as well as in academic writing, and a critical inquiry class taught by theHSA faculty. The critical inquiry class has multiple sessions taught by different instructors. Eachsession focuses on a topic that is related to the instructor’s specialty, yet all the sessions have acommon component: for the first few weeks, students and instructors engage in a discussion ofthe meaning of liberal arts education and its implications for HMC. In addition to completing theCommon Core, every student at HMC is required to take at least ten courses in HSA, with atleast four courses in an area of concentration. The engineering curriculum at HMC consists ofthree stems: design, engineering sciences, and system. The design stem includes three
their choice, all first year engineering students who elected a service-learningproject followed the engineering design process as covered in their Engineering Design course todesign, create, deliver and subsequently improve their own STEM curriculum as part of asubstantial team design project. They submitted the same engineering design assignments totheir professor during the semester as their peers who were working on service-oriented designprojects. At the end of the semester, the first year engineering students prepared their ownservice-learning presentation for their classmates and a technical final report for their professorto meet their engineering course requirements, just as their peers had done for their service-oriented design
paper describes how a second semester cornerstone course is fostering the development ofcritical thinking in Chemical, Food, and Environmental Engineering students at Universidad delas Américas Puebla (Mexico) by developing students’ self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. Course two major projects were presented to experts inthe field that assessed students’ critical thinking by means of a specialized rubric3. Instructor,peer-, and self-assessments were also performed throughout the course on several assignments(formative) as well as on two major projects (summative). Possible performance levels werefrom exemplary (value 4, skilled, marked by excellence in clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance,depth
, water,materials). They were asked to put this information into a table using Excel and to write aparagraph discussing which alternative was chosen as their preferred alternative and why. These Page 24.811.7homework assignments given in conjunction with lectures on the engineering design cycleprovided the students with the implementation of the engineering design cycle throughout thecourse and helped guide them in designing their sustainable home project.The ResultsSurvey Assessment 1: PRE and POST learningAt the beginning and end of the second year of offering this thematic approach to EngineeringDesign, students were assessed with a short survey
studentsdepending upon the class size. This is a key component of a student overall grade in the course.This assesses students’ ability to communicate in writing. Peer evaluations are used to assignindividual grades. Each member of each group is required to complete a peer evaluation formwhich is provided by the instructor in the course packet.Oral Presentation of the Written Leadership Project: Each group is required to make an inclass—oral presentation of their written project. All members of the group are required toparticipate. The class participation is highly encouraged in the whole presentation process. Forexample, each class member and the course instructor jointly assign a grade to the oralpresentation for each of the individual presenters.Guest
scienceeducation. Using the search terms “active learning,” “teaching, ” “learning,” and “team-based learning” in any field, the searched was focused on articles published in peer-reviewed journals between January 1993 and December 2013. A 20-year period wasselected intentionally in order to include relevant work related to cooperative learning donein the late 90´s, and to achieve saturation. In the initial search 49 articles were found.Analyzing the full text of every article refined the search. The final articles were chosen fordemonstrating all the following selection criteria: 1. The research must have used a type of active learning in the theoretical framework. 2. The research was focused on improving student learning in the engineering
Central Queensland University Matthew W. Ohland is Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University and a Professorial Re- search Fellow at Central Queensland University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineer- ing students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and collaborative teaching methods has been supported by over $12.8 million from the National Science Foundation and the Sloan Foundation and his team received Best Paper awards from the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008 and 2011 and from the IEEE Transactions on Education in 2011. Dr. Ohland is past Chair of ASEE’s
Latino adolescents use engineering design processes to solve community-based projects, and how their household bodies of knowledge and social practices with their peers may connect to these design processes. Alex is particularly interested in the use of comprehension strategy instruction in linguistically and culturally diverse classrooms, physical and digital manipulatives and their application in engineering courses, and education and outreach for minorities in STEM.Dr. Amy Alexandra Wilson, Utah State University - College of Education Amy Alexandra Wilson is an assistant professor in the School of Teacher Education and Leadership at Utah State University. She studies disciplinary literacy instruction for adolescents in
Paper ID #9251A strategy for sustainable student outcomes assessment for a mechanical en-gineering program that maximizes faculty engagementProf. Sriram Sundararajan, Iowa State University Sriram Sundararajan is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Iowa State University and also currently serves as the Associate Chair for Operations. His research areas encompass multiscale tribology (friction, lubrication and wear), surface engineering and mechanical engineering education. He has authored over 65 articles in peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings and two invited book chapters. He serves on the
accreditation boards, professional societies, and societal views.7-9 2. Rapid changes in technology introduce novel ethical concerns that challenge or transcend existing codes of ethics of engineering professional societies.10,11 3. Engineering students experience a wide range of ethics pedagogy but still have lower levels of ethical reasoning than their peers.12,13 4. A coherent framework and effective pedagogy are critical for teaching ethics in an engineering context.14,15For our research project we proposed that for case-study analysis to be used as an effective toolto develop higher levels of moral reasoning in engineering ethics, it must be taught within acoherent framework for ethical decision-making that involves a
English speakers, language skills can be amajor challenge causing students to have difficulty taking notes, participating in class, andworking with their peers. Andrade also summarizes findings related to professors’ perceptionsof international students. Professors attributed lack of participation to cultural differences,whereas the students themselves attributed it to poor language skills. She also reports thatinternational students often preferred to work independently rather than in groups.The work reviewed by Andrade2 appears to be characteristic of much of the research oninternational students. It focuses on adjustment issues and relationships to academicachievement. In engineering education, participation of international students in active
as a whole class, and after the first week eachgroup is required to meet with me for one hour outside of class. Before the first class meetingtime students are expected to complete a course blog post telling a little about themselves andwhy they chose to take the course. This practice gets them into the habit of completing thefrequent blog prompts that are used to keep students engaged with the course even though weonly meet as a group formally one each week.In the first class they get a crash course from our Small Business Development Center regardinghow to establish a business, how to write a business plan, and how to prepare the relatedfinancial documents. I do this up front because I want students to know what to expect regardingthe
effective means of meeting ABETcriteria [4]. In the traditional engineering classroom, students focus almost solely on the technicalaspects of engineering problem solving. Project-based learning can provide opportunities forstudents to be exposed to the broader context of engineering problem solving [7, 9]. Perkins [10]suggests that students learn best when they experience the “whole game” associated within acontent area. Situated in real-life examples, Perkins idealizes seven principles to engage studentsin their own learning process. These principles range from exposing students to the entire contextof a subject area, to working on so-called hard parts of the problem, getting students outside of theclassroom, and gains in peer learning from team
the troubleshooting is a“reactive” problem solving (Baker & Dugger, 1986). The design involves more innovation,where the troubleshooting involves the recognition that technology encompasses (Baker &Dugger, 1986).More recently, Design is defined by Nielsen (2003), “A Problem is basically impression of atension or a contrast between two conditions: Condition of Desires and Actual Condition”. Thesuccessful design of an item transforms a condition of “Desire” (or need) into one of “Actuality”.These definitions are supported by Jonassen (2004) when he writes “First, a problem is anunknown entity in some context”, and “Second, finding or solving for the unknown must havesome social, cultural or intellectual value”. He then adds one vital
abroad experience significantly greater growth during subsequent immersion activities. Page 20.30.5We suspect that, regardless of whether or not the entire cohort of students participating in thesustainability service-learning project chooses to return to Chile for their full year abroad, all ofthose students will have a distinct advantage over their peers who have not participated in anyshort-term programs. The assessment surveys that we are developing as part of this activity willhelp us document, analyze and report differences in comfort levels between different cohortswhen exposed to a foreign culture.Our fourth activity is a specialized
, peer participants provide feedback on workshopaspects that may need to be addressed prior to the official workshop, which include, in part,notation consistency, instructional pace, breadth of material, and timing. The practice workshopsare held one week prior to the scheduled time of implementation, which ensures there is time toaddress the concerns of the workshop participants.Both the instructor and the workshop participants can benefit from these practice workshops. Forstudent instructors, they provide opportunities to speak in front of an audience that is committed Page 24.1404.3to teaching. The audience can see subtleties that may have been
such initiatives, with LLC organized aroundsustainability having been established at more than a handful of colleges and universitiesnationwide. Proponents of living and learning communities point to social and educationalbenefits beyond enrollment and retention, such as better academic performance, studentengagement (civic, intellectual, and social), and critical thinking owning to experiential learningand co-curricular (and extra-curricular) learning opportunities. Also expected are more reliableand effective student transitions into higher education owing to the peer support network and rolemodels built around shared interests and positive identities (Tinto, 2000; Zhao and Kuh, 2004;Inkelas, et al, 2006; Brower and Inkelas, 2010). This
model instructor Table 1: Timetable of reform development, implementation, and planned future work for the three courses Introductory Dynamics, Introductory Solid Mechanics, and Introductory Statics. Work in 2014 is planned, while work prior to 2014 is completed at the time of writing. See Table 2 for a list of specific reforms.pedagogies as faculty teach different content, do not collect data, or resist the implications of datathat they did not collect. By creating joint course ownership, faculty are able to participate in animplement-evaluate development cycle. This cycle begins by identifying areas for improvement.Then faculty implement targeted reforms and evaluate whether these reforms produce
analysis leaving a total of109 responses. The majority of participants, 71, selected yes as the response. Three participantsselected no as their response. It would depend on was selected by 35 participants with themajority of the follow up write in responses listing experience as the condition that wouldinfluence the salary. This is in alignment with the responses to the earlier question which notedexperience considerably favored over education.A third question asked participants if new employee hires with industry experience would beoffered a higher starting salary than someone without industry experience. This question offeredthree response choices: yes, no, it would depend on (please specify). All 110 participantsresponded to this question. One
major.Approximately half of students will decide to leave the major before the start of their sophomoreyear [2]. The decision to leave the engineering major can be based on many factors including: ifa student is failing courses in their major, motivation to do well in school, external influences(peers/parents) and change in attitude about the major. There are some students who view themajor as a means to make a competitive salary upon graduation and others who have a truepassion for the study of how engineering connects the world. Page 24.1346.2Supplemental Instruction (SI) was created to assist students in high risk courses by offeringsessions throughout the
multiple methods simultaneously (e.g., presenting PowerPoint slides while writing on the whiteboard) in an effort to be as thorough as possible and reach a wider range of learning styles. The utilization of multiple learning tools presented in concert means that the students are no longer focused exclusively on the teacher. Their visual attention is divided between all of the different sources of information. However, hearing students are still engaged with teachers through spoken language. This is problematic for deaf and hard-of-hearing students for numerous reasons as previously noted. o Different sources of information being presented are
– Answers the question “How do you plan to study this problem?”Chapter 4: Findings – Answers the question “What were the actual results of the study?”Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations – Answers the question “So what?”References: Published peer reviewed documents and internal reports. Table 1: Instructional Plan for the CourseClass Structure A major goal of the Capstone project is to familiarize students with a corporate teamenvironment, where responsibility for getting things done belongs to the team and its members.A typical class will have 12 – 15 students, and these students will be grouped into five projectteams. This size will provide students with opportunities to get personal attention from
development activities.9. ABET’s accreditation criteria will encourage my institution to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7revise policies in order to promote faculty development activitiesin order to keep faculty technically current.10. ABET’s accreditation criteria will encourage my institution to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7allocate adequate financial resources for faculty developmentactivities. 11. How do you stay current (or maintain technical currency) with the pace of technological change? (Check all that apply) □ Active participation in professional organizations □ Presenting papers at conferences/writing papers in peer-reviewed publications □ Attending conferences/technical workshops/seminars
maintenance and support (such as battery life, easily broken, etc.) It issimple to take notes in the print version, but it can be a bit more difficult to write notes on theeTextbook although that is also a desirable capability that we wish to expand for the students. Inthis paper, we focus on the feasibility and technology readiness level for bringing an eTextbookwith embedded simulations to fruition.ApproachEngineering field needsEngineers often want to experiment and to be able to receive immediate feedback or response pertheir inputs. They want interactive analysis tools. Engineers want to perform trial-and-errorexperiments with a realistic system, with which they can interact, even if it is a simulation of areal system.Many current engineering
% Motivation to complete college 30 64% 10 21% 7 15% Class rank 28 62% 11 24% 6 13% SAT Writing 28 62% 7 16% 10 22% Quality of high school 26 60% 10 23% 7 16% Motivation to study engineering 28 60% 11 23% 8 17% ACT English 26 58% 11 24% 8 18% ACT Science 25 56% 11 24% 9 20% Leadership experiences 26 55% 13 28% 8 17% # AP/IB courses
, participants were given anassignment to identify a lesson taught in their classroom which could use the cloud as aneducational technology tool and then to write a revised lesson plan based on cloud computingintegration and standards-based lesson planning. The assignment also required participants tosubmit the revised and original lesson plans plus samples of student work. The submitted lessonplans reflected the diversity of subjects taught by the participants and shared with their peers.The completed assignments were presented at the second workshop session, which consisted of a1-day meeting in December 2012.Based on the teachers’ applications for the program, we were able to outline what the teachershoped to learn from the workshops. A pre-workshop
serving as the department chair. His current research interests include incremental and online learning, learning in nonstationary and evolving environments, ensemble based systems, and various applications of computational intelligence in bioinformatics and biomedical engineering. He has over 140 peer-reviewed papers in journals and conference proceedings. Dr. Polikar is a senior member of IEEE, and member of ASEE, Tau Beta Pi, and Eta Kappa Nu. His recent and current works are funded primarily through NSF’s CAREER and Energy, Power and Adaptive Systems Programs. He is also an Associate Editor of IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.Dr. Ying Tang, Rowan University Ying Tang received the B.S. and
economyOutcomes 1, 3, 4, and 5 contribute to developing the students’ design abilities and experience,while outcomes 2, 3,4, and 5 specifically address design as a global, multi-cultural activity.These outcomes are assessed in three ways. First, each student group prepares and delivers anoral presentation describing their design process and demonstrating the resulting product.Second, each group writes a technical report detailing their design and the process used todevelop it. Third, each student in the class completes a questionnaire about the course, itsactivities, and their experiences, including peer collaboration and contributions. The first twoassessments look closely at students’ design experience, while the third gives feedback on thestudents
experiential, this “case study” approach is presented as asource of additional information to consider when examining the learning goals and processesassociated with developing student capability and interest in the research process. Page 24.584.2For background, one needs to know the experiences of the student author. As a sophomore Iapproached the faculty member with the purpose of joining a research lab to gain expertisewithin the field of human factors. From my perspective, it was overall viewed as a “graduatelevel research experience.” But after spending two years in the research lab environment, it wasrealized that this was more than just writing a
Research, 61(2), 218–238.12. Kulhavy, R.W., & W.A. Stock. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 279–308.13. Nelson, M.M. & C.D. Schunn. (2009). The nature of feedback: how different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375–401.14. Bjorklund, S.A., J.M. Parente, & D. Sathianathan. (2002). Effects of faculty interaction and feedback on gains in student skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 153-160.15. Kuh, G.D. & S. Hu. (2001). The Effects of Student-Faculty Interaction In the 1990s. The Review of Higher Education, 24(3), 309-332.16. Moreno, R., M. Reisslein, & G. Ozogul. (2009). Optimizing