the objective of increasing studentretention and overall satisfaction. Since this course is one of the first technical courses thestudents have to take, the latest approach is to incorporate hands-on laboratory experience withthe goal of getting the freshmen accustomed with novel techniques of acquiring data, buildingthe skills to analyze and investigate data using Excel software, writing a laboratory report, usinga Word processor, and comparing their results with computer simulation results using Matlab orSimulink. At the end of the course each student will have the opportunity to improve theirpresentation skills by presenting their findings in front of their peers using PowerPoint. For thefirst hands-on experiment the students used a
6 Peer-review filter 21 Develop research question based on free-write 32 Update literature review Search skills, 35 Revise research topics topic selection 36 Identify information producers for a given topic 39 Develop and revise search terms 41 Develop search queries, choose database or search engine 42 Search diary 1 Characteristics of scholarly authorities 3 Formal and informal sources Critical 8 Comparison of pop science and original research articles evaluation of Read and reflect on
system with lift and flattening capabilities for home use.Students’ Learning Outcomes Assessment:After the completion of their project, students are required to write a comprehensive final reportand give a clear and informative oral presentation elaborating on the work they have donethroughout the project.The students’ learning outcomes are measured by the MANE faculty using the followingperformance indicators. • Demonstrate ability to select appropriate tools in a design process • Demonstrate clear and sound reasoning preparing for a design solution • Demonstrate effective contribution in achieving the project/team goal(s) • Demonstrate effective collaboration by taking responsibility • Demonstrate
-8 I fairly contributed in the sample preparation part of the lab project.Q-9 I fairly contributed in the sample testing part of the lab project.Q-10 I fairly contributed in the report writing part of the lab project.Each question was rated on the scale of 1 to 5, 1 representing strong disagreement, 3 representingthe neutral or not sure response and 5 representing the strong agreement. All the students wereasked to complete the survey at the end of the course. The responses of students on the survey hadno impact on student’s grade. All the responses were kept confidential. The collected data wasanalyzed for evaluating perceptions of students about Green Concrete project. The questions werefocused on the learning in Green Concrete project
. degree from Princeton, and M.Eng. and Ph.D. degrees from Cornell.Julie Dyke Ford Ph.D., New Mexico Tech Dr. Julie Ford is Professor of Technical Communication (housed in the Mechanical Engineering depart- ment) at New Mexico Tech where she coordinates and teaches in the junior/senior design clinic as well as teaches graduate-level engineering communication courses. Her research involves engineering commu- nication, technical communication pedagogy, and knowledge transfer. She has published and presented widely including work in the Journal of Engineering Education, the Journal of STEM Education: Innova- tions and Research, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, the Journal of Technical Writing and
directors through the spring/summer “internship course” whichallowed them to critically reflect on the experience while they were in it by writing reports,producing videos or engaging in interactive peer-to-peer assignments in the target language -- allof these components of curricular design and faculty intervention during the students’ year abroadmake out the background and most likely key to the success behind the seniors’ high interculturalgains and later on also career success10.An additional key element that may have played a role in the students’ high GPI scores is thesequence of a voluntary faculty-led short-term trip abroad prefacing their year-long independentsojourn. The short-term tour plays a significant role in engineering student
toprevent further bias due to obtrusiveness. Class length varied between 50 minutes and 2 hours.Data AnalysisOnce collected, the video was coded in one-minute increments for instances of instruction,dialogue, instructional technology, pedagogical strategies, student cognitive engagement usingthe Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (TDOP) (Hora & Ferrare, 2014). The codes aresummarized in Table 2. Each video was coded by two separate people. The results werecompared and discrepancies in the coding were resolved for instances with less than an 80%overlap using negotiated agreement. Teaching Methods Lecturing Lecturing while Writing
your method o All sources must be peer-‐reviewed scientific publications. In-‐text citations and a list of references must be included in your write-‐up (any standard reference citation style may be used). • Next lab: You will synthesize PVA hydrogels using your proposed methodology and measure the mechanical properties of the hydrogels.
purchasing common household objects5.Additive Manufacturing Course (3-0-3)A new course on 3D Modeling and Rapid Prototyping has been developed and offered as asenior level elective course to all engineering students. The catalog description of the courseincludes the following:Product design, CAD and related software; basic principles, development,process chain of additive manufacturing; photopolymerization processes; powder based fusionprocesses; extrusion-based systems; printing processes; sheet lamination processes; beamdeposition processes; direct write technologies; design for additive manufacturing; guidelines forprocess selection; software issues and direct digital manufacturing; medical applications; postprocessing; use of multiple materials
appropriate software engineering tools in the development of a software product5. Manage the completion of a software project for an external customer6. Participate in several peer design walkthroughs, including the presentation and critiquing of each other’s designs during class time7. Participate on a multi-disciplinary design team to design and implement a software project8. Write a complete design document for a software system9. Write a management plan for a software project that involves time and resource estimates, personnel scheduling detail, and the determination of its production costsCIS 375 meets twice a week for 2 hours each class period for 56 contact hours over a period of 4months. The topics covered in this course are listed in
positions with the social hierarchy and theirengineering teams. However, these identities were only accessible to majority students andunderrepresented students were often left out of the team dynamics. This study emphasized thebest practices of promoting teamwork with diverse students including: (1) teaching aboutdiversity, especially teaching how to respect one’s teammates and the client’s needs; (2)organizing teams to reduce conflict, balance gender composition (or have all-men or all-womenteams), and improve trust; (3) incorporating peer feedback throughout the duration of the teamand using it to mediate disrespectful interactions and unacceptable practices; (4) including a widerange of teamwork expectations in grading practices; and (5) better
Wednesday Friday Traditional Reading assignment Lecture Lecture Lecture Blended Online reading Lecture Worksheets, group projects, case studies, or homework time. assignment Held in active learning space working with peers and instructors.To answer the question, Do students benefit from the blended course?, we compared exam scoresfrom the traditional and blended courses. To answer the question, How do students progress onBloom’s taxonomy in the blended course?, we used worksheets that served both as learningactivities and measurements of Bloom’s taxonomy progress. We focused on two concepts thatstudents typically have
valued being active participants in learning,opportunities for collaborating with peers and outside experts around the work of teaching,focusing on subject matter content across mathematics and science and students’ learning of thatcontent, and the sustained ongoing nature of Project TESAL where the work teachers did inprofessional development was fully relevant to their work as classroom teachers. These strengthsalign directly with best practices for professional development and for overcoming thechallenges of professional development specifically on math-science-engineering designintegration and instruction.IntroductionCommon Core middle grades standards include engineering design in the science framework, butthe design process is not easy to
.Student ratings of male and female instructors are likely influenced by the genderedexpectations of the rater12. Two straightforward examples of gendered expectations are thatstudents are more likely to assume a male instructor holds a PhD as compared with a femaleinstructor13 and are more likely to refer to male instructors as “Doctor” or by their last namewhen writing evaluations of their instructors14. Each of these examples shows that the status andcredentials of female faculty are discounted. Female professors may be expected to be morecaring and nurturing than male professors, given that these traits are considered morefeminine12. Even though female instructors had more meetings with students outside of classhours, students were more likely
thinking, creativity and innovation skills, inInnovations in Technology Conference.14. Vurkac, M. (2014). Integrating philosophy, cognitive science, and computational methods ata polytechnic institution: Experiences of interdisciplinary course designs for critical thinking, inProceedings American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.15. Bayles, T.M. (2013). A reflective writing assignment to engage students in critical thinking,in Proceedings American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.16. Cajander, A., Daniels, M., Peters, A.K., and McDermott, R. (2014). Critical thinking, peer-writing, and the importance of feedback, in Frontiers in Education Conference.17. Piergiovanni, P.R. (2014
thecourse material. Lord and Orkwiszewski (2006) implement inquiry-based methods in a collegebiology lab, where students were asked to develop a laboratory to investigate osmolarity. Theresults were compared to a control group which performed the original lab, and it was found thaton average students not only better enjoyed the inquiry lab, but also scored slightly higher on apost-lab quiz. Gormally, et al. (2009) showed that students who participated in an inquiry-basedintroductory biology course demonstrated more improvements in science literacy and researchskills when compared to peers who enrolled in a commensurate traditional course. Interestingly,the students in the traditional course were more likely to have more confidence in the
tenured full professor. CSULB is a teaching-intensive institution and thus, he has taught classes at different levels from introduction to programming and data structures; to junior level classes in database design; senior level classes on database, web development, and senior projects; and finally to graduate classes in database systems. In 2014, Dr. Monge joined a team at Google that created NCWIT’s EngageCSEdu, an online living col- lection of peer-reviewed teaching instruments that use research-based techniques that retain and engage students, particularly effective in broadening participation in computing. Dr. Monge’s research inter- ests have evolved over time. Through his participation in an NSF sponsored
school and college programs.Ms. Amee Hennig, University of Arizona Amee Hennig has her B.S. in physics and creative writing from the University of Arkansas as well as her M.A. in professional writing from Northern Arizona University. She oversees the education and outreach activities for the Center for Integrated Access Networks based out of the College of Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona. At the University of Arizona she manages a number of summer programs for Native American students and educators.Daniel Lamoreaux, University of Arizona Daniel Lamoreaux is a current doctoral candidate in the University of Arizona’s School Psychology pro- gram. While working as a graduate assistant for the education
California, Santa Barbara. Dr. Zhao joined CSU faculty in 2004. He is currently serving as the director of the Master of Science in Electrical Engineering, and the Chair of the Graduate Program Committee in the Department of EECS, the ABET coordinator for the BS in Computer Science Program, and a member of the faculty senate at CSU. Dr. Zhao has authored a research monograph titled: ”Building Dependable Distributed Systems” published by Scrivener Publishing, an imprint of John Wiley and Sons. Furthermore, Dr. Zhao published over 150 peer-reviewed papers on fault tolerant and dependable systems (three of them won the best paper award), computer vision and motion analysis, physics, and education. Dr. Zhao’s research is
and all students should present part of the video uploaded to YouTube (5%).The final choice of a project was made in consultation with the instructor to ensure proper scopeand feasibility. The deliverables for the group project include: (1) forming a group, (2) projectpre-approval (3) project proposal; (4) progress report; (5) final report and (6) an individualnewsletter or group video (all students opted to do the group video). The group project alsoincluded a peer-evaluation component to ensure accountability and fair grading of individual andgroup efforts.Upon forming groups and getting pre-approval for a project idea, groups were tasked with theproject proposal assignment. This assignment entails a presentation
-141. doi:10.1108/10748120910965502.Guzek, F., Brockway, K., Brockway, T., Guzek, S., (2013). “Broadening STEM Students’Perspectives, and Recruiting with Blended Learning and Study Abroad.” Proceedings of 2013Midwest Section Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education.Bonwell, C., Eison, J. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom AEHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 1-878380-08-7.Donnelly-Smith, L. (2009). Global learning through short-term study abroad. Peer Review,11(4), 12-15. ISSN-15411389Festervand, T. A., & Tillery, K. R. (2001). Short-term study-abroad programs--a professionaldevelopment tool for international business faculty. Journal of Education for
aswell as to allow faculty to provide feedback on their growth. In addition to reflective writing,students sketched in their journals. Sketches could be ideas for their project or as responses to theweekly questions. In addition to encouraging reflective growth, these activities were designed tohelp students become comfortable with the basic skills, like sketching, required to implementdesign thinking. Notably, some student disciplines were relatively unfamiliar with narrativereflection while others rarely sketch as part of their work.The first iteration of the course was offered as a special topics course in each discipline and crosslisted through Interprofessional Education at James Madison University. Biology and healthscience students did
-motivated project management, and teamwork andcommunication (both amongst their peers and with faculty and graduate students). The projectstructure is consistent with research by the National Academy of Engineering, which emphasizescreativity, practical ingenuity, leadership, and management, in addition to strong analytical skillsas some of the primary characteristics required for successful engineers of the future [12]. FIREproject teams require a minimum of two first-year researchers to facilitate teamwork andcollaboration and to provide students with a peer with whom they can collaborate withoutreservations of seniority. These collaborative teams are intended to not only foster the leadershipand management skills emphasized by the NAE but also
(BSE) degree programs. Upon arriving at ISU in 2006, he led the development of the BSE program, and this program now enrolls over 100 students. Raman also runs multiple summer research internship programs through his roles in CBiRC and CenUSA – over 200 students have participated in summer pro- grams he directed over the past decade. In his role as Pyrone Testbed Champion for CBiRC, Raman and his students have developed early-stage technoeconomic models of bioprocessing systems. His graduate students have gone on to faculty positions at peer institutions, and to engineering leadership positions at companies including Cargill, Nestle, and Merck.Dr. Monica H. Lamm, Iowa State UniversityProf. Sriram Sundararajan, Iowa
sustainability assessments of biopolymers and biofuels, and design and analysis of sustainable solutions for healthcare. Since 2007, she has lead seven federal research projects and collaborated on many more, totaling over $7M in research, with over $12M in collaborative research. At ASU, Dr. Landis continues to grow her research activities and collaborations to include multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable systems with over 60 peer-reviewed publications. Dr. Landis is dedicated to sustainability engineering education and outreach; she works with local high schools, after school programs, local nonprofit organizations, and museums to integrate sustainability and engineering into K-12 and undergraduate curricula.Prof
toreflect on their own process by writing blog posts every time they finished a role.As mentioned before, S. G. Adams et al. (2002) model guided our study, therefore wedeveloped several interventions in the classroom to make sure we were offering the studentswith each construct of the proposed model. Details as follows: • Common purpose: The primary grade in the design course was based on teams’ development of their design project. Every team had a common purpose (i.e. the real design problem to solve by the engineering team). • Clearly defined goals: teams were required to develop quantifiable and commonly agreed goals, based on the needs of all the tracks. • Psychological safety: students were trained on safety for
statement, design constraints, and criteria for design evaluation. In allsemesters the instruction discussed the topic and provided examples of each with in-classdiscussion. In the hybrid semesters additional in-class time was available for the students tobreak into groups and spend time attempting to write their own mission statement, list ofconstraints and evaluation criteria. This in-class time for attempting to define their ownstatements for a design resulting in much lengthier and engaging in-class discussion of this topic.These in-class exercises and hands-on attempts were done for each step of the design process. Inaddition, the same five 2-D Mastercam labs (#1-5) were used in all three semesters. Data wasplotted in Figure 1 to show how many
asked what coping skills they used to help themtransition back to UofL. There were 64 responses to this open-ended question. Five responseswere taken out because they reported this was not applicable (NA, N/A, or na).Peers and family were mentioned in 14% (9 out of 64) of the comments. Some responsesmentioned friends and classmates that caused the transition to be easier, “Friends andclassmates coming back with me really helped” (SUM16-52), “Well I got a girlfriend. Is that acoping skill?”(SUM16-21). Many connected working with peers to helping with their transition,“…worked more with friends to stay on top of work initially” (SUM16-25). “Study in groups andcompartmentalize time” (SUM16-98). Some students mentioned receiving help from
greater STEMstudent success when student supports such as those detailed in the previous paragraph are 5 present (i.e. Ong, Wright, Espinosa, Orfield, 2011; Toven-Lindsey, Levis-Fitzgerald, Barber, Hasson, 2015). One comparative study examined a program for students at UCLA (PEERS) that included academic workshops, counseling, the creation of a supportive community, and exposure to research. The study found that participants earned higher grades in gatekeeper chemistry and math courses, had higher GPA’s, completed more science courses, and persisted in science majors at significantly higher rates than a non
form, to be read at homebefore coming to the lab. In many US campuses, the analyses and deep discussions are notperformed with the professor present in the lab to guide the students, but rather students work ingroups to analyze data and then provide formal written reports (30-60 pages) and presentations.Further, at home, approximately 28 hours are allotted in our total NCSU undergraduatecurriculum for hands-on experience in the CHE-specific labs, substantially fewer than the 40hours allotted for a single summer course at CPE-Lyon. Before traveling to France, Alex Kim heard rumors that French engineering students weremore advanced than their American peers, and he was interested in discovering whether or not