their non-ELC peers.BackgroundPrior research has suggested several potential contributing factors to lower rates of academicsuccess and retention within undergraduate engineering. These include lack of support andrecognition [2], inadequate advising [3], and feelings of disconnection to peers and faculty [4]–[6]. In addition to these factors linked with negative student outcomes, research has alsoidentified a host of best practices linked to positive student outcomes. Called high-impactpractices, these include learning communities, first-year seminars, writing-intensive courses,problem-based learning, collaborative assignments, and research and service opportunities [7].Specific to engineering, the use of hands-on collaborative design projects
, promotes collaboration, inspires generosity, and encourages life-longlearning.In this paper, we present the framework of the program focusing on the structure of the summerworkshop (MadE Leadership Mentoring Program) and the introductory course (EngineeringLeadership I: Theory and Practice). The MadE Leadership Mentoring Program is a summerworkshop that allowed students to conduct individual introspection while developing the coreidentity of the program and the leader peer group. Engineering Leadership I permitted theexploration into how leadership theory can inform and direct the way leadership is practiced anda platform for feedback during the semester as matters pertain to leading first-year students. Thecourse is constructed to advance our
: Engineering, Arts and SciencesNumber of students: 16 students, 5 yearsInitiatives: 1. Two, one-credit courses 2. Peer mentoring of seniors to freshmenResults: 1. Beneficial to the retention of the freshmen 2. New study habits and the importance of time management 3. Experience in research, report writing, and poster presentations were also found to be very beneficial to the freshmen 4) NSF S-STEM Scholarship [20] University: University of Maryland Baltimore County Discipline: Mechanical engineering Number of students: 45 students, 5 years Initiatives: 1. Proactive recruitment 2. Selected high impact practices such as orientation, one-to one faculty mentoring, peer
a presentation; (3) review feedback and revise slides; and (4) write and post areflection. This assignment enables students to • Demonstrate their understanding of a specific fluid mechanics concept; • Apply a specific fluid mechanics concept to a real-world situation; • Communicate their application in a clear, concise manner to their peers; • Design visuals to accurately demonstrate a concept; • Provide and accept constructive criticism; and • Reflect on their learning.The App was introduced in fall 2010 to improve both instructor teaching and student learningand to connect learning outcomes more explicitly with engineering practice. The App integratedthe core principles of effective teaching and learning with
AC 2012-3428: USING TECHNOLOGY TO TEACH COMMUNICATIONSAND COMMUNICATIONS TO TEACH TECHNOLOGY IN A STUDY-ABROADLEARNING ENVIRONMENTMr. David Bowles, Louisiana State University David (Boz) Bowles is a Technical Communication Instructor in the Engineering Communication Studio at Louisiana State University. He earned a bachelor’s degree in English and a master’s of fine arts in creative writing from Virginia Commonwealth University.Paige Davis, Louisiana State University Paige Davis has 22 years of experience in the College of Engineering at Louisiana State University. For the past two years, she has directed a study abroad program specifically designed for engineering students. In addition to teaching, she assists with
10-17 who were novice learners in introductory programming. Comparing the group that usedOpenAI’s code generator Codex and the baseline group that did not use Codex for their learning,the authors found that the Codex group performed better at generating code during the evaluationand post-test. In another study, Kazemitabaar et al. [20] developed CodeAid, a Large LanguageModel-based programming assistant for undergraduate students similar to a teaching assistant.CodeAid was designed to support students in programming by answering questions about code,helping to write code, and helping to fix code. Through studying the class deployment ofCodeAid over a semester, the authors proposed design implications for designing AI assistants ineducational
well as variations in familial and community understandings of neurodiversity [20].Existing literature shows a pattern of disparities in formal diagnosis rates and access to supportsbetween individuals from minoritized racial groups and their White peers [21]-[24].Additionally, neurodiverse women frequently receive a diagnosis of anxiety or depression, whileADHD or autism diagnoses are delayed or unrecognized [25], [26]. The demographic data of the31 participants are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Summary of Demographic Information (Total N = 31) Field of Study N (%) Biology 5 (16.1%) Biomedical/Health Sciences
report on the benchmarks and outcomes serving as key indicators of success.MethodsAll relevant literature about PFF programs was searched; beginning with the implementation ofthe first PFF Program initiatives as sponsored by the AAC&U and CGS. Four databases (ISIWeb of Science, Engineering Index, ERIC—Education Resources Information Center, andAcademic Search Complete) were searched using a combination of search terms, including“preparing future faculty,” “engineering,” “faculty development,” “teacher education,” “faculty,”and “program effectiveness” for publications appearing from 1993 to present. Searches usingGoogle and Google Scholar were also considered for those publications not included in oursearch engines or not submitted for peer
, but the studies were based only on studentperspectives, whereas, student final grades were not included in the analysis to confirm studentsreport. Student classroom engagement greatly involves peer-to-peer interaction and not student-to-machine interaction. Nevertheless, student classroom engagement is complex and broad to behandled in one direction. Some researchers classified student behavior as a predictor of classroomengagement [11]. Likewise, Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong [12] classified factors thataffected student classroom engagement into two categories namely; the indicators and thefacilitators. The author further divided indicator factor into three categories namely: affective,behavioral, and cognitive and the facilitator
from classmates in a collegial atmosphere. The reviewers gain agreater understanding of the specific details and clarity required in a proposal. The reviewersoften identify problems in a proposal that are also present in the proposal written by thereviewers themselves. The ability of the reviewers to see their own mistakes critically and edittheir own proposal is greatly improved.The students have 3-4 weeks to finish writing their proposal after the peer review. Each groupgives a 10 minute oral presentation followed by 5 minutes of questions during the last week ofclass. Every group member is required to speak during the presentation and be prepared toanswer questions. The students and instructors ask questions after each presentation.In
content generation assignment intwo sections of a senior computer science and engineering (CSCE) capstone course. In these twosections, 49 students were asked how interactive ethics assignments helped them becomeknowledgeable about ethical issues, analyze the ethical implications of their projects, and thevalue of choosing their own ethics topics. Students in both sections on average rated the ethicsassignments highly for learning ethics issues and being able to choose topics, with more mixedratings of the ability to analyze their own capstone projects. From written responses, we foundthat students valued assignments for bringing awareness of relevant ethical issues in society, forproviding opportunities to learn with and from peers, and for
college is bothnormal and surmountable. The ecological approach attempts to instill the same message, not justwithin individual students, but within the social ecology of the classroom. Namely, rather thanbeing delivered in a lab setting as in prior work, the ecological-approach targets carefully selectedpopulations—classrooms with specific, known demographic disparities in performance. Theintervention is adapted to these classrooms via focus groups. Rather than being delivered by anexperimenter, course instructors or TAs are trained to deliver the intervention and to engage theirstudents in peer discussion around the intervention. These peers are not random strangers but ratherclassmates with whom they will work together over the term. The
participants usingTDC methods that guide and motivate student teams through each phase of project development.The program accomplishes this by providing resources that are directly tied to the successfulcompletion of required milestones called “Levels” and optional opportunities called “OptionAreas.” Guidelines and awards attached to milestone deliverables provide schedule structure,motivation, instruction, and funding to the team as design projects mature from the preliminaryidea-stage to a sound design solution. Graduate student peer reviews complement academic andtechnical guidance provided by both faculty and project mentors/customers. The semesterculminates with a professional-style conference, called the Design Challenge Showcase, whichprovides
themselves.Students were encouraged to post articles of interest. Instructors also prompteddiscussions on topics relevant to the course, such as writing case studies, providingStrength, Improvement, Insight11 (SII) feedback to peers, and interviewing for a job. Thejob interview discussion, for example, happened during a week of on-campus interviewsand two groups contributed to an article on the topic that week.InstrumentsThree instruments were used to collect data: (1) Industry/Advisory Board survey,questionnaire and interview; (2) student focus group discussion; and (3) an online wikiarchive. These instruments were selected based on best-practice methodologies ineducation assessment8 and best fit for the scope of the study.Three College Advisory Board
., 2010, “Measuring engineering design self-efficacy,” Journal ofEngineering Education, 99, pp. 71-79. Page 26.1074.11 AppendixThe rubric used for peer evaluation to determine individual contributions is shown below. Peer Rating of Team Members: ENGR 350 In the table below, write down the names of the individual members of the group in which you worked for the project as part of ENGR 350 this semester. Rate your participation and the participation of each group member. You have to rate the degree to which each member fulfilled his
Skills, (e) Networking, Finding Mentors &Mentoring, (f) Understanding and Exploring Pathways to Interdisciplinary Careers, (f)Leadership and Entrepreneurship Skills for career success, (g) Professional & ResponsibleConduct, (h) Mental Health & Wellbeing. These topics were tailored specifically for the needs ofcomputational science students with a goal to increase their awareness and preparation forinterdisciplinary careers. This paper discusses the modifications and adaptations made to fosterthe success of first year graduate students from diverse academic backgrounds throughnavigating interdisciplinary computational science and developing peer cohorts and pathways tocareers.Course learning outcomes and students’ development were
pedagogy, we found them surprising.As a result of this survey, it became clear to us that many of our university’s instructors neededto be engaged in more conversation and training around pedagogical research, rather than beingleft to come to their own conclusions about what they feel the most important elements of theirpedagogy are. We may not have anticipated this particular need when we began designing theITM, but it is precisely the kind of opportunity it was designed for nonetheless.Beginning in the fall of 2020, the commission began to integrate the ITM into many of thepedagogical development activities it offers: actively during the annual workshop andconference, during new faculty training, and voluntary peer observation, as well as
research centre. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Preliminary Findings of a Phenomenological Study ofMiddle Eastern Women’s Experiences Studying Engineering in IrelandKeywords: Arabic, Middle Eastern, women, gender, engineering education research, PBL,collaborative learning, Peer Learning, supportThis paper reports analysis of phenomenological interviews conducted with eight womenstudying engineering, all Arabic speakers and practicing Muslims, and all from thecountries of Oman and Kuwait. Data were collected as part of a larger study of women’sexperiences learning engineering in institutions of higher education in Poland, Portugal,and Ireland. The eight women contributing data for the
-LEPpeers on real world projects. Finally, a performance activity will be used to directly observe ifand how LEP students approach systems integration problems differently from their peers.IntroductionEngineering majors at East Central State University are similar to those at other schoolsthroughout the nation – students choose to major in one area and they follow a curriculum that islargely specified but has a few electives of various types sprinkled throughout. The primarycommonalities to all majors are a set of math, physics, chemistry, writing, and technology andsociety courses. With this structure, it is not surprising to learn that students in different majorsdevelop different sets of rigorous technical skills and that these skills do not
accepted solutions and anticipating new directions for researchPrior to the Fall 2019 revision, students were encouraged to select a topic from a list of ~10topics chosen by Engineering and Writing Arts instructors each semester. Other instructorsallowed students to choose their own topic subject to instructor approval. The crucialrequirement was that the topic be rooted in technology, but also be topical and relevant tosocietal considerations, such that it was well represented in both peer-reviewed technicalliterature and the popular press. Examples of topics used prior to 2019 include self-drivingvehicles, smart grid, asteroid mining and wearable sensors.Once students had chosen a topic, for the rhetorical analysis, they located and
in the areas of research, teaching, and service. LEGACY wasintentionally developed to prepare and diversify the next generation of engineering leaders inacademia. Rybarczyk et al. (2011) argue that postdoctoral training should include independentresearch experience, productivity in the form of peer-reviewed publications, and improvement inscholar’s skills in grant writing (Rybarczyk et al., 2011). To prepare scholars, LEGACY trainsscholars in grant creation and management, research program development, and career mapping.Additionally, as LEGACY Director, Dr. Cox works with scholars to independently brandthemselves using social and professional networks so that more people can learn about thescholar and their work. Scholars also receive
format for the class allowed us to successfully addressfour issues: to establish and achieve higher expectations for the teams, to improve eachteam’s understanding of the fundamental engineering and science of its project, toencourage and increase the interactions between the teams, and to help the students tobetter “think through” the writing process which in turn helps them to better understandthe organization of their project.IntroductionThe multidisciplinary capstone design course at the University of Houston, taken by thestudents in the Departments of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE), IndustrialEngineering (IE) and Mechanical Engineering (ME), has been described previously 1.This course is a one semester, three-hour credit course
serves tocontextualize the new content that students have to learn before solving the problem. Lectureson the new content are not given. Instead, students are guided through a PBL cycle that helpsthem to identify and construct new knowledge that is synthesized with their existing knowledgeto be applied in solving the given problem.10, 11 As shown in Figure 1, the typical PBL cycle11basically consists of • Phase 1: problem restatement and identification, • Phase 2: peer teaching, synthesis of information, and solution formulation • Phase 3: generalization, closure and reflection. Meet the problem Self-directed learning Phase 1 Problem identification
asfrequent interactions with faculty and peers and more participation in academic activities, is mostimportant for student persistence. Townsend and Wilson [4] concurred, identifying that theseinteractions contribute to a student sense of belonging at the institution. Rendón [18] found thatthe more students perceive an interaction as being positive, the more they view themselves as anintegral and valued member of their college, critical for an overall positive experience. A number of studies have identified academic integration in college as more importantthan social integration for transfer student persistence. For instance, Townsend and Wilson [4]found that community college transfers make their social connection in the classroom, and
for suchcourses is that related topics are typically perceived by students especially at the undergraduatelevel as uninteresting and irrelevant, while it is difficult to bring the “real-world” experience tothe classroom.This paper summarizes the author’s experiences in developing and teaching for the first time aSoftware Specifications course to the newly established Software Engineering (SE) degreeprogram at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) in Spring 2014. The SE program belongs inan Engineering College which emphasizes undergraduate education (there is no graduate degreeoffered). The Software Specifications course is a required course for all SE students at FGCU. Itincludes topics such as Eliciting, Writing, and Testing Requirements
Page 26.1149.2difficulties, the process of analyzing ethnographic data is often one of the most difficult steps forresearchers to navigate during the research process. Much of this confusion comes from attemptsto demonstrate an understanding of what was actually observed.In their seminal book, “Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes,” Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw2 discusstechniques for writing effective fieldnotes in a variety of observational settings. They state thatfieldnotes can often be written from multiple perspectives. Using a first-person point of view,researchers are able to describe specifically what they observe or experience during the datacollection process. This is particularly useful when the researcher is a member of the group s/heis
student’s decision toremain an engineering major or even to stay at a university. It is therefore imperative to providestudents with a strong foundation in the first semester Calculus I and to provide the necessarysupport in order for them to be successful.Active learning, engagement in the classroom, and peer-to-peer collaboration have deliveredpromising results in freshman level STEM courses.4-7 For math courses, two of the mostcommonly used approaches are supplemental instruction (SI) and peer-led team learning (PLTL).The SI approach, developed at University of Missouri-Kansas City, focuses on at-risk coursesand consists of voluntary sessions led by undergraduate students. At-risk courses are gatewaycourses which historically have failure or
1 and the following are major definitions of assessment instruments that were embeddedinto the course: Project Journal: The maintenance of a bound design project journal is a requirement of the course by each team member. Teamwork (Peer-assessed): At least twice in the semester students are requested to complete a written evaluation of team members’ performance. Project Portfolio: This is an ongoing maintenance of a project portfolio. Records of team meetings, and updated plans for upcoming work are maintained in the portfolio, and are reviewed in project meetings with the instructor and industry’s sponsor. Standard contents of the portfolio reflects all proceedings of the team work on the
communicating their solutions to engineering problems, ≠ meaningful experience on diverse teams in applying the engineering design process and Page 15.178.2 communicating their designs, ≠ the essential and motivating information about the engineering disciplines so that they make an informed choice about their engineering major, are capable of functioning on multi-disciplinary engineering teams, and appreciate the role of engineering in modern society, and ≠ proactive and high-quality academic advising, professional development opportunities, peer mentoring, and peer tutoring,and we strive to produce a large
a touchstonecase study throughout the academic term. This project was referred to in class, and by thestudents, as the “widget project.” The widget project gave students and faculty members acommon background for discussion, an opportunity to immediately apply new knowledgelearned in the class, and a vehicle for peer to peer education.Daily Topical Coverage The Design Project Management class was conducted in the System DynamicsLaboratory, a studio laboratory with 12 two-student workstations, a dual-headed projectionsystem useful for supporting impromptu design sharing and small group reporting. The DPMclass met two days per week, from 10:00 a.m. to 11:50 a.m. on Tuesdays and Thursdays.Typically, each two hour session was conducted