currently offered. In this way academics willbe suitably rewarded in their career path. Yet reflection upon the effectiveness of teaching and Page 5.13.1learning has not always been a crucial practice for engineering academics and consequentlyattendance at formal courses has continued to be infrequent or non-existent. Staffdevelopment activities have also previously been boycotted by Australian academics forreasons of “lack of time available”, “anyone can teach” or “teaching is a personal matter”. Itappears that the Kugel Model of Development [2] can assist to explain this reasoning further.As the academic has been focussed purely on the teaching of a
focus fromoutcome to process was accomplished using in person grading where students were expected todescribe their code and any challenges they faced writing the code. Students were then askedquestions to help them reflect on their code and on their understanding of new concepts.Examination of midterm exam grades found a slight improve in scores with the implementation ofin person grading.KeywordsArtificial Intelligence, Assessment, ProgrammingIntroductionGenerative artificial intelligence (AI) has been the talk of the universities since the advent ofChatGPT in November 2022. The development of generative adversarial networks, transformers,and large language models in the last decade has allowed the creation of generative AI capable ofwriting
receivepartialcreditontheproblemsattempted.Finalgradesarethendeterminedbycombining the scores on the formative (homework) and summative (tests) assessments using a predetermined formula. In somecases,attendance,classparticipation,andlabworkmayfactor in the final grade calculation. Although this works reasonably well, the final grade does not accurately reflect student knowledge. tandards-based Grading is a more authentic way to assess student achievement. In a courseSusingauthenticgrading,coursegradesarebasedonstudentproficiencyinspecifictopics,called standards. Standards are regularly assessed and opportunities for reassessments are offered
research examines how these student-led activities and peerproduced materials influence students' engagement, confidence, and persistence, as well astheir sense of belonging and emerging engineering identity. A mixed-methods approach,including pre- and post-surveys utilizing adapted validated scales (Walton & Cohen, Good et al.,Godwin et al.) and qualitative reflections, is implemented. Preliminary findings are anticipated toshow positive shifts in student insight.IntroductionThe first year of an undergraduate engineering program presents a pivotal, often challenging timefor students. Beyond fully understanding foundational technical concepts, steering through thistransition involves great personal and social adjustments that can significantly
authentic AQ These moves are used to: invite students to take a position; questions that inviteauthor accounts so that students own responsibility for their students to take atalk; position students’ accounts in relation to each other to positiondevelop coherence in dialogue; promote meta-talk so that Making explicit ExInstudents reflect on their reasons and views before sharing invitationsthem with the rest Authoring accounts AuthA Positioning accounts PosA4. Talk Organization Reformulation Ref Teachers
theeffectiveness of Personal Development Planning (PDP), such as learning logs, journals,reflective practice, self-assessment, and self-regulation to track progress toward courseoutcomes. Most studies report a positive effect of PDP on learning (David Gough, 2033). Astudy was conducted among 84 Master's students in Business at Babson College inMassachusetts. The students were directed to complete a mandatory course-baseddevelopment plan over eighteen months. They discovered a trend from the students whoself-reported a high degree of progress versus those who noted little progress. The value ofdevelopment planning appears to be enhanced by a sense of personal agency (James M. Hunt,2017). IDPs are increasingly implemented in higher education, and students
the College of Engineering and Computing and an Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at George Mason University. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Sharing Our Insights after Serving as Rotators at the National Science FoundationAbstract: A panel co-hosted by the Divisions of ECE and CoED will focus on the reflectionsfrom the former National Science Foundation (NSF) Program Directors. The panelists andmoderator served as rotating program directors across various directorates at NSF, all with aconnection to engineering and computing education. They will reflect on their experiences atNSF and what they learned from the position and will
Economy naturally supports ethical analysis throughits real-world decision-making focus, a trend reflected in modern textbooks [9], [10]. These developmentsreinforce the importance of preparing students to address ethical considerations alongside economicanalysis.Although case-based learning has traditionally served as a cornerstone of ethics education in engineering,it is not without limitations. Conventional case study approaches often rely on static scenarios andinstructor-led discussions, which may restrict opportunities for individualized feedback and dynamicstudent engagement. Students may also struggle to fully connect abstract ethical principles to the evolvingrealities of professional decision-making. Addressing these limitations
influenced their design processes and outcomes. The findingsinform how the SET can support engineering instructors in incorporating socially engaged designprinciples along with traditional engineering content in their courses.Study DesignParticipants and ContextFour SET modules were implemented in a two-semester capstone mechanical engineeringcapstone design course at a large Western university designated as a minority-serving institution.Students were divided into 7 teams to work on engineering projects (3 industry-sponsored, 3community-sponsored, and 1 student-led) and each team was composed of 4-5 students. Allstudents were required to complete the SET modules and reflection prompts. Of the 32 studentsenrolled in the course, 27 students consented
develop the skills to tackle complex problems andadapt to challenges. Constructing an accurate mental representation of a problem is essential, guidingsolution development and strategy refinement. These skills, central to self-regulated learning (SRL), arecrucial for open-ended problems in fields like engineering design [12].Self-regulation, especially monitoring and evaluation, is key to problem-solving. Monitoring tracksprogress and method effectiveness, while evaluation reflects on outcomes and refines strategies, improvingproblem-solving efforts.Figure 1. The interplay between MKT & SRA in a learning activity; Adopted from Butler & Cartier (2004) 2. The Study2.1. Objectives and Research QuestionsThe aim of this study was to
design and implementation of a student-driven laboratory method which supports the development of authentic leadership skills. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 But how do you Feel?Authentic Leadership Development for undergraduate students through a student-driven,experiential, and emotion-laden course using a laboratory method addressing the whole person.AbstractBased on 324 reflections written by 27 undergraduate students from two independent cohorts,this study examines the effectiveness of a semester-long authentic leadership developmentcourse which is based on a student-driven, student-centered, and experiential laboratory method.This study shows firstly
paper draws on a qualitative dataset of student responses to biweekly “reflection questions”integrated into routine course activity in a pilot implementation of a Wright State-likeEngineering Mathematics course. Alongside auto-ethnographic data from the course instructorand coordinator, this dataset illustrates the transformations involved in the scale-making process,and enables tracing the consequences of these transformations for the identities of people andsocial collectives involved in the course.IntroductionThis paper reports on the results of a study of an implementation of the Wright State Model forEngineering Mathematics at one university. Consistent with the LEES call for proposals, weadopt a human science theoretical approach to the
, 2024Beyond the Algorithm: Empowering AI practitioners through liberal educationAbstractAs AI technology continues to transform society, there is a growing need for engineers and technologists to developinterdisciplinary skills to address complex, society-wide problems. However, there is a gap in understanding how toeffectively design and deliver inter-disciplinary education programs for AI-related training. This paper addressesthis gap by reporting on a successful summer school program that brought together specialists from around theworld to engage in deliberations on responsible AI, as part of a Summer School in Responsible AI led by Mila -Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute. Through deep dive auto-ethnographic reflections from five
research team to acquire hands-on models that professional studentorganizations could use as a tool to increase engagement. This factor was also studied toascertain any insights into how the models enhanced the experiences of the event. Collegestudents wrote reflections after their interactions. This paper shares how community-engagedactivities not only change attitudes and outreach self-efficacy in all students but also might becritical in self-efficacy and motivation for minority women engineering students.I. IntroductionKennesaw State University (KSU) is thriving with nearly 43,000 students on two metro Atlanta,Georgia campuses. The adoption of strategies like providing incentives, such as scholarships andfinancial aid, for minority
theprocess of listening, learning and reflecting to develop knowledge, skills, attitudes andcommitments to engage across diverse groups in open, effective and socially responsible ways.Accordingly, this project adopts the three student learning outcomes for the UD International andIntercultural Leadership Certificate which identify that students will be able to 1. Explain how issues of social justice, power and privilege are shaped in a variety of contexts. 2. Use language and knowledge of other cultures effectively and appropriately to communicate, connect and build relationships with people in other cultural communities. 3. Express respect and thoughtful engagement with people across cultures.These outcomes focus on the
were morecapable of quality work than the engineering students in the comparison group. Moreover,preliminary results showed a significant drop in scores for expecting quality and having relevantKSA during the peak of COVID during online instruction and performance of both projects,followed by a rise in mean scores during the return to in-person classes. Reflections fromavailable qualitative data were paired to help understand the quantitative data results further.IntroductionThe increasingly interdisciplinary nature of the modern work environment requires engineeringprofessionals to have the ability to communicate and collaborate with others within and outsidedisciplinary boundaries [1],[2]. Further, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and
andtransdisciplinary course focused on engineering health equity. Using equity pedagogy, theinstructors aim to create a learning environment and learning objectives that will support studentsto become reflective and critical citizens that can help build a just society (McGee Banks andBanks, 1995). Moreover, a transdisciplinary framework with student-centered strategies toaddress social and structural determinants that influence health structures, systems, andtechnologies at an undergraduate level offers a holistic opportunity to explore complex globalproblems (Velez et al., 2022).Related WorkHealth equity courses have been implemented at the graduate level at the University of TexasAustin (Lanier et al., 2022), senior undergraduates and early graduate
and effective approach. Theircharacter education model is broken into five components: teaching about character; displayingcharacter; demanding character; apprenticeship; and reflecting on character [18]. This modelsupports a pedagogical approach which provides a foundation of understanding througheducation, provides mentorship and setting of conduct standards and adds reflection as animportant component which allows the student to assess their behavior and potentially adjust.As pragmatic as this approach might be, there are very few postsecondary institutions that try toreach this level of character education. To the contrary, most look to the ‘participation’ approachas noted above [18].a pedagogical approach to engineering virtue
andencourages students to use their initiative and reflect on their failures and successes [7]. Oneof the concerns in using PBL is that students themselves often find it difficult to assimilateold knowledge with new, which limits their ability to develop engineering judgement, eventhough as educators we recognise the importance of this assimilation. The concept ofapplying old knowledge and understanding to new situations and thereby creating newknowledge and understanding can also serve as the defining aspect of PBL, so long asstudents are given adequate instruction and scope to experiment with their ideas [8]. Studentswould require confidence in tackling a problem in addition to having acquired a broadconceptual understanding of the problem. In PBL
questioning and research topic was developed by thementor. The initial stages of the project and starting reference materials were likely also plannedout by the mentor. The mentees presented their work at the end of the summer, but they may nothave seen it through the arduous process of article writing, peer review, and publication. Thementees also did not see the follow-up stage of reflection on the remaining open questions in theproject and seeking inspiration for the next research topic.This research is not without limitations. For one, social desirability bias may have shapedstudents’ responses to the periodic assessments because they were aware that their mentorswould see their responses. Thus, students may have artificially inflated their
team members’ needs and perspectives maylead to conflict.Second, some approaches rely heavily on games, role-playing, and experiential exercise [e.g., 12,27, 34]. Students learn most from the experiential exercises [11]. In some cases, games aim atdeveloping and understanding trust rather than addressing conflict directly. In other cases, exercisesbuild skills in interviewing and giving feedback.Third, some approaches rely greatly on reflection, particularly written reflection [e.g., 27, 32, 34].As Powers and Kirkpatrick [27, p. 65] concluded: While oral debriefing is necessary, it is not sufficient for effective learning. Writing forces the student to organize the material in terms of personal experience, allows private
,” Commun. Teach., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 116–129, Oct. 2008, doi: 10.1080/17404620802382680.[10] J. Gilmore, M. A. Maher, D. F. Feldon, and B. Timmerman, “Exploration of factors related to the development of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graduate teaching assistants’ teaching orientations,” Stud. High. Educ., vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1910–1928, Nov. 2014, doi: 10.1080/03075079.2013.806459.[11] M. Di Benedetti, S. Plumb, and S. B. M. Beck, “Effective use of peer teaching and self-reflection for the pedagogical training of graduate teaching assistants in engineering,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., pp. 1–16, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1080/03043797.2022.2054313.[12] J. Agarwal, G. Bucks, and T. J. Murphy, “A Literature
own.Groups of 4-5 students worked with a facilitator over 5-6 weeks. The course has anasynchronous and synchronous component to accommodate different time zones and schedules.A series of 5 video lectures guided students’ learning along the design path. The students weredirected to download a set of notes with blanks and encouraged to actively listen by filling in thenotes while watching the lecture. The length of the video lectures ranges from 8 - 32 minutes. Aset of 5 individual assignments (in the form of on-line quizzes) were created to support theasynchronous activities. After watching the video lecture, students are directed to complete aquiz. Responses to short-answer questions covered in the lecture and reflective exercises arecollected
issues which are not related to a team’s task [4]. Relationship conflict isusually expressed through tension, animosity, and annoyance between group members [5]. It cancause team members to spend more time focusing on off-task issues and make team membersless cooperative and receptive to others’ ideas [4]. While there is conflicting research regardingthe impact of other conflict types on performance, there is a broad consensus that relationshipconflict has an adverse effect [6]–[8]. Relationship conflict is considered to negatively affectperformance regardless of when it occurs in a team’s lifecycle [9]. Task conflict is the result of differences in opinion regarding the content of a group’swork [4]. This type of conflict reflects
developcategories of students for further inquiry. Students (n = 22) completed a systems engineeringdesign task, The Solar Urban Design, in which they worked to optimize solar gains of high-risebuildings in both winter and summer months within Energy3D as a part of their engineeringscience classroom. Energy3D is a Computer-Aided Design (CAD) rich design tool withconstruction and analysis capabilities. As students design in Energy3D, a log of all of theirdesign actions and results from analyses are logged. In addition, students took reflective noteswithin Energy3D during and after designing. We computed percentile ranks for the students’design performance for each of the required design elements (i.e. high rise 1 and high rise 2) foreach of the required
Our intent is to explore student reflection and outcomes of service-learning throughqualitative methodology. We utilized narrative inquiry through large descriptive data sets(Denzin & Lincoln, 2018). Qualitative methods allowed us to review student narratives andunderstand reflective processes (Chase, 2018). The goal of this study was to examine studentexperiences and their reflection of material to better communicate outcomes and benefits ofenrolling in a service-learning course.A WiSE approach: Examining how service-learning impacts first-year women in STEM 7 We instituted purposeful random sampling (Light, Singer, & Willett, 1990) to recruitcollege women in STEM, enrolled in a service-learning leadership
new modules we plan to develop shown in Figure 1. Therefore, it emerged as the mostappropriate model to use and became our primary framework.Multicultural awareness focuses on an individual’s understanding of their own social identities incomparison with the identities of members from other groups (Pope, Reynolds, & Mueller,2004). The competency of awareness encourages students to engage in critical reflection abouttheir own underlying assumptions to ensure that individuals with differing cultural perspectivesare not invalidated. Multicultural knowledge focuses on the pursuit of cultural knowledge andthe comprehension of new and or existing theories regarding race, class, and gender (Pope,Reynolds, & Mueller, 2004). This competency
courses. Followingthe first round of exams, students select the course in which they wish to improve theirperformance most significantly and then complete both an exam wrapper survey and learningstrategies survey to evaluate their preparatory behaviors, conceptual understanding, andperformance on the exam. Each student develops an action plan for improvement based on theirresults and begins implementation immediately. Following the second exam, students completean exam wrapper survey followed by a learning journal, in which students evaluate and reflect ontheir adherence to and effectiveness of their action plan and performance on the second exam.We propose that engagement with this exam wrapper activity in the context of the EntangledLearning
applied, transformative, purposive knowledge and growth.51, 52Because professionalization is also an important goal in engineering education, our listculminates with several goals that build from affective, ethical, and cognitive foundations to themore specific abilities we expect of graduating engineering students. Each student and program instructor will be able to 1. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their rights and responsibilities to themselves, others, society, and the natural world 2. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their habits and growth, as well as others’, and the implications of
depending on external, “teacher-centered” authority to a more self-assured ability to reconcile multiple perspectives, to tolerate ambiguity, and to reflect on the process itself (meta-cognition). Page 12.156.2 • Encourage students to develop the social skills needed to work with a team through the sharing of ideas, the ability to provide meaningful, constructive feedback, and the ability to accept peer critiques.Unfortunately, integrating effective peer-review sessions into a course requires much effort onthe part of the instructor. Karen Spear [13] enumerates several of the pitfalls associated withpeer-review of