projects that they completed. The logs were graded by the instructors for completeness. The struggles portion of the log format was used to provide additional resources or supplements. The instructors provided samples of good learning logs to help students with the content and writing. The format for the learning log can be found in Appendix C. 3. Peer Assessment: Students worked in learning groups and met weekly to engage in learning activities and problem solving. These sessions were documented to reflect on the learning that took place within the group. Students came together to discuss the grading and comments provided by the instructor and to learn from each other. The learning groups worked
• • Rotation and reporting of individual team member roles for each laboratory exercise (i.e. data taker, equipment operator, editor, responsibility for draft section(s) of report, etc.) • Bringing any team conflicts to the instructor’s attention only after failing to resolve such issues as a team • Individual team member accountability addressed by the peer evaluation conducted at the end of the course • Self-governance of teamsBenefits to downstream courses in curriculumFaculty have commented on how much better students write in various courses and labs aftercompleting ENGR 317, but equally important is that successful completion of the ENGR 317course benefits students in that they are able to apply the technical
career paths, reflect on how their personal strengths [8] andinterests align with a particular path and consider what educational experiences would supportthe development of necessary skills required.When the assignment was originally developed in Fall 2018, students submitted a writtenreflection on two career pathways of interest, incorporating strengths, relevant skills and aconsideration of a day in the life of an engineer in this career. While this assignmentincorporated some element of choice in relation to career paths to reflect on, it required no actionbeyond reflective writing and students had limited experience upon which to base their response.Students indicated during focus groups that the reflective writing nature of the assignment
Paper ID #12048The Power and Politics of STEM Research Design: Saving the ”Small N”Prof. Amy E. Slaton, Drexel University (Eng. & Eng. Tech.) Amy E. Slaton is a Professor of History at Drexel University. She write on issues of identity in STEM education and labor, and is the author of Race, Rigor and Selectivity in U.S. Engineering: The History of an Occupational Color Line .Prof. Alice L. Pawley, Purdue University, West Lafayette Alice Pawley is an Associate Professor in the School of Engineering Education and an affiliate faculty member in the Gender, Women’s and Sexuality Studies Program and the Division of
EducationThermodynamics (ME680) during their fourth or fifth years. Like their peer institutions, RIT hasthe desire and requirement to improve curriculum structure, integration, and assessment. ME413 and 680 form a progression in course work into the study of Thermodynamics and,therefore, the courses are carefully integrated. This integration is achieved through a courseassessment process conducted by the faculty leads from both courses.The goal of Thermodynamics is to provide studentswith practical and relevant engineering science Table 1. Summary of Topics Exploredbackground in thermodynamics. The course also in Thermodynamics (ME 413)provides the groundwork for subsequent courses in Topical Areas
’ experiences with e-bookpublishing was helpful for the group in proceeding with the project. In his interview, Richardadded: …In my experience …the publishing companies…sometimes might have some input, while other faculty did not have exactly the same experience when they were trying…to publish more traditional books…I had some explanation to for this…they tried either to talk to some publishers and the orders of the textbooks…the chapters and things like that…basically at different doors…so in that sense I had delivered more experience than some others had.The professors could easily write the assigned chapters within their content expertise but e-bookpublishing presented unfamiliar technical, economic, and social
writing efficient codes in a given programming • Persistent encouragement from the faculty memberslanguage. The eCTF problems awarded flags not only for the • Peer group’s success in the other parts of the projectcorrectness of the solution but also for the design’s efficiencyand speed. As a result, the course instructors offered lessons V. C ONCLUSIONSon-the-fly on basic algorithm and data structure during the In this paper, the authors have described activities beneficiallecture/lab sessions. This experience has also motivated the to increasing the engagement of underrepresented minoritieselectrical engineering department to consider an algorithm in an embedded
Theory into Practice, Action in Teacher Education, and Journal of Hispanic Higher Education. She earned her Ph.D. in Reading/Writing/Literacy from the University of Pennsylvania and has been a faculty member at UTEP since 2008.Dr. Alberto Esquinca, San Diego State University Alberto Esquinca is an Associate Professor in the Department of Dual Language and English Learner Education at San Diego State University.Helena Mucino-Guerra, University of Texas at El Paso Helena Muci˜no is a Ph.D. student in the Teaching, Learning, and Culture program at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). She holds a master’s degree in Musical Education Research from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). She is currently
andArchitecture, but also to industry.LITERATURE REVIEWStudies have shown that retention and student development are correlated with socialintegration3. It has been suggested that a student’s interaction with his peers is the single mostimportant factor in student development 1,2 and that the lack of peer group study is a significantfactor regarding students changing majors from math, science and engineering fields in college14.Tinto’s15 longitudinal model targets academic and social integration as a key reason for studentsdropping out of college programs as well. The literature clearly states that social integration in Page 12.21.3any setting, both
team’s grade is distributed based on individual contribution. The individual grades are distributed based on the instructors’ observations and the peer input and the grades given within a team is such that the average of the individual grades equal the grade on the team effort (i.e. if the report is a B, the three team members could get B/B/B or A/B/C or A/C/C, etc.) This effectively deals with the requirement for all team members to contribute to the project.Overall Conclusions Overall, it can be concluded that freshman can do well in the course and benefit from theexperiences that it provides. Input from a self assessment paper that each student writes at the end of thesemester indicates that the students are realizing the
students are expected to publish peer-reviewed journal papersas well as assist PIs with proposal writing.2- Oral Communication – TANMS students are encourage to freely articulate themselves andtheir ideas and thoughts during meetings with PIs and mentors. Additionally, students areexpected to deliver an oral technical presentations and posters.Core II - Engineering Success1- Innovation – Ability to execute new ideas in research, education, and industry with relevance(or relevancy) to multiferroics.2- Creativity – Ability to synthesize new ideas on multiferroics. For example, students are able tosuggest applications of multiferroics based on their research.Core III – Business and Marketplace Savvy1- Entrepreneur - Entrepreneurial mindset is
decision. Required preparation classes include training in teaming and professionalism.Practice in peer and self-evaluation in team situations is included as are proper techniques forconducting meetings. Process Control—Team DynamicsDuring both on-campus preparation and the on-site project phase team progress is monitored bya variety of standard tools. Team performance contracts are created as a team and signed by eachmember. Periodic contract reviews provide a first assessment of individual contributions. Wealso use a formative peer evaluation form from several sources measures 21 items within thedimensions standards of integrity, respect for individuals, innovations, goal setting, leadership,and overall work
) Geomatics for Civil Engineers (3) Writing (3) Chemistry 2 or 3 (17) Calculus 3 (4) Physics 2 (4) Statics (3) Fine arts (3) Dynamics (3) Communication Differential 4 (15) Skills (3) Equations (3) Mechanics of Introduction to Transportation Engineering (3
planned. During the year the students also perform different fundraisingactivities and assist their faculty advisor with grant writing to support the trip expenses includingsupplies and maintenance of equipment. Since their formation the faculty-ESW-students haveraised more than $80K from federal and private foundations as well as support from individuals.Selection criteria for the team that will be going to Guatemala, are based on contributions to thestudents’ organizations, participation, as well as professional and personal skills. Spanish IEPstudents are highly valued amongst their ESW peers, because their language skills are essentialfor the educational activities that are simultaneously performed alongside the engineering work,and because
Education chairs an annualmeeting where program activities are reviewed and “best practices” shared among representativesof the college. ABET accredited programs are required to write a two page update of their on-going activities in preparation for this regular meeting.III. Keeping the Flame Alive in Mechanical Engineering The Mechanical Engineering program review and assessment process consists of differentactivities, see figure 1. These activities include continuous assessment by two faculty committeesof the teaching/learning process in the Department, continuous assessment by individual faculty aswell as faculty groups in specific areas, continuous assessment by the Department Chair and theDirector of Undergraduate Studies, and
near-peer mentors,engaging in STEM focused events and activities, and connection to university and STEMresources.This practice paper reviews the history and evolution of STEM LLCs for women at RutgersUniversity and catalogs LLC practices, with a particular focus on community engagement. Alongitudinal graduation review of living-learning community participants is also provided,showing that an average of 80% of LLC students graduate in STEM.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDIn the early 1900’s, the New Jersey State Federation of Women’s Clubs convinced Mabel SmithDouglass to lead the effort of establishing a women’s college as part of Rutgers University. In1918, the New Jersey College for Women, later named Douglass College, opened its doors to
. Currently, he is an Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. During the last 20 years, he has been working in the areas of hierarchical multiprocessors, hierarchical networks, performance analysis of computer systems, digital signal processing, embedded systems, in-vehicle networking, performance analysis of networking protocols, secure wireless communications, and privacy protected vehicle-to-vehicle communications and simulation techniques. He has supervised a number of projects from Ford Motor Company and other local industries. He also served as a Co-PI on two NSF funded projects. He has published over 100 peer-reviewed journal and conference proceeding papers. He
Pennsylvania StateUniversity. In its eighth year at the time of this writing, the online MSME program hasexperienced significant growth and over the last five years of the online MSME program hasgone from a total of ~40 students in the program to 130 students. Nearly 50 students havingearned their master’s of science degrees via the online program. This growth is in part due toexplicit theory-driven attention to pedagogy, recruitment, mentoring, and facilitated guidance.Similar to our resident students, our online students have faculty research advisors and conductmasters-level research projects. This research element makes our online MSME program unique.While there is increasingly more written about the modest growth in online engineeringeducation
toquestions such as "Who am I ?" at the beginning of the course provides the opportunity for suchpractice. We also recommend that students critique each other's concept maps. The opportunityto offer peer feedback further exposes students to the rules and expectations for conceptmapping. This scaffolding approach is expected to improve the quality of the pre- and post-evaluation of the concept maps during module implementation.Furthermore, reflective writing is a useful tool for having students reflect on their personalexperiences while surprisingly teaching students empathy. The act of looking beyond their ownexperiences to the experiences of various stakeholders appears to have created opportunities forstudents to consider broader social and
) educational technology, (3) the student’s rolein the engineering college, and (4) the professor’s role in the engineering college. Theparticipants were instructed to write 10 words or phrases that come to their mind when they thinkabout each of the questions and rank their answers in the order of importance. Following theindividual questions, ten questions were discussed in a focus group. The results of the studyshowed that when it comes to evaluation of education and teaching methods, students would liketo see more opportunities to give input in the system and be more involved as part of the creationin all levels and steps. Current literature on Excellence in Engineering Education stresses theimportance of skills and knowledge but leaves out two
III.The Freshman and Sophomore Engineering Clinics are intended to provide a foundation ofengineering skills needed for Junior/Senior Engineering Clinic. The goals of the SophomoreEngineering Clinic consist of teaching engineering design principles and technicalcommunication (technical writing in the fall, public speaking in the spring). The SophomoreEngineering Clinic is an integrated course, team-taught by Communication and Engineeringfaculty. There are two 75 minute lecture periods and one 160-minute lab period each week.Students work on design problems during lab periods, which are supervised by a team of 5-6engineering faculty representing all four Rowan engineering departments (Chemical, Civil &Environmental, Electrical & Computer
approaches undertaken since 2008, in Introductionto Engineering, to introduce freshmen engineering students to critical thinking. Also presentedare recent 2009 revisions to the components of the course, such as the reworking of the casestudies in an effort to encourage students to demonstrate critical thinking. Explicit discussionswith the students regarding the reasons for time and effort being spent on case studies and criticalthinking were also added to the course. The number of critical thinking assignments wasincreased, expanded, and further clarified from the previous year and some assignments werealso redesigned to allow for some peer reinforcement during intermediate stages. Statisticalanalysis of a pre and post assessment of critical
? Page 6.800.12 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2001, American Society for Engineering Education g. How difficult is it to move from a research-focused institution to a teaching-focused institution? What about the reverse? h. What is “peer instruction” and “collaborative learning?” How have you used these techniques in your class?5. Grant Writing – The Funding Process a. Provide an overview of the grant writing, application, review and selection process to obtain funding. b. Is it better to choose a research area and then find funding, or find out the “hot” areas are for a particular funding agency and tailor
ethics to mobile technology. A multitude of “how to write a teachingcase study” guidelines are available, including in construction education. However, literature thatprovides insights into developing a specific case study in construction engineering andmanagement is scarce. To fill this knowledge gap, this paper presents the dynamics ofdeveloping an educational case study to explore the implementation of target value design(TVD). This case study was developed for engineering and construction management students toformulate, discuss, and decide on strategies, actions, and solutions to provide the best value tothe project owner when implementing TVD. This work-in-progress paper focuses on the pilottest when developing the case study. Pre-class
engineering-related scenarios, situations, or dilemmas. The students areassessed based on the following: (1) individual or team responses to the engineering-relatedscenarios, situations, or dilemmas discussed in teams in class; (2) a reflective paper on theengineering profession, (3) a peer-reviewed paper on addressing a professional dilemma inengineering, and (4) two team-based assignments—an infographic and a video. Students areassigned to teams randomly by the instructor at the start of the semester (a maximum of 6students per team) and work in the same team throughout the semester, i.e., for the in-classdiscussions and the two team-based assignments.To facilitate team building, students participate in a number of ice-breaking activities. Teams
technical and non- technical environments and identify and employ relevant technical literature as needed. • Conduct standard tests, measurements, and experiments, and analyze and interpret the results to improve processes. • Demonstrate the ability to function as an effective member and leader of technical teams.In addition to theoretical lessons on mechatronics, this course incorporates IoT technologies toprovide students with practical, hands-on experience. The laboratory activities encompass • Provide students with training on Arduino IDE. • Review the laboratory manual and watch related tutorials. • Conduct the experiments. • Gather data and compare results. • Collaborate with team members to write
: a. Diagnose team challenges and devise and implement solutions b. Coach your peers, team leader, client, or faculty c. Recognize and respond to conflict productively d. Influence others without authority e. Write collaboratively f. Use a project management technique such as design freeze planning, scheduling tools, customer needs assessment and conversion to product specs, team charters, change order management, etc. 7. In what ways, if any, did the course not support your design teams or projects that you wish it had? 8. Is there anything else that I should have asked or that you would like to share
learn” remains to be one of the biggestchallenges college students face in their first year, especially when we take nation-wide readinglevels into consideration (US Department of Education, NAEP, 2015). In Fall 2015, a “MindDump” pedagogical strategy was implemented to encourage students to read the class material forpre-exposure. The students have 4 minutes and 33 seconds of silence in class to write downeverything they can remember from their reading (Whitman, 2015). Mind Dumps are used as cheatsheets during exams. The same procedure with the addition of guided reading questions wereadapted for the Spring 2016 semester. Aggregated survey results from the first two semesters(N1=78, N2=75) showed that about one third of the students Agreed
. Additionally,students were exposed to common college practices like office hours, course syllabi, coursereadings, and class discussions. In the 2018 course, specific time was set aside to allow studentsto work on their own (with freedom to work anywhere on campus). These portions of time werespecifically designed to give students choices in how to manage their time.The course, which drew juniors and seniors from various local high schools, did not havespecific prerequisites. Thus, a fundamental challenge of the course was to incorporatedifferentiation into the curriculum delivery to meet the needs of a variety of skill levels. Toaccommodate all students, each section of the course included peer-peer tutoring, office hoursduring lunch, and optional
studentsÀ English placement. The three Englishcourses in order from lowest to highest level are Introduction to Writing (D), Basic EnglishComposition (D), or Expository English Composition. Each of the freshman seminar (Seminar inCritical Inquiry) sections and the Introduction to Engineering sections is taught by engineeringfaculty. The Reverse Engineering Lab is taught by engineers from the staff of the TexasManufacturing Assistance Center (TMAC) located on the UTEP campus.Students are clustered each semester until they complete Pre-calculus. Figure 2 illustrates thecluster sequencing for a student entering UTEP with placement in Introductory Algebra and BasicEnglish Composition. An asterisk (*) after a course indicates that it is part of a