to explore cultural differences, varying age groups, etc. Pushing students to consider extreme users and less familiar stakeholder groups will help them to explore alternative use cases and develop a broader perspective on engineering design challenges. Designing for “extreme” or “lead” users is common practice in professional engineering design, and designing for such users can lead to increased empathy and improved design outcomes [4,5]. Incorporate Reflection on Big Picture Concepts. As part of EDSGN 100, students should come away with a holistic understanding of what it means to be a practicing engineer in an age of increasing globalization and project scale. A successful engineering design project should
all PennState campuses, there are over 50 instructors teaching 70+ sections annually. Over the past twoyears, the course has been significantly revised to reflect changing academic and industry needs.This paper describes the current state of the course, highlighting newly developed coursematerials that leveraged the expertise of a team of interdisciplinary instructors.Prior to recent efforts, the curricular objectives for EDSGN 100 were formally updated mostrecently in 1995 when the course was changed from Engineering Graphics (EG 50) toEngineering Design and Graphics (ED&G 100), signifying the shift from a predominatelygraphics-based course to one incorporating team-based design projects. In 1998, the course wonthe Boeing Engineering
from one’s own and degree of emotional confidence when living in Affect complex situations, which reflects an “emotional intelligence” that is important in one’s processing encounters with other cultures Social Responsibility 0.73 Level of interdependence and social concern for others Interpersonal 0.70 Degree of engagement with others who are different from oneself and Social Interaction degree of cultural sensitivity in living in pluralistic settings*Cronbach’s alpha is an
decision matrix poster focusing on one user perspective from the three designs documented in the previous assignment (group gallery walk, stakeholder randomly assigned).Assessment and analysis methods. The project was qualitatively assessed through analysis ofreflections collected over two years from the faculty teaching the course, the graduate teachingassistant, a community volunteer who organizes mobile produce markets for the local foodbank,and undergraduate student participants. What follows is in their own words. 23. ResultsFaculty reflections. I wanted to introduce more active learning to a course that is traditionallytaught via lecture, and was encouraged by my participation in a
reflect onperformance early in the course would improve student outcomes. In particular, we examinedcounterfactual thoughts, thoughts about “what might have been.” These thoughts contribute tocausal reasoning and play an important role in making plans for the future. Additionally, weexamined behavioral intentions, specific plans for future actions in the course, which researchhas also shown improves student outcomes.After the first exam in a large-enrollment class taken by first-year engineering majors, 290students were randomly assigned to either generate counterfactuals about what they personallycould have done differently that would have resulting in doing better on the exam (vs. describetheir actual performance) and to either generate
rather than on how closely they metthe learning objectives of the activity or assessment.In a “specifications grading” system [2], students earn credit for completing activities (or bundlesof activities) by meeting clearly defined specifications shared at the time of assigning theactivities. If the work does not meet the specifications, then credit is not earned. This system hasseveral advantages. Specifications are closely mapped to the learning objectives for the activitiesand the course, making it easier to document and to reflect on learning. Students focus theireffort on meeting specifications much as they would in the professional field when addressingclient needs or competing for a project bid. Specifications can include aspects of the
differences in the interests and/or training indifferent majors. The very short responses from many students are somewhat troubling, giventhat all students should be able to readily answer these questions with more complex and detailedresponses after having taken a course that included ethics content. This raises interesting issuesaround students’ feelings about the importance of these topics, and indicates that these questionsmay reflect on the affective domain (e.g. value) to an equal or greater extent than the cognitivedomain (e.g. knowledge, reflected in the response to Q2).IntroductionEngineering has significant and important impacts on society, being critical to providing basicnecessities (e.g. access to clean water) as well as contemporary
he’s such a lovely polite person, he’s not going to argue with me, and he hasn’t tested it yet, so he doesn’t have the evidence to counterclaim or whatever. So I would have really stolen from him the opportunity to think that through. (Interview 5)In her reflection, Margaret recalls specific details of Charlie’s latest rocket design. She notes thathe had been attending to a particular problem—how to keep the rocket from leaking out air. Shealso acknowledges her own understanding of the mechanics underlying his design—the weightof the rocket needed to be considered alongside how well it traps air. While she was aware thatCharlie’s design was too heavy to be launched, she let him try out his ideas on his own. Shereasons that if she were to
included in the communitypartnerships with two main foci: middle school robotics leagues and a community makerspace.Two surveys (Pre and Post course) helped to identify initial impressions and changes in students’(1) understanding of community partner’s geographic location, (2) impressions of location, (3)propensity to frequent a business in that location, and (4) knowledge of actual persons residing inthe community. Students were asked to write reflections after S-L site visits which acted asassessments of their growth in understanding of course concepts. The reflections were also usefulto see the students’ perception of professional growth and their perception of the community andtheir impact on it.Initial surveys indicated that news and word of
found the pedagogical changes necessary forcollaborative learning implementation to be slightly overwhelming as an individual faculty.Thus, this faculty member was enthusiastic to join the FLC, when provided the opportunity.Cross-case study findings Explicit or implicit counts are often reflected in qualitative analysis when justificationsare made. For example, we ‘identify themes or patterns that happened a number of times andthat consistently happen a specific way’ [31]. Analysis of the case study data was conductedmainly by coding the interview data, thereby yielding counts and data points that were thenanalyzed further. A starting set of codes was defined (‘Codes are tags or labels for assigningunits of meaning to the descriptive or
Sky’s the Limit: Drones for Social Good courseincludes critical aspects that relate to multiple engineering disciplines, which allows students toidentify the connections between drones and their particular engineering concentration. Thecourse is also multi-disciplinary and encourages critical social reflection. Students consider abroad range of applications of drones with the goal of promoting social good. The courseculminates in an entrepreneurial project that incorporates knowledge and skills from severalengineering disciplines in the context of engineering for social good.Research has found that female, Black, and/or Latinx engineering students are drawn to pursuingcareers that they identify as promoting social justice and a greater social
teacher then tried literacy instruction and debriefed themwith the coach, with an emphasis on iterative improvement after reflection and with anemphasis on building collaborative relationships.Data for this study included observations, conducted periodically throughout the school year,as well as monthly interviews with each teacher regarding their perceptions and practices ofliteracy instruction. Two researchers analyzed the data using inductive constant comparativeanalytic methods. Specifically, they inductively developed codes from the interviews, such ascodes related to the teacher’s perception of literacy. The research team then inductivelydeveloped codes from the teachers’ literacy instruction. The research team then compared thecodes from
-directedlearning towards problem-solving. Throughout the problem-solving process, IRE students areengaged with purposefully designed metacognitive reflection activities. The reflection activitiesinclude writing memos centered on their learning and problem-solving strategies utilized whilethe projects are ongoing to completion, and when completed, they write on the processes thathave gone into the projects, including what went well or what could have gone better. Thesewritten memos serve as metacognitive tools [3] that help students to monitor and control theirthinking in the process of attaining desired outcomes—both critical components ofmetacognitive procedural knowledge—and to take stock of what they have learned to helptransfer their newly gained
serves as Director of the Center for Research in SEAD Education at the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT). Her research interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, liberatory maker spaces, and a RED grant to increase pathways in ECE for the professional formation of engineers.Dr. Donna M Riley, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Donna Riley is Kamyar Haghighi Head of the School of Engineering Education and Professor of Engi- neering Education at Purdue University
activity has been conducted once a semester in the Iron Range Engineeringprogram since the Fall 2017 academic year and twice a semester in the York College ofPennsylvania program since the Fall 2018 academic year.Feedback was collected via student surveys, student and faculty reflections. Preliminary analysisof student feedback and faculty reflections indicates increased learner engagement, enhancedreview of technical content and a different type of learning experience. Faculty reflections alsonoted that the activity helps students to self-identify those concepts they had successfullymastered and those needing more review. This activity has brought value to the overall learningprocess and will continue to be used to improve teaching and student
return to their institutions(workshops), have time to practice these skills (practice writing time), and discuss how things aregoing (writing clusters). Figure 1. Dissertation Institute Main ActivitiesWorkshop Sessions: Multiple 1 or 2-hour sessions lead by experts in dissertation topics toprovide the participants with ideas, concepts, techniques and reflections about the writing habitsand process, time management, communication with advisors, and overall topics germane to thecompletion of their dissertation.Practice Writing Sessions: Significant amount of structured writing time distributed along theweek to provide students with the opportunity to apply the workshop’s lessons, practice theirwriting, and advance in
explanations [9]. However, thefield of engineering has not yet established a clear idea of what “disciplinary engagement”means.Engineering at its core is about creating solutions to problems using mathematics, science, andcreativity through a design process. The engineering curriculum reflects this by containingdifferent types of courses that teach the mathematical models of natural phenomena (i.e.engineering science courses, or technical core courses), laboratory and experimental techniquesand processes (i.e. lab courses), and fundamentals of engineering design (i.e. design courses).These courses all ask students to engage disciplinarily in different ways, all in support of theoverall practice of engineering to create new solutions. Prior research
identity is more thanlearning the technical skills and knowledge required to perform engineering work, it alsoincludes aligning one’s sense of self with the field of engineering. In addition, engineeringidentity has shown to be an important factor for broadening participation in engineering, as theidentity development experience also reflects one’s perceived similarity with others in the field,providing a sense of belonging or “fit” [8]. Previous research has demonstrated engineeringidentity also precedes persistence in engineering degree programs through degree completion [4,6, 9], though these studies were somewhat limited in terms of their generalizability due toreliance on small, localized samples.The purpose of this study then is to test the
contextualized curricula, spurring many technical programs to reform,for example by “humanizing” engineering, developing technical literacy in nonengineers, ortrying to produce more integrative socio-technologists.Several initiatives reflect the mid-to-late 1960s interest in educating “socio technologists” tobridge the gap between competing admiring and critical visions of technology; this period wasinformed by both the triumphs and the tragic consequences of WWII and Cold War technology.Wisnioski [7] calls this gap “a rift about the purposes of engineering and the nature oftechnology...sparked by a combination of changes in the organization, content, and scale ofengineering labor, and by a trenchant critique of technology from intellectuals, activists
end, student takes the final challengeassignment, which consists of multiple choice 10 questions. In addition to the 3 self-assessment and onefinal challenge quiz-type assessments, the students complete two reflection essay papers in the 9th an 10thweeks of the semester.Research Survey and Data collectionThe students in the 4th year seminar were asked to complete the online module in the 9th week of the courseduring fall 2018 term and the survey was administered in the last week (Week 10). The online module wasintegrated as a take-home assignment, where students were able to complete the online ethics module onBlackboard (the University’s Learning Management System). A survey consisting of 10 sections with 18questions was given to the
during problem solution in order to analyze, solve, and reflect ona problem. Engineering undergraduates enrolled in physics and thermodynamics reported thefrequency of use of problem-solving strategies, confidence in their ability to solve problems, andanswered demographic questions. Measures of performance included course grades. Factor-analytic methods that were applied to students’ reports of strategy use identified three types ofstrategies, which were labeled Execution, Planning and Looking Back, and Low Confidence inAbility. The three factors were significant predictors of course performance, based on correlationand regression methods that were applied to the data. The study provides evidence that usingproblem-solving strategies improves
further the understanding of how educators at HSIsperceive their undergraduate students, including their assets and needs. Thirty-six engineering educatorsfrom 13 HSIs in Arizona, Florida, New Mexico, and Texas attended one of two workshops in the springof 2018. Participants engaged in individual and group activities that helped them reflect on their studentsand actively design an educational innovation for their institution, using information previously gatheredthrough interviews with students. Qualitative analysis of the data across the thirty-six educators at bothworkshops identified differences between how instructors describe characteristics of Latinx engineeringstudents across regions and instructor type. The overall findings provide a set
) educational programs and careers [1]. This underrepresentation is reflected in the normsand culture existing in STEM fields. The perception of a white-men dominated environment canoften result in unfair stereotypes and biases imposed on women and people of color. These studentscan face assumptions of inferiority and be considered as part of the STEM field only as part of arequirement or quota [2],[3],[4]. Group based project learning is a common tool used in the engineering classroom topromote the acquisition and development of skills that prepare students for engineering careersrequiring significant collaborative effort. Working in groups and collaborating towards acommon goal allows students to develop their communication, leadership
appreciate what an engineering degree, and engineering itself,entail. Students drawn to engineering because of high school success in math and science shouldleave first year informed about the other skills they will need if they are to thrive as engineers.Our first year must also prepare students for second-year specialization, both technically and inregards to the choice of department. Departments expect a certain level of readiness innumerical literacy, ability to use software tools, presentation and interpretation of data ingraphical form, and ability to critically reflect on the reasonableness of results. To achieve thesegoals, an engineering practice and preparation half-course called “Thinking Like an Engineer”(TLE) has been developed. The
assessment survey that sought to identify pain points for theprogram, growth trajectories, and desired outcomes, initial offerings of this course used aProject-based Learning (PBL) approach to provide sophomore-level exposure to authenticdocuments. PBL-approaches to teaching feature opportunities for reflection, knowledgescaffolding, and confronting the boundaries of one’s knowledge [15]. Studies in STEM-specificPBL approaches suggest that low- and intermediate-performing students, as well as minoritystudents, demonstrate statistically significant performance gains when provided with anexperiential teaching approach, but the reasons for this success are not well understood [16].Students’ work culminated in four projects submitted throughout the
feedback from a first implementation offered in Fall 2017. This second moduletook students to a city-wide recycling processing center to observe the sorting processes thatmaterials undergo once they are discarded. Through this field trip, students were able torecognize some of the challenges of current waste disposal and recycling practices. The thirdmodule welcomed a guest expert to share experiences with the global impact of waste disposaland the relative privileges that persist in developed countries. The fourth module asked studentsto critically assess materials for use in a commercial product, inspired by the regional and globalchallenges they were previously exposed to in the course. Following each activity, studentscompleted a reflective
] revised the DMCI to better map to theSRMDM and revealed a three-factor model addressing the elements of the decision-makingprocess for engineering students. Factor one contains questions relating to the generation andevaluation of options phases of the SRMDM and many of the original DMCI questions. Factortwo contains questions that reflect the lack of a decision-making process or impulsive decisionmaking. Factor three contains questions that relate to reflection in the decision-making process.These factors more accurately map to the original SRMDM phases and are a valuable addition tothis study because they allow specific aspects of decision-making to be isolated for predicting achange in major. Students were asked to rate statements relating to
are required to reflect and indicate wherethey have seen this connection type outside of the classroom. The demos are followed by four3D examples where students work in their pairs to draw the FBD. A survey conducted in fivestatics courses taught by the authors found that 75.3% of student respondents (n = 78) indicatedthis activity was helpful in their understanding of support reactions with only 9.1% saying it hadno impact and 15.6% indicating it was only a little helpful.IntroductionThe ability to accurately solve statics problems is critical for engineers in a wide variety of fieldsincluding civil, mechanical, aerospace and bio-engineering. Fundamental to determiningstatically correct solutions is the accurate determination of support
behavior. Structure and The way an object is shaped or structured determines many of its Function properties and functions. Stability and For both designed and natural systems, conditions that affect stability Change and factors that control rates of change are critical elements to consider and understand. Table 1 NGSS Crosscutting ConceptsHow crosscutting concepts are implemented and assessed alongside core ideas and practicesraises exciting opportunities to deepen student motivation and learning. Rich resources includingNSF funded, University of Washington’s online STEMteachingtools.org provide a frameworkfor asking deep reflection questions [3
could enhance student learning of the subject particularly in computer programming.To this end, programmable robots could be utilized to supplement programming activities thatencourage and motivate students to apply their creative thinking and programming skills todevise solutions for real-world problems. Since developing a computer program to instruct arobot provides an immediate feedback as whether the program has accomplished its job, itengages students in both learning and reflection processes.This paper presents the application of an affordable programmable robot in three computerprogramming classes; namely, Computer Science and Information Systems: An Overview (CS0),Programming I (CS1), and Programming II (CS2). Also, the survey results