development model where they wereimmersed in tasks in which the facilitator supported an inquiry-based learning environment. The professional development model consisted of two full days of inquiry experience anda half-day at the end of implementation dedicated to reflection of practice. The first day ofprofessional development focused mainly on Algebra concepts and was given prior toimplementing any of the Math Out of the Box lessons. After teachers implemented the tenlessons relating to Algebra, they returned for the second day of professional development dealingprimarily with data concepts. Teachers were also given the opportunity to reflect on the Algebralessons and discuss issues relating to implementation with their peers. Topics such as
, design reports alone have been the method by which the students’ performance isjudged in typical capstone design courses. However, this limits the ability of the faculty to determinethe students’ interaction with their companies and also with their peers. The desire to evaluateteaming skills as well as technical competence led the authors to investigate different approaches forassessing student learning. In this paper, the authors demonstrate the use of company evaluations,status reports, student self-assessments, peer reviews, and oral reports, as well as design reports toquantify student performance both as team members and design engineers. These methods will bediscussed and examples presented showing how the results can be used to improve
that if it were not for CREATE makingthese opportunities and resources available to them, they would not have known about them orsought them out. Meetings with peer and faculty mentors have also been mentioned as beingvery helpful.Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge funding from the National Science Foundation S-STEM program, grant number DUE-1833738. The Institutional Review Board of the University of Nevada, Reno has approved all procedures. They also wish to thank members of the management team, Ivy Chin, Meg Fitzgerald, Joe Bozsik, Lourdes Gonzales and Candice Bauer for their invaluable participation in the project. References1. E.C. Brown, M.A. Farwell and A.M. Kennedy, “Writing and Implementing successful NSF
for the Center of Enhancement for Engineering Diversity where she taught a seminar for first-year female engineering students and coordinated precollege outreach events. As a researcher, she has previously served as a Graduate Research Assistant on the VT PEERS project studying middle school students reg- ularly engaging in engineering activities. In addition, she dedicates her spare time to exhibiting at the Virginia Tech Science Festival and hosting several sessions for the Kindergarten-to-college (K2C) Initia- tive.Dr. Jacob R Grohs, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Jacob Grohs is an Assistant Professor in Engineering Education at Virginia Tech with Affiliate Faculty status in Biomedical
MyEngineeringLab system.Laurel Whisler, Clemson University Laurel Whisler is Assistant Director and Coordinator of Course Support Programs in Clemson Univer- sity’s Westmoreland Academic Success Program. In this capacity, she provides vision and direction for the Tutoring and Peer-Assisted Learning (PAL) programs and provides support to the General Engi- neering Learning Community. She is also co-developer of Entangled Learning, a model of rigorously- documented, self-directed learning in communities of practice. She has an M.A. in Music from The Pennsylvania State University and an M.L.S. from Indiana University.Ms. Abigail T. Stephan, Clemson University Abigail Stephan is a doctoral student in the Learning Sciences program at
modest funding forsupplies and are expected to attend the national Society for Women in Engineering conference inthe fall along with their local sponsor or a chaperone. Ambassadors are asked to write monthlyjournals of their progress in their projects, including photos when possible of any events. Viaonline webinars and phone calls, the Ambassadors have a few opportunities to meet one anotherbefore attending SWE and sharing a room with a peer. Formative feedback suggested that girlswho are paired together for rooming at SWE should receive notice of their partner early in thefall, so they could communicate before sharing space for 4 days. At the SWE conference,Ambassadors engage in some of the content of the conference, including keynotes
additional two hours per week with their engineering instructor and supplementalinstruction led by upper-level peer mentors. Faculty mentors are introduced to the studentsthrough weekly lunches beginning after their first quarter. The lunches, which provide a venuefor professional development discussions, are also leveraged to build community among thestudents and faculty. As the first cohort progresses into their second year of study and begins tobranch out into more discipline-specific courses, the weekly lunches have become the primaryconnection point for the students and faculty. Additionally, the faculty mentors meet with theirstudents regularly and serve as academic advisors to guide the students as they progressacademically.This paper will
Math Placement is Calculus I. The sole student who started in College Algebra was included with Precalculus. d Reference group for Writing Placement is Expository Writing. The sole student who had credit for Critical Writing was included with Critical Writing. e Reference group for Living Learning Community is No LLC for the first model; No or Other LLC for the second.A logical follow-on question is, why did the ELLC have such a strong effect? Perhaps for thereasons cited in the literature: development of academic and social support networks, morefrequent peer-to-peer and student-faculty interactions, increased sense of purpose, group identity,and cohesion, etc. [25], [26]. Another possible explanation is that the early benefits to
STEM to make it the new norm. She has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert systems for space station, manufacturing equipment models, and architected complex IT systems for global collaboration that included engagement analytics. She holds a US Patent # 7904323, Multi-Team Immersive Integrated Collaboration Workspace awarded 3/8/2011. She also has twenty-five peer
engineering researcher.Lilja describes the needs of engineering researchers to critically evaluate the work oftheir peers, understand and utilize standard tools and techniques in their field of study,and present innovative ideas and results clearly in written and oral communication. AllSURE student participants are not engineers, however the skills cited by Lilja areconsidered applicable for success in all disciplines represented within the SURE program.The fundamental components stated by Lilja for successful research were incorporated inthe SURE 2007 program year through a three part seminar series focused oncommunication, investigation and documentation. All seminars were formulated andfacilitated by the SURE Program Coordinator.Seminar
. Page 22.1659.10The summer ALVA students receive intensive training in keeping an accurate laboratorynotebook, reading scientific papers, and writing their own research papers. Science literacyrequires strong communication skills, both in interpreting others‟ work, and explaining andjustifying one‟s own. To become skilled scientists, students need to learn how to communicatein this world in which the language and structure may be new to them. With the advent of theInternet, the definition of valid information sources has become fuzzy. Students often do theirresearch online, but do not have the skills or knowledge to determine whether their sources arevalid67. Many documents are posted on the web without going through the peer review process68
individually or by funding sources) for research progress.Writing for Research. Theme: Lab/Research: In the next most frequently applied code,participants described the stress of writing, especially getting started with writing or makingconsistent progress. Participants described stress in receiving feedback and being critiqued,including informal critiques experienced when collaborating with coauthors. Participants alsodescribed experiencing stress when writing grant proposals, navigating the peer review process,and waiting for feedback from collaborators. This stress was particularly high for students forwhom English was not a native language and for students who had not yet published theirresearch. For some participants, this stress was grounded in
peers.Five FG engineering students with high quantitative belongingness were selected for aninterview. A semi-structured interview protocol based in interpretive phenomenological analysiswas used to elucidate the students’ experiences that fostered belongingness. Separate themesfrom each student were created from coding and then overarching themes unified a sharedexperience.The following overarching themes were prevalent among the participants: similarity toclassmates, recognition as an engineer by peers, limited questioning of belongingness, andbelongingness is a state of mind. The results depict that elements of engineering identity play apart in making students feel they belong (e.g., recognition), but in some cases, belongingness isdistinct from
their identities in cis-heteronormative and masculine society andengineering spaces [12], nonbinary students in higher education experience frequent gender-based discrimination [11], microaggressions [13], and even fear of victimization in hostileenvironments [14]. Frequent exposure to hostile environments can result in nonbinary studentsexperiencing heightened levels of minority stress [15], [16], isolation [17], depression andanxiety [18]. Unsurprisingly, trans* and gender nonconforming students have 10% lower rates ofretention than cisgender and heterosexual peers, while LGBQ students have 7% lower rates ofretention than cisgender and heterosexual peers [19].It is well established that support networks created for cisgender students promote
statement. I can clearly explain my strengths, interests, personal 22 qualities, and assets. I can effectively building working relationships with Peer Success Teams 8 others.In an open-ended portion of the post-evaluation we asked: “What do you like about theprogram?” The responses, in order of frequency, were: 1) learning practical skills for the jobsearch such as resume and cover letter writing, informational interviews, and job interviews; 2)the collective
, decision-making and report writing. These are the new basics.Compare this list with the old basics, which includes mathematics, physics, chemistry,applied mechanics, fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, etc. These map onto the new basicsthrough the analysis phase (Figure 2). It is clearly time to rethink how we practise engineeringeducation. Yet, the temptation remains to continue with the basic sciences through years oneand two, with some engineering design being introduced in the third or final years. Page 12.654.4Of course, the accrediting bodies have beensaying this for sometime now (above). The
business market. After moving to Charlottesville, VA, she had the opportunity to teach Multivariable Calculus for UVA SEAS, and she was hooked. She has been teaching Applied Math from that point on and enjoying every minute.Dr. Bernard Fulgham, University of Virginia Bernard Fulgham received his PhD in Mathematics in 2002, writing his thesis in the field of non-associative algebras with advisor Kevin McCrimmon. He began teaching Applied Mathematics at the University of Virginia in August 2004 and became a full-time Lecturer in 2006.Mrs. Monika Abramenko, University of Virginia I studied math in Frankfurt and finished with the German ”Diplom” in Mathematics in 1993. For several years I worked at a bank in Germany. In
a competency gap between graduates’ soft skills (social,leadership, workplace diversity) and what is needed by employers. Students have the content andtechnical knowledge, but they lack the skills and experience to share that knowledge in anaccessible way, with diverse groups and in multiple modes as dictated by the nature of theproject or workplace. Jollands, Jolly and Molyneaux’s 2012 research on engineering curriculumthat requires multiple technical writing, presentation and communication opportunities, thatincludes peer and faculty feedback, better prepares their graduates for the workplace. AnEconomist Intelligence Unit Report, Driving the Skills Agenda: Preparing Students for theFuture (2015), states that the most highly sought after
Page 26.569.2week lecture held in an auditorium seating over 350 students. Despite the best efforts of facultyto engage students in this format, there was little to no meaningful interaction between studentand instructor. The redesign transformed the course into a lecture/discussion style, which waslaunched in Fall 2014. The lecture was still held in a 350-seat auditorium. However, thediscussions section broke the students out into groups of 20 students or less. Upper levelengineering students acting as peer facilitators led the discussion sections. In this study, thecourse transformation included structure and content of discussion sections, training andexperience of peer facilitators, and assessment of the course.Students who are unsure of
so by a chair following poor teaching evaluations; this typicallydoes not make them more ready to change, however. Our setting, because of the five-year effortto engage all faculty in better meeting diverse student needs, provided an opportunity toinvestigate both groups of faculty. Our study reports on the first four years of the project.The departmental change effort included several strategies, guided by an engineering educationresearcher, to bring about change: threading design challenges through core chemicalengineering courses; switching from bleed-all-over-it, long technical reports to cycles of drafts,peer and instructor feedback, and revision and reflection; and developing ways to assess andsupport professional skills like teamwork
Involvement9, and and the institutional conditions that are related toEngagement Student Engagement10 student success.Perspective These perspectives provide insight into those factors that foster student success, whichinclude academic preparation and the student experiences while in college11. Studentexperiences emphasize both student characteristics/behaviors and institutional conditions thatimpact student success. Student behaviors include involvement in extracurricular activities,interaction with faculty and peers, motivation, and commitment, while institutional conditionsinclude the resources and educational practices that facilitate positive student behavior11. Sincethis research is focused on providing the foundation
engineering vocabulary.Engineering Effective ways to integrate engineering into current curriculum, such asIntegration language arts, social studies, mathematics, science, and art lessons.Teaching Teaching practices that include different ways to improve problem solvingStrategies and critical thinking skills: questioning techniques to elicit student responses; writing techniques, such as expository, procedural, and reflective journal writing; and how to make learning more hands-on, etc.Student Teamwork Team building that fosters positive peer interaction and cooperative learning among students to solve problems and complete projects
communal maternity clinics and daycare to esteemed communal elementary schoolsystem. However, our weakness is proven to be the conservative gender attitudes amongteenagers aged 15: mathematics is for boys and reading is for girls. For the skill of reading,this is accurate: girls achieve substantially higher scores than their peer boys. However, inmathematics the margin is small. Even so, most of the PISA-aged girls are not interested inmathematics. They also suffer from a low self-esteem concerning their capabilities in naturalsciences; even though they are talented in mathematics, their trust in their abilities is rockbottom. This phenomenon has strengthened in recent years.15In the oldest and largest institution providing higher engineering
questions, true or false statements, and direct or sequential problem-solving tasks. • Flipped classroom: Post lecture videos sourced from online platforms and integrated addi- tional materials from reference books to offer a range of perspectives. • Peer-teaching: Upon addressing a question from a student, encourage that individual to share the explanation with peers who may have had a similar question. • Collaborative Learning: During the in-class exercises and labs, students should be encouraged to collaborate in pairs, engaging in discussions or jointly solving problems. • Research presentations and Q&A from peers: Student should be encouraged to ask questions and actively contribute feedback
interacting with peers and mentors. After muchthought and consideration to the students’ perceived need for a way to bridge the gap betweenhigh school and college, then exploring ways to exploit the capabilities of today’s educationaltechnologies and media resources, the idea of developing an online alternative to the traditionalon-campus Summer Bridge Program was born. Interestingly, a search of the literature did notreveal many previous initiatives employed by other engineering schools to provide an onlineprogram for assisting with transitioning STEM freshmen into college.When Learning Specialists from the University’s Counseling and Psychological Services(CAPS) Office who had provided the lion’s share of workshops on academic skills and
Program (IEP) and the Freshman EngineeringHonors (FEH) Program. These new programs retain part of the traditional material but add inhands-on laboratory experiences that lead to reverse engineering and design/build projects. Therelational practices – teamwork and project management, along with report writing and oralpresentations and ethics have assumed important roles in this program. The programs aredesigned to have faculty from all of the degree granting departments teach freshmen. Theseprograms were developed to improve the retention and early decision to stay or leave for newfreshmen and to lay a foundation to better address some of the ABET 2000 accreditation criteria.Retention has improved markedly. This paper provides a brief description
country of study (ie. mismatchbetween Australian and China writing styles) may cause complications for students who are in awriting-intensive program [1]. Other challenges include engaging in a new social environment [10] requiring students tosocially and emotionally adapt while potentially leading to culture shock or cultural clashes [1,3,9,12]. This can be aided with supporting relationships among international peers or withdomestic students, as these forms of mentoring are successful in previous literature [4,5]. Mostmentoring opportunities discussed in the literature focus on connecting international studentswith other international students and do not engage much with domestic students, but the desireto connect with domestic students
industry practices, ePortfolio documentation of skills, andcollaborative peer engagement unlike anything currently available in Introduction to Engineeringcourses in the MOOC community. In the first offering of this course, 4,014 students wereenrolled including 69 students who paid a small fee to be ID-verified in order to potentiallyreceive a certificate for completion of the course; 22 students successfully completed the course.This paper describes the course goals, structure, and design including specific challenges relatedto designing a course for the MOOC environment. The implementation of the course will also bediscussed, including preliminary data on the effectiveness obtained from an end-of-course surveyadministered to students enrolled in
)approach dominates research but they argue (echoing Newman [1]) that the “theinterconnection among the forces influencing student change highlight the need to considertheoretical conceptions from multiple disciplines in designing studies of college impact” (p.630).Reporting their findings (which applied to the US) they write, One of the most striking features of the full corpus of the post-1990 research we reviewed is the broad scope of the dimensions of student lives that change with exposure to college. Even after adjusting for other forces, and even if the exposure lasts for only a year or two, college changes students to a degree unattributable to normal maturation or other influences outside the academy
currently under construction. Initially, the purpose of the website wasenvisioned as a repository of project resources, but as our research proceeded, it becameobvious that the students perceived the concept map and web tools as essential parts of theproject and their view of their personal success strategies.Overall, the basic principles implemented in the project are supported by theory based incognitive and social constructivism and the substantial body of evidence that favorscollaborative learning and the inductive approach over the traditional lecture driven,deductive teaching approach. Collaborative learning, active/inquiry learning, conceptlearning, peer learning, problem/case-based learning, low stakes quizzing, mini-lectureswith just-in