forimprovement was creation of a collaborative and inclusive environment. Overall, most scoresincreased between semesters. This may be a function of more time spent together as a team,learning each other’s nuances, and figuring out how to best work toward a common goal. Withthat stated, the teamwork survey was completed after the March 2020 pandemic stay-at-homeorders were issued and courses went online. There is a chance that greater empathy was realizedduring those trying times, especially considering that the competitions were canceled for 2020.The 2020-2021 teams responded (Table 7) with higher agreement with “my team fosters acollaborative environment” and “my team fosters an inclusive environment” than the 2019-2020teams. Overall, the 2020-2021
a design of experiment framework, leadingto statistically significant conclusions. A comparative study between multiple sections in particularbetween traditional and online delivery was reported in Wilck and Kauffmann (2013) 21.This course is scheduled for engineering sophomores (and selected freshmen) instead of seniorsas documented in some literature2. We believe it is advantageous to start learning and sharpeningteamwork and leadership skills as earlier as possible and engineering economics serves as a greatplatform. Such a belief, has been noted a century ago by a renowned engineer John Harford 21 thatengineering and economics “help to develop the very valuable habit of thinking in terms of groupsrather than of individuals”, where the
Lon- don, CT. He holds a PhD in Ship Design from the Technical Univeristy of Delft, Delft, the Netherlands. He is an active duty member of the U.S. Coast Guard and has previously served aboard a USCG HEALY (Polar Icebreaker) and has also served as port engineer for USCG suface assets in the Pacific Northwest. He holds a tenured military faculty position at the Coast Guard Academy and teaches courses in Ship Design, Marine Engineering, Dynamics and Statics. Page 24.1319.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Flipping a Newtonian Dynamics Classroom
the course based on completion of the11 units in the app. Note that students were told at the beginning of the class that use of the appwas required, although the syllabus did not state what role it would have in the grade. Studentswere not told that the app would be for extra credit only until the last week class. Figure 3: Completion rate of app lessons by weekOf the 102 students who opted in to the study, 10 had actually passed the pretest. To avoid aceiling effect, we took those 10 students out of our sample. The intervention in this study was theuse of the augmented reality app as a supplement to the standard course content. Students in 2 ofthe 4 sections of the class were invited to use the app. In total, 57
impact.” “My experience will definitely have an impact on student achievement. The more honest experiences I can provide to my students whether directly in a lesson or just in conversation then the more students will feel a direct link to a program or plan of furthering their own education.” “I think there will be an impact on helping prepare kids for research.” “Yes, it will have a great impact on the students, because I met other colleagues teaching the same course as mine and we brainstormed on how to effectively improve our teaching skills in the field of robotics, automaton and mechatronics. Besides that, the research experience I had will be incorporated in my syllabus.” “Yes, I
Academy of Engineering(NAE) has identified that the engineers of 2020 need to have strong analytical and problemsolving skills while being readily adaptable to advancing technologies in a globally connectedworld (1). A classroom syllabus typically contains conventional lectures and a group project. Itmay also contain a business example provided by a guest lecture or case study. These currentteaching methods have displayed positive results, but barriers between academia and industrycan be made seamless by incorporating both advances in technology and motivational techniques(2) . Students will find the transition to be more cohesive after they have completed a curriculumthat facilitates superior student understanding.Initial Assessment: Learning
the first 2 weeks). The conversation should be informal in nature and faculty should allow time for additional, unexpected conversation topics. Schedule about 20 minutes per student. Have a copy of the syllabus available so you can refer to course outcomes, etc. Common questions should focus primarily on the course (outcomes, topics, projects, etc.), in addition to the following: o Ask students to share a bit about their background (could be education and/or personal in nature depending on what the student wants to share) o What are you excited about related to this course? o Is there anything you are anxious about? o Do you have any questions about the course
their associated benefits. Portions of this course, and related SDN concepts are introduced as part of the fiber optics courses such as Data Networking, are taught exclusivelyonline as part of CUNY’s distance learning program B. NetFPGA(instructors present live lectures online weekly, which arerecorded so that students can view the content at any time).Distance learning students are required to attend labs oncampus at least once per week. While the labs in the first halfof the course are intended to develop a basic understanding offiber optic networking, labs in the second half of the courseare devoted to SDN concepts. The SDN labs we havedeveloped use
reveals that students were very positive aboutthe focus on a real-life engineering design project. As institutions of higher education considermethods of engaging typically under-represented youth in engineering, this project provides auseful model as to what can be achieved by students.Appendix A - Grant Logic ModelAppendix B-- Details about Each Cohort Cohort 1 OverviewThe first cohort met at the university from mid-fall of 2013 to April of 2014. This cohort wasenrolled for transferable credit in the College of Engineering freshman design course taught by auniversity instructor who also taught this course concurrently with university freshman. Theprogram course used the same syllabus, projects and metrics as the college level course, but
conceptual discussions.Problem definitionTo overcome that deficiency, to improve teaching, and enhance learning of students, instructorshave over time developed novel and innovative concepts [7] that include, but are not limited, to: 1. Course projects Page 25.231.2 2. Software assignments 3. Journal reading and research 4. Online help, class handouts, and other ancillary materials.However, most of such efforts rely on instructor’s experience and his/ her desire and initiative toimprove teaching skills. Since many OR instructors are not familiar enough with the vastresources available in the area of student learning, they usually do not
, we follow the cognition of curriculum practice by Goodlad (1979) in considering acurriculum as more than just a set of courses but a design of educational system that includes boththeoreticalandpracticalelements.Therefore,ourcasestudystrivestonotonlydescribethepresentstateaboutwhattheSFTcurriculumisbutalsouncovertheunderlyinglogicsandideasaboutwhyandhowsuchcurriculumisdesignedandimplementedtoshowtheprobablefuturetrajectory.3.2.SpecificationofCaseContextTheinvestigationofthisstudyisbasedonanin-depthcasestudyofBUAAatschoollevel,ashastheutilityofrelyingonasinglecasestudy.Theeffectivenessofcasestudyresearchhasbeenaffirmedbyanumberofprominentscholars(Eisenhardt,1989;Yin,2009),inthisstudy
two partnershipsrepresent case studies of effective cooperation in the design of mutually validated professionalengineering courses. The UK University concerned is Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) withapproximately 30,000 students located in South Yorkshire, England. SHU became a university in1992 following a period as a polytechnic from 1969 with elements of the institution tracing theirhistory to the mid 19th century. The two Malaysian institutions are Tunku Abdul Rahman College(TARC) and KBU International College (KBU). Both colleges are located in Kuala Lumpur.There continues to be a great desire by students from Malaysia to achieve a degree levelqualification from a western HE institution, as well as securing professional body
inclusion in the TF program, their training, aswell as the curriculum completed by the first year students merit an update at this time.Recruitment:Technology has made the recruitment of TFs easier than it was ten years ago. Students areinformed of the opportunity to become a TF by the college's electronic list serv (FYI: For YourInformation). Minimum requirements include satisfactory GPA, prior successful experience withthe course, and interest in completing the required one credit seminar (ENES 388T Seminar inCollege Teaching). Applications are also provided online and ask students to provide adescription of their college activities including involvement in student organizations andprojects, relevant leadership, tutoring, or teaching experiences
conducted by the Middle States Commission onHigher Education (MSCHE).MSCHE accreditation2 requires evaluation of 14 “standards,” whereas ABET accreditation isbased on evaluation of eight “criteria.” Both include requirements that programs define learningoutcomes at several levels (e.g. course-level and program-level) and demonstrate that studentsachieve those learning outcomes. Learning outcomes are defined by ABET as [1]: Student outcomes describe what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of graduation. These relate to the skills, knowledge, and behaviors that students acquire as they progress through the program.ABET Criterion 3 requires that programs that they accredit demonstrate that students
students (this was the case for thedynamics class at HSKA). These skriptums tend to be much shorter than textbooks, andconcentrate on the really important things.Prof Deutsch Reflections on Class StructureIn the US all instructors have to set up a syllabus, which not only displays the course ofinstruction but also defines how the final grade is determined. A typical grading scheme mighthave Homeworks at 20%, Quizzes at 10%, Midterms at 30%, and the Final Exam at 40%. InGermany this does not exist, since it’s entirely the final exam which determines the grade.Sometimes the German professors let the students do homework or have tests to make thestudents reflect on the content and work on problems, but these assignments don’t influence thefinal
others, How people learn, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.[17] E. A. C. a. others, "Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs," ABET Report E1 11/19, vol. 3, 2003.[18] G. Beauchamp, "INEL 5508 Digital Control Systems Course Syllabus," UPRM Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Mayaguez, PR., 2007.[19] L. W. Anderson, D. R. Krathwohl and B. S. Bloom, A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives, Allyn & Bacon, 2001.[20] Texas Instruments Incorporated, TMS320F28069 Technical Reference Manual, 2014.[21] Texas Instruments Incorporated, DRV8833 User's Manual, 2014.[22] J. F. Patarroyo and G. Beauchamp, "A Microcontroller Based System for Improving
and learning strategies, use of emerging technologies, and mobile teaching and learning strategies.Cherie D. Edwards (Dr. )Michelle Soledad (Assistant Professor) Michelle Soledad is an Assistant Professor in the Iron Range Engineering - Bell Program at Minnesota State University, Mankato. She holds degrees in Electrical Engineering (BS, MEngg) from the Ateneo de Davao University in Davao City, Philippines, and in Engineering Education (Ph.D.) from Virginia Tech. Her research interests include teaching and learning experiences in fundamental engineering courses, and data-informed reflective practice. Michelle's professional experience includes roles in industry and academia, having worked as a software engineer, project
education organization, astate science teacher organization, to teachers who visited the Center for class field trips, andthrough social media. Recruitment tasks were accomplished by Center education staff andpartner organizations. Interested teachers applied through an online application system during afour month submission window. To be considered complete, submitted applications had toinclude a resume, a series of short essays, and a form completed by two of their professionalreferences. Completed applications were reviewed by Center education staff, with finalacceptance decisions being made by the program manager.Participant Demographics Self-reported demographic information for the 22 teachers who have participated in theRET program is
was selected for evaluation.Background and MethodsThe EEBoard was evaluated in a regularly scheduled circuits laboratory which was held inconjunction with the second semester of a two semester circuits lecture course. Ten labs wereperformed on a weekly basis during the semester to reinforce the electric circuits principlespresented in the classroom. Each lab session contained a pre-laboratory assignment whichincluded a PSpice®/OrCAD® circuit simulation followed by a laboratory exercise. Each studentindividually completed the pre-laboratory assignment and submitted a weekly pre-lab report. Alaboratory assignment containing a detailed written description with diagrams and figures of thelaboratory apparatus was provided prior to each laboratory
., Nowak, M. and Alnajjar, H., 2002, “Integrating Science and Math into theFreshman Engineering Design Course,” Proceedings of the 2002 American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.[8] Project Links, Renssselaer Polytechnic Institute, http://links.math.rpi.edu/[9] Unified Engineering Class Web Site, source: http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/, DateAccessed: June 9, 2003[10] 18.01 Single Variable Calculus, source: http://www-math.mit.edu/18.01/syllabus/index.html, Date Accessed: August 1, 2003[11] 18.02 Multivariable Calculus - Fall 2002, source: http://www-math.mit.edu/18.02/info.pdf,Date Accessed: August 1, 2003[12] 18.03 Differential Equations Fall 2002, source: http://web.mit.edu/18.03/, Date Accessed:August 1
, 2007.20 Fried, C.," In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning", Computers & Education Vol. 50, No. 3, 2008, pp. 906-914.21 Kladko, B., "Wireless Classrooms: Tool or Distraction?", The Record, Bergen County, NJ, 2005.22 McWilliams, G., "The laptop backlash", The W allstreet Journal, New York, NY, 2005, pp. B1.23 Anderson, R.," Beyond PowerPoint: Building a New Classroom Presenter", Syllabus Magazine, 2004.24 Anderson, R., R. Anderson, L. McDowell, and B. Simon, "Use of Classroom Presenter in Engineering Courses", 35th A SEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Indianapolis, IN: IEEE, 2005.25 Driver, M.," Exploring student perceptions of group interaction and class satisfaction in the web-enhanced
endemic, students simply did not feel comfortable publiclyconfronting teammates with poor ratings in the report, worrying about hard feelings andretribution from slighted teammates. Another drawback was the considerable effort required toproduce the report, coming precisely at the crux of team effort, where teams were struggling tofinish up projects at term’s end.3.2 Version 2: Anonymous Evaluation, Individual ReportsIn the next iteration of our system, the peer evaluations were made anonymous, and restricted tothe one-page questionnaire of ratings and comments; no Teamwork Report was required.Students were explicitly promised anonymity of peer evaluations in the course syllabus, and peerevaluations were emailed directly to the instructor by
expertise research and design inspiration); and the final two weeks on thestudents supporting themselves as future designers who are aware of their design processes (9.Design awareness and design signatures, 10. Presenting final ideal design signatures andreflection). These topics as well as class activities and assignments are presented in Figure 1 andcan be found on the Design Signatures website at the following address:https://www.designsignatures.org.The seminar was a 2-credit optional course offering that students applied to. It was graded ascredit/no credit. The first instance of the seminar was delivered in the winter quarter (January -March) 2020 in person, with a pivot to online for the final class as the pandemic started. Allother
engineering students due to the fact that it may or may not be possibleto change a person’s ethical values . Page 15.906.84. Incorporating a Real World Case Study into the Syllabus of a Senior ConstructionEngineering Course, Eli FiniCase Study Used: Mauritius Auditorium Design Case StudyThis paper investigates the effect of bringing real world case studies on college students’self efficacy, their confidence, and their motivation toward an engineering field. It wasfound that working with real cases increases student’s motivation and maximizes theirlearning by becoming personally committed to course and program goals. As a result oftrying to address the problem
courses called Engineering Ethics. Resourcesidentified in the guide are approved by the faculty-librarian team in charge of web development.The Guide is even more useful when access to the web site is provided from multiple locationssuch as from the Library’s site, the course pages and via online interactive course managementsystems such as webCT and Blackboard. With this in mind, a research guide to support Page 9.552.8engineering ethics in different courses and design projects was created. It is linked from the Main“Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference &
students and provides the instructor anadjustment factor for use in grading. Though the CATME adjustment factors are often used toadjust team grades upward or downward for individual assignments, in this class formulas areused to convert an "average" peer feedback score into a grade of 85% and a "best possible" peerfeedback score to a grade of 100%. This scaling is identified in the course syllabus, which helpsto calibrate student expectations. All scores are posted to an online grade book visible to thestudents, allowing them to make adjustments in how they interact with their team as the semesterprogresses.The CATME system also allows students to provide private comments to the instructor on howthe team and its individuals were working (or not
. ABET Learning Outcomes 3 (regarding effective communication) was adequately addressed. 4. The diversity and inclusion topics were introduced to the class with minimal additional preparation effort on the behalf on the instructor. 5. No technical coursework (traditional civil engineering calculations and analyses) was removed from the course to create room in the syllabus for the topics of diversity and inclusion. 6. Students felt comfortable sharing their thoughts through both verbal and written means of communication. 7. Students clearly gained an appreciation of the broader socioeconomic impacts that engineering projects have on communities. 8. The case was robust enough, and the teaching interventions
closely paralleled one or more of the topics covered on the course syllabus. Inaddition, their chosen topic had to be congruous with the new millennium conference theme.Students were encouraged to research past, present, and future applications of their chosen topic.The key idea was to have students explore a topic(s) in more depth than would be covered inclass, thus making them the “experts.” Each student in the AU course wrote a single-authorpaper.The theme for papers prepared for the Pittsburgh conference was a little different. Given thatPitt uses an integrated curriculum approach for their freshman courses, students were told thatwhere possible, their papers should relate to topics covered in the fall or spring semester of theirPhysics
Paper ID #14512Inquiry-Based Learning to Explore the Design of the Built EnvironmentMs. Anahid Behrouzi, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Anahid Behrouzi is a doctoral student of civil engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She has been involved with STEM education beginning in 2003 as a volunteer and summer instructor with the North Carolina Museum of Life and Science. She has been engaged with undergraduate/ graduate course delivery in the topic areas of engineering problem-solving, structural engineering, and reinforced concrete design at North Carolina State University (2008-2011), the
Hypatia program. Bothprograms help women in engineering to explore critical issues surrounding women's roles inpredominately male fields.For the first-year seminar course, the students are divided into two sections of thirty-threestudents. It has been found that there is more student interaction in smaller class sizes. Onesection meets on Monday, and the other section meets on Wednesday. On Thursdays, the entiregroup meets as one with the Galileo students. Galileo is the male counterpart to the first-yearHypatia program and is also offered through the CEED office. Each class is 75 minutes inlength. Topics covered in the first-year seminar course can be found in Table 1.As the course syllabus states, the course is designed to assist the students