Conference Session

Session 5 - Track 3: stEm PEER Academy

Collection

2023 Collaborative Network for Computing and Engineering Diversity (CoNECD)

Authors

Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Claire Jean Duggan, Northeastern University; Jacqueline A. Isaacs, Northeastern University; Johne' M Parker, University of Kentucky; Keisha Marie Norris, Miami University

Tagged Topics

CoNECD Paper Sessions, Diversity

foundational research in student retention and other evidence-based practices that engage, enroll, and graduate their women and BIPOC engineers.5. Professional Learning a. Provide a toolbox of resources to guide collaboration and partnerships at their respective institutions, with partners, and with each other (broader impact/broadening participation, proposal development, writing research papers, etc.). b. Expand PEERs’ understanding of national funding opportunities aligned with their institutional goals (NSF grants, national education grants, industry grants, etc). 1017

Conference Session

Intro to Biomedical Engineering and Vertically Integrated Curriculum (Works in Progress) - June 23rd

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Ross Aaron Petrella, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Lianne Cartee, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Devin K. Hubbard, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Kenneth Donnelly, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; David A. Zaharoff, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; George T. Ligler, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

Paper ID #30221A Vertically Integrated Design Program Using Peer EducationDr. Ross Aaron Petrella, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Departmentof Biomedical Engineering Dr. Petrella received his B.S. in biomedical engineering from Virginia Commonwealth University in Rich- mond, VA and his Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Old Dominion University in Norfolk, VA. He joined the University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomed- ical Engineering first as a postdoctoral research scholar and is now an assistant teaching professor where he teaches

Conference Session

NSF Grantees' Poster Session

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Brian F Martensen, Minnesota State University; Deborah K. Nykanen P.E., Minnesota State University, Mankato; Marilyn C. Hart, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Rebecca A. Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato

Tagged Topics

NSF Grantees Poster Session

AC 2012-4169: INTERDISCIPLINARY STEM PEER-MENTORING ANDDISTANCE-BASED TEAMSBrian F Martensen, Minnesota State University Brian F. Martensen is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Mathematics and Statistics at Minnesota State University, Mankato. He began working with the NSF-supported MAX Scholar Program in 2009. His interests include inquiry-based models of instruction and ways to facilitate the transition of majors to professionals. His mathematical research is in the area of dynamical systems and topology.Dr. Deborah K. Nykanen P.E., Minnesota State University, Mankato Deborah K. Nykanen is an Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at Minnesota State University, Mankato. She received her Ph.D

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rebecca Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Deborah Nykanen, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Marilyn Hart, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Mezbahur Rahman, Minnesota State University, Mankato

progression of a student through the programprovides valuable opportunities for “stepping stone peer mentoring” and individual studentdevelopment. Our selection process addresses diversity issues by factoring in major, gender,year, eligibility for subsidized financial aid (a program requirement), community collegebackground and first-generation status. In addition, we ask students to write a brief essaydescribing how they will contribute to the program diversity given a broad definition thatincorporates such things as race, religion, socioeconomic status, and breadth of experience incommunities. We strive to select students who are motivated and who could have an improvededucational experience given the opportunity to be a member of the cohort, to

Conference Session

First-Year Programs: Student Perceptions and Perspectives

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Lea Wittie, Bucknell University; James Bennett, Cornell University; Carly Merrill, Bucknell University ; Jove Graham, Geisinger; Troy Schwab, Bucknell University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

Paper ID #32312Bias in First-Year Engineering Student Peer EvaluationsLea Wittie, Bucknell University Lea Wittie is an Associate Professor in the department of Computer Science in the Engineering College at Bucknell University. She has spent the past 4 years coordinating the first year Engineering student Introduction to Engineering and over a decade participating in the program before that.James Bennett, Cornell University James Bennett is a biomedical engineer specializing in medical device design and development. He has earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Biomedical Engineering from Bucknell University and is currently

Conference Session

Embedded Computing

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rathika Rajaravivarma, Central CT State University

Tagged Divisions

Computers in Education

2006-1382: PEER ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES FOR ALABORATORY-BASED COURSERathika Rajaravivarma, Central CT State University Page 11.987.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006Peer Assessment Methodologies for a Laboratory-Based CourseAbstractAdvances in technology and the explosive growth of the Internet have called fornew ways of learning environment. The content delivery is no longer the passiveapproach of lecture emanating from the teacher to the student. It is imperativethat computer networking courses taught at the undergraduate level containadequate hands-on implementation based projects and experiments in order tobetter train students. The computing curricula 2001 (CC2001

Collection

2000 Annual Conference

Authors

Matthew Ohland; Richard Layton

Session 2330 Peer Evaluations in Teams of Predominantly Minority Students Richard A. Layton, Matthew W. Ohland North Carolina A&T State University / University of FloridaAbstractThis paper presents an analysis of student peer evaluations in project teams where the majority ofthe students are African-American. Peer evaluations were used to assign individual grades fromgroup grades for design projects in a junior-level mechanical engineering course taught byLayton for three semesters in 1997-99. This study is similar to and complements a 1999 study byKaufman, Felder, and Fuller. The results of the two

Collection

2001 Annual Conference

Authors

Matthew Ohland; Richard Layton

Session 2230 Peer Ratings Revisited: Focus on Teamwork, Not Ability Richard A. Layton, Matthew W. Ohland Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology / Clemson UniversityAbstractIn a previous study, we determined that student peer ratings used to assign individual gradesfrom group grades showed no effects relating to gender but significant effects relating to race. Alikely explanation of this result was that students seem to base ratings on perceived ability in-stead of real contribution to the group effort. To overcome this tendency, we modified the peer-rating instrument, instructed students on the

Conference Session

First-Year Programs Division Technical Session 2: Peer Mentoring/Learning, Teaching Assistants, and Career Mentorship

Collection

2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jill Davishahl, Western Washington University; Audrey Boklage, University of Texas at Austin; Madison Andrews, University of Texas at Austin

research focuses on creating inclusive and equitable learning environments through the development and implementation of strategies geared towards increasing student sense of belonging.Audrey Boklage (Dr.)Madison E. Andrews © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com Peer Mentors Forging a Path in Changing Times “When I first started thinking about inclusivity, I recognized that I wanted to share what I was learning. I also want to spread word about my department and even more I want to spark more interest for STEM and/or engineering, keep working on inclusive practices, and work on

Conference Session

Faculty Development Toolkit

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jerry Samples, University of Pittsburgh-Johnstown

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

Good Teaching: As Identified by Your PeersAbstract:The literature on teaching is replete with definitions and examples of good teaching. Theyinclude the traits and characteristics of the best instructor/teacher/professor. They have examplesof methods and results of surveys that quantify teaching: bad or good. In recent years, theliterature included the impact of teaching on the student learner; thus, coming full circle, fromteacher to learner. The literature provides good information, but it is the analysis of the currentclassroom experience of one’s peers that provides reliable information on the teaching of today’sstudents.Since 1998, over 1000 faculty have pondered over 5 questions concerning good teaching. Theyhave pair-shared the results

Conference Session

FPD VI: Presenting "All the Best" of the First-Year Programs Division

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Chris Smaill, University of Auckland; Gerard Rowe, University of Auckland; Lawrence J. Carter, University of Auckland

Tagged Divisions

First-Year Programs

slightly aware that someone is going to have to mark their work and Idid witness some students think about how they lay it out and are aware they will lose marksfor insufficient working. So hopefully this ended in them constructing better answers in testsand exams.” “The student learning did improve as a result of peer marking exercise as it allows them toknow how others think”. “It forces the students to grasp the material at early stage of (the) course which results inbetter understanding of the course.” “I marked (a) few exams and found that most of the students did write the UNITS of thequantities in (their) solution. It was definitely due to peer-marking exercise.” “I think peer marking exercise is a good practice to do and it adds an

Conference Session

Assessment in Multidisciplinary Learning Environment

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Ryan Striker P.E., North Dakota State University; Mary Pearson, North Dakota State University; Ellen M. Swartz, North Dakota State University; Enrique Alvarez Vazquez, North Dakota State University; Lauren Singelmann, North Dakota State University; Stanley Shie Ng, Biola University

Tagged Divisions

Multidisciplinary Engineering

. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press, 2019.[18] “FERPA | Protecting Student Privacy.” https://studentprivacy.ed.gov/ferpa (accessed Apr. 07, 2021).[19] USPTO, “USPTO Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, Title 35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty.,” Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep-9015-appx- l.html#al_d1d85b_11e72_2ee (accessed Apr. 07, 2021).[20] R. Lu and L. Bol, “A Comparison of Anonymous Versus Identifiable E-Peer Review On College Student Writing Performance and the Extent of Critical Feedback,” p. 17.[21] C. Bauer, K. Figl, M. Derntl, P. P. Beran, and S. Kabicher, “The student view on online peer reviews,” in Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM

Conference Session

Diversity Research - Session I

Collection

2018 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity Conference

Authors

Jacklin Stonewall, Iowa State University; Michael Dorneich, Iowa State University; Cassandra Dorius; Jane Rongerude PhD, Iowa State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity, Diversity Research

Paper ID #242512018 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and ComputingDiversity Conference: Crystal City, Virginia Apr 29A Review of Bias in Peer AssessmentJacklin Hope Stonewall, Iowa State University Jacklin Stonewall is a Ph.D. student in the Departments of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engi- neering and Human Computer Interaction at Iowa State University. Her research interests include: gender HCI, decision support systems, sustainability, and the creation of equitable cities and classrooms.Prof. Michael Dorneich, Iowa State University Dr. Michael C. Dorneich is an Associate Professor at Iowa State

Collection

1999 Annual Conference

Authors

Victoria Gallagher; Tracey Weldon; Cynthia R. Haller; Richard M. Felder

Session 2630 Dynamics of Peer Interactions in Cooperative Learning Cynthia R. Haller, Victoria J. Gallagher, Tracey L. Weldon, Richard M. Felder North Carolina State UniversityAbstractAlthough many recent studies demonstrate that cooperative learning provides a variety ofeducational advantages over more traditional instructional models, little is known about theinteractional dynamics among students in engineering workgroups. We explored these dynamicsand their implications for

Conference Session

Undergraduate Peer Educators: Mentoring, Observing, Learning

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

YunJeong Chang, University of Virginia; Rider W. Foley, University of Virginia

Tagged Topics

ASEE Board of Directors

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

individual and group-based activities that aredesigned to prepare the students for the upcoming summative assessments. The first-half of thesemester focuses on technical writing and how to represent complex engineering ideas withvisuals and written descriptions. The second half of the course focuses on down selecting fromall the creative concepts in the individually-generated Idea Notebooks to one that will bepresented as part of the Rocket Pitch. Then the students are given three weeks to work withinthe discussion section on their provisional patent applications.3.0 Research Design The project entails data collection at multiple levels that attend to the course design, pedagogy,and classroom environment that affect the students

Conference Session

Undergraduate Peer Educators: Mentoring, Observing, Learning

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Chandra Anne Turpen, University of Maryland, College Park; Ayush Gupta, University of Maryland, College Park; Jennifer Radoff, University of Maryland, College Park; Andrew Elby, University of Maryland, College Park; Hannah Sabo; Gina Marie Quan, University of Maryland, College Park

Tagged Topics

ASEE Board of Directors, Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society

Paper ID #23278Successes and Challenges in Supporting Undergraduate Peer Educators toNotice and Respond to Equity Considerations within Design TeamsDr. Chandra Anne Turpen, University of Maryland, College Park Chandra Turpen is a Research Assistant Professor in the Physics Education Research Group at the Uni- versity of Maryland, College Park’s Department of Physics. She completed her PhD in Physics at the University of Colorado at Boulder specializing in Physics Education Research. Chandra’s work involves designing and researching contexts for learning within higher education. In her research, Chandra draws from the

Conference Session

Architectural Engineering Education II

Collection

2005 Annual Conference

Authors

Joseph Betz

students develop complex theory papers starting with "low-stakes" writing activities that leads to "high-stakes" formal papers. This process incorporates acontinuous improvement plan that uses several types of peer review. A campus-wide committee,referred to as the Writing in the Discipline Committee, also reviews and approves thepedagogical writing process used in the course. Student survey data is presented to measurestudent attitudes and perceptions. Sample grades are presented to show trends. Analysis,recommendations and conclusions are given. The goal here is to present a useful case study forfaculty interested in teaching a writing intensive or WID course.BackgroundThere are two important background points that should be made. One, what type

Conference Session

Materials Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Reihaneh Jamshidi, University of Hartford; Kamau Wright, University of Hartford; Paul E. Slaboch, University of Hartford

Tagged Divisions

Materials

further develop students’ technical writing skillsthroughout the semester by introducing a three-part strategy: (1) Focused instruction time –Allocating select times throughout the semester to focus on one section of lab report; (2)Reviewing samples as a group – determining which samples or attributes of samples wereeffective or ineffective; and (3) Peer review – Students reviewed each other’s lab reports andgave feedback. The goal of focused instructional time and reviewing samples was to allowstudents to improve their writing skills by focusing on one section of lab report at a time, andthus learning the writing techniques more effectively. The peer-review part of the strategy wasdesigned to draw students’ close attention to quality of writing

Conference Session

Innovations in Design within BME Curricula

Collection

2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Richard Goldberg, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Kevin Caves, Duke University; Julie A. Reynolds, Duke University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical

, we first designed a rubric that would help students understand theexpectations for each section of the final report. We also imposed frequent deadlines for sectionsof the report to keep students engaged with their writing. To minimize the burden for the coursefaculty, we conducted several in-class “writer’s workshops” in which students learned what wasexpected for each section of the report. Based on these workshops, students then peer reviewedeach other’s writing. Finally, we implemented more efficient methods of providing feedback onwriting, such as using digitally-recorded audio feedback.As a result of these strategies, the quality of writing in the final reports has improvedsignificantly. Feedback from students indicates that they

Conference Session

Emerging Trends in Engineering Education

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Stephanie Nelson

organization,completeness, clarity, grammar and punctuation, and understanding of documentationconventions for the disciplines. While assignments as well as findings vary per discipline, thereare enough commonalities in terms of the weaknesses that the findings as well as relatedrecommendations are presented for the all engineering students. Three pedagogical approachescan bring significant improvements to the writing products produced by these students:assigning jointly written reports, providing training on documentation conventions forprofessional reports, and requiring students to draft early and undergo multiple peer reviewsand revisions.Index Terms  Engineering writing, engineering writing pedagogy.IntroductionThe most recent ABET visit to Cal

Conference Session

New Trends in ECE Education I

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Susan Lord, University of San Diego

Tagged Divisions

Electrical and Computer

” ofgathering data, conducting experiments etc. and the “rhetorical space” of writing to communicateto an audience of their peers, they create their own knowledge.Students are more likely to see the value of writing when it is tied to the technical content. As Page 12.582.3Pesante says “Learning is most effective when it takes place in context and when it is reinforcedthrough the students’ course of study.”13 In all of the examples in this paper, an engineeringprofessor rather than a writing professor grades the writing. Thus the quality of the writing andthe technical accuracy of the work are inseparable. This adds legitimacy to the claim that writingis

Conference Session

Multidisciplinary Endeavors: Engineering and Liberal Arts

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alyson Grace Eggleston, The Citadel; Robert J. Rabb P.E., The Citadel

Tagged Divisions

Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, Multidisciplinary Engineering

coordination with other faculty.The first research question examined by this paper is to determine if students can be objectiveand constructive through peer assessments to make a positive difference in team members’leadership skills. It is important to point out that students enrolled in the sophomore levelTechnical Writing Course are mixed with students from four different engineering majors andtwo science majors. Additionally, these students are primarily residence-only students and sharemany campus activities: dorm life, dining facility meals, etc., and have increased contact witheach other.A quick comparison of the averaged individual score at week one and five indicates over 37.5%of the students had improvements in their overall peer leadership

Conference Session

Student Teams & Active Learning

Collection

2004 Annual Conference

Authors

Chris Daubert; Steven Peretti; Paula Berardinelli; Deanna Dannels; Chris Anson; Lisa Bullard

Session #3: Interpersonal Aspects of Teaming Module Session #4: Preparing and Delivering Collaborative Presentations The content of these modules can be found at the project web site(http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/project/actionagenda/pages/revisecourse/tws_instructional_materials/jr_lab_instruct_materials.html.) The target learning proficiencies are listed in Table 1.Table 1: Junior-level TWS proficiencies and corresponding skillsProficiency Corresponding skillsCollaborative technical • write collaborativelywriting • function as a peer editorCollaborative technical • convey technical material orally as a team in a way appropriatepresentation

Conference Session

Supporting the Capstone Experience

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Kun Zhang P.E., California State University-Chico; Pablo K. Cornejo, California State University-Chico; Chris Fosen, California State University-Chico

Tagged Divisions

Civil Engineering

to practicethe entire writing process (e.g. drafting, revising, and proofreading) and facilitating instructors tograde manageable reports to provide timely feedback. The specific objectives of this study are to(1) assess the effectiveness of one-page letter report assignments and associated activities, suchas technical writing instruction, individual practice, peer review, faculty feedback, and use of agood writing sample to improve students’ technical writing and (2) assess the improvement ofthe new ABET outcome 6 by using the one-page letter report at a Hispanic Serving Institution(HSI). Direct measurements were assessed based on scores of students’ reports following arubric, which was created according to the ABET outcome 6 and basic

Conference Session

Military and Veterans Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alyson Grace Eggleston, The Citadel; Robert J. Rabb P.E., The Citadel

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Military and Veterans

, theoretical, and analytical skills associated with theirdevelopment. In the model, sophomores engage by learning the skills associated with directleadership of individuals and small teams and the management of duties. In a sophomore-leveltechnical writing course (required of all engineering and computer science majors), sophomore-level leader development was assessed using the institution’s criteria. These small teams had ahands-on, technical assignment that lasted several weeks. There was a difference in leadershipskills and communication skills observed between the traditional students with their formalleadership curricula and the student veterans. Student peers consistently rated student veteranshigher in all areas of the leadership attributes

Conference Session

NSF Grantees Poster Session

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Frederick Berry, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

AC 2008-2059: USING WRITING TO ASSESS LEARNING IN ENGINEERINGDESIGN: QUANTITATIVE APPROACHESPatricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of TechnologyFrederick Berry, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Page 13.1370.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Using Writing to Assess Learning in Engineering Design: Quantitative ApproachesINTRODUCTIONThis poster (and paper supplement) presents the final results from NSF grant #0404923 –“Writing for Learning and Assessment in Engineering Design Courses.” Quantitativeresults are given from three years using Calibrated Peer Review™ (CPR™) as apedagogy and assessment tool in a junior-level

Collection

1997 Annual Conference

Authors

James A. Newell

Session 2513 The Use of Peer-Review in the Undergraduate Laboratory James A. Newell Department of Chemical Engineering University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND 58202-7101IntroductionThe value of peer review in developing both critical thinking and student writing skills is well-documented (1-4). The first drafts tend to be improved because the students’ realize that their peerswill be reading their writing (5). Additionally, the student is provided with a formalized to revisethe original report in response to the review. The reviewer benefits by being forced

Conference Session

Innovations in Teaching Physics or Engineering Phy

Collection

2008 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Teresa Larkin, American University; Dan Budny, University of Pittsburgh

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Physics & Physics

understanding within introductoryphysics and engineering curricula. The prominent strategy to be described involves havingstudents research, write, and present a paper at a formal class “conference” held at the end of theterm. Throughout this process, students are exposed to all aspects of preparing a professionalconference paper including the submission of an abstract, preparation of a paper for review,participation in a rigorous peer review, and presentation of their final paper at the conference.One focus of this paper will be to highlight each of the aspects of the paper writing process,placing particular emphasis on the significance of the peer review process. A discussioninvolving the rubrics developed and used during the peer review process will

Conference Session

LEES Session 8: Care and Commitments

Collection

2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer Mallette, Boise State University

learning through teamwork, while the latter focuses on projects that allow studentsand faculty to leverage the potential of teams to solve problems and support projects that oftenhave tangible outputs beyond the classroom. In some cases, in-class writing and work can beused alongside collaborative learning, where the goal is using writing and peer engagement tolearn course concepts more effectively [11, 12]. In other cases, teamwork assignments may notfocus on writing specifically but use writing to communicate design solutions or data analysis.Typically, these projects may culminate in a report, a presentation, or some tangible product thatinvolves writing (e.g. a final team report communicating results to a project sponsor). Theseprojects may

Conference Session

Assessment in Multidisciplinary Learning Environment

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

David Clippinger, Pennsylvania State University, Behrend College ; Steven Nozaki, Pennsylvania State University, Behrend College; Ruth Camille Pflueger, Pennsylvania State University, Behrend College

Tagged Divisions

Multidisciplinary Engineering

were analyzed. These student papers formed the entirety of ayear-group cohort of students enrolled in a Mechanical Engineering Technology program at theauthors’ institution. As will be discussed in the conclusion, this analysis was part of a multi-yeareffort to measure the effect of student peer tutoring on student writing style. The cohort ofstudents whose work was measured for this paper were those who had received no peer tutoring.The nineteen works used as the source data for the examples of student writing averaged 463words in length (median = 387) and ranged between 1,595 words at the longest and 99 words atthe shortest (IQR 206 to 520).ResultsResults obtained from each of the methods described here are as follows in tables 2,3,4 and 5