and tips for new and practicing engineering librarians. It is envisioned thatengaging conversations, dialog and interactions after the presentation will generate ideas thatwill help the ELD Mentoring Committee develop new strategies for future activities.Literature ReviewFor the library profession in general, the literature shows several modes of mentoring. Theseinclude traditional, peer, and mentoring circles. In an article describing a community of practiceapproach which was developed
the 21st centuryto develop [7], [8] so they may become more curious, self-directed problem-solvers and thinkers.In an effort to democratize access to this fundamental skill, most resources on the QFT are madeavailable for free to download online.1.1. Elements of the Question Formulation TechniqueThe QFT is comprised of a few essential elements. As a part of the first element, learners are firstpresented a Question Focus (QFocus), which serves as a prompt to elicit questions. Then,learners formulate their own questions on the prompt while following four rules for formulatingquestions: • Ask as many questions as you can. • Do not stop to judge, discuss, or answer any questions. • Write down every question exactly as stated or
their work, (2) develop their ability to discuss those issues effectively with peers andinterested members of the public, and (3) understand the four dimensions of how people learn asthey relate to REU projects and more broadly to successful learning environments. Finally, weurge other REU programs to consider an enriched or integrated approach, arguing that REUprograms offer tremendous opportunities for helping future engineers become better teachers,better communicators, and more responsible members of their profession.The VaNTH REU ProgramVaNTH has been offering an REU program since 2000, with a total of 30 students attendingfrom 23 institutions:Carnegie Mellon - n=1 Case Western University - n=1Duke University
; thepeer-peer evaluation metrics; the evaluation process itself; and methods for constructivefeedback and criticism. As the senior capstone timeline advances, and as conflicts occur and theteam matures, the charter will need to reflect the group’s changing dynamics. Thus, it isimperative that in order to be a useful document, the charter must be updated periodically by allteam members.The peer-peer evaluation is run mid-quarter as a means of practice and to provide studentsfeedback with regards to their performance. At the end of the quarter, an individual’s peer-peerevaluation scores will determine 20% of the course grade. All students are rated on the majorproposal activities, five contribution criteria as set by each team, and their overall
experience while on campus. The aims of the coursewere to (1) help undergraduate students who are interested in research connect with facultypartners who are committed to mentoring undergraduates in research, (2) to guide students inreading through papers that introduce the type of research being carried out in a faculty partnerslab, (3) to guide students in drafting a mini-review of 5 papers relevant to that research, (4) toguide students in identifying and writing up a research proposal which they will complete in thelab of the faculty partner. In the first year, six academic departments out of eight participated inthis new course by offering a cross-listed course for their students under one major course taughtby one of the PIs at the STEM Center
experience of the creative arts beyond the superficial might reveal thatthe artist and the engineer are not as different as is usually supposed. The University of Texas atTyler has conducted an experimental project in which engineering students were encouraged toexperience the design process afresh from the perspective of the creative arts. Juniors inelectrical engineering worked under the mentorship of arts faculty in a chosen medium (studioart, writing, or music) to produce legitimate works of art that were displayed, performed, or readpublicly, and documented how their experiences of design in the arts have informed and shapedtheir perspectives as engineers. The structure, expectations, and results of this course aredescribed in this paper.A
difference between popular, textbook, and peer reviewed literature,reading and analyzing scholarly articles, laboratory notebooks, responsible conduct of research,intellectual property rights, effective presentations, writing a literature review, and careeropportunities.The semester long seminar (SLS) is adapted from work done by The University of Wisconsin [1]as part of their Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC) activities while theweek-long faculty led boot camp (FLBC) was developed at Washington State University (WSU)[2] and the 2½ day peer mentor led short course (PMSC) was developed at the University of Page
Karl Haefner, PEEC Collaborative Team Member. University of Phoenix, M.A.e.d., Secondary Education, 2008 Grand Valley State University, B.S. Geology, 2004 Sagi- naw Valley State University, B.S. Mechanical Engineering, 1988 Mr. Haefner is an engineering instructor at Cankdeska Cikana Community College, where he is actively working to build the Pre-Engineering Department. He assisted with writing the AMI accreditation report to the HLC, wrote several success- ful grants, and managed CCCC’s Advanced Manufacturing Curriculum and Pre-Engineering Educational Consortium. In addition the Advanced Manufacturing initiative at CCCC has hired two undergraduates to run the 3-D/Scanner Laboratory. The aforementioned gives the
implementation project. Communication Skills Finally, after the completion of their project, the students are required to write a final high- quality design report and give a clear and informative oral presentation elaborating on the works they have done throughout the semester. They are also required to demonstrate the operation of their production line.Project ComponentsAfter specifying the target product through brainstorming by team members, considering allconstraints (time, budget, availability of tools and equipment), the activities follow the threeproject phases of definition, planning, and implementation.The project has the following two main components (refer to figure 2) 5: a) Defining and solving design problems, which includes
received from enrollment in a LC. Most notably, they reportthe following7: 1. Making connections with other students, peer mentors, faculty, and advisors. 2. Academic advising (e.g., knowledgeable, available when needed assistance). 3. Experiencing environment that promotes and respects diversity. 4. Becoming familiar with campus and academic support resources. 5. Deciding on a major or future career. 6. Adjusting to college.As part of “making connections,” LCs also provide a chance for students to create a network atIUPUI since LCs consist of an instructional team of a faculty member, academic advisor,librarian, and peer mentor. Tinto illuminates the importance of student engagement andnetworking on campus, “The frequency and
Washington include introductory and honors courses in bioengineering, tissue and protein engineering lab courses, diversity and ethics in bioengineering, lead- ership, service learning, and bioengineering capstone writing and design courses. She is committed to enhancing diversity and inclusivity in engineering, and creating opportunities for undergraduate students to engage in service and educational outreach. Dr. Hendricks has over a decade of experience leading K-12 educational outreach and summer camp programs at both Duke University and the University of Washington.Camille BirchCelina Gunnarsson c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Exploring the Interplay of Diversity and
by connecting them with peers,enabling them to participate in skills-based workshops and hands-on projects, connecting them toalumni and other industry mentors, and helping them to become immersed in campus life prior tothe start of their freshman year of college. In recently two years, more women students arerecruited to the program, a unique mini program “RAMP for High School Girls is designed. Theobjective for this program is to expose students to various STEM disciplines.The six-week mini RAMP program is organized as modules. Each week the female studentsexplore a different STEM discipline. The Mechanical and Electrical modules are presented inthis paper. An entrance survey and an exit survey were conducted to collect data right before
students and instructors. The results are overwhelmingly positive and themethods can be applied to all or parts of multiple courses and curricula. There is definiteapplicability to K-12 outreach programs as well as community/junior college collaborativeprograms. Issues addressed include learning styles, under-represented minority participation,student peer support and collaboration, student classroom participation, budgetary and personnelresources, computer grading, and course management systems. Methods and technologiesinvolved will be used and demonstrated during the presentation.BackgroundThe concept of “distance” or “online” courses is not only generally accepted by most engineeringschools, appropriately and properly developed courses are
23.184.2Many of these students came from historically black or minority serving universities andcolleges. Figure 1 shows the REU cohorts and their faculty advisors for 2008-2010.Methods and Activities Besides their researchprojects, the fellows participatedin activities to improve theirresearch skills throughout the 10week experience. Once the fellows reported tocampus at the beginning of thesummer, they attended a half-dayorientation during which timethey were introduced to eachother, their faculty advisor, andpresented with generalinformation about the hostingdepartment and university. Theywere mandated to attend theresearch methodology seminarsdesigned for undergraduateresearch students at theuniversity, covering topicsincluding writing a
Page 15.871.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Microcontroller Controlled Walking RobotAbstract: The objective of this project, funded by the ACTION Program at the University ofMaryland Eastern Shore, was to involve and expose undergraduate students, particularlyminority and under-represented students, in research and real-world projects. One of the uniqueaspects of this project was the involvement and collaboration of a graduating senior student aswell as a freshman student during construction and application of the robot. This arrangementwas intended to provide an opportunity for peer teaching and learning. The construction andoperation of an advanced walking robot was intended to display the
-controlled Steering Mechanism Page 22.1595.5 This project fit into the general EDSGN 100 course goals by allowing students toassemble a vehicle, modify the design, communicate with student peers, use engineeringprinciples to measure vehicle performance parameters, and become familiar with datacollection and analysis. At the end of this project, the teams were required to write areport including all pertinent information.3. Computer Engineering Course Integration Students enrolled in a sophomore-level introductory digital design laboratorycourse collaborated in the Power Wheels® project. This laboratory course traditionallycovers basic digital circuit
the entire production process. At the center of this process would be therequirements for a quality peer review publications.The group started by setting up a process that tackled the review process for the book and thenwriting some custom software to implement the process (see Figure 1). In addition, the group Page 22.476.2adopted some practices from the corporate training arena. Figure 1. ProcessToward the goals of creating the most effective instructional contents, the group decided toinstitute a publishing process similar to that founds at industrial training facilities. In thisparadigm, the authors
remotely deliverlab sessions to his/her students4. The development of Web-based laboratory setups allows one toperform selected experiments remotely from a distant computer8.It seems that online teaching offers a satisfying alternative to lecture-based traditional teaching.But online instruction may increase faculty workload, since it takes faculty extra time inpreparing lecture notes and answering emails from students. This may limit some facultymembers’ use of online tools. In addition, criteria for evaluating quality and effectiveness ofonline teaching have not been well established.2.2 Research PracticesFaculty members routinely write grant proposals and review scholarly publications. Online toolsmay facilitate faculty members in