describe our approach of scaffolding the process of student revision of writtenassignments with grading rubrics, peer review, and reflection. This work-in-progress is the firsttime we have graded rough drafts according to a rubric, although we have extensive experiencein using peer review and reflection to scaffold better writing outcomes for students [1-4].Here we describe our approach to scaffolding the student revision process in three steps: 1) Grade based on grading rubric for rough drafts. We provide grading rubrics for rough drafts when the assignment is posted, and then give students a grade on their rough draft. Using a grading rubric on rough drafts is the novel aspect of our work-in-progress. (10 points in total
Paper ID #44710The Impacts of Reflective Writing on Peer Evaluations in EngineeringDesign CoursesMr. Adam Weaver, Baylor University Mr. Adam Weaver joined the Baylor Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering with over 15 years of experience in industry and government service. He served in the Active Duty Air Force as an engineer for over eight years, specializing in test and evaluation of avionics, guidance/navigation, and space systems. After his time in the military, he worked as a Propulsion Test and Integration Engineer with Space Exploration Technologies as well as multiple positions with L3Harris
Paper ID #40759stEm PEER Academy: the Power of Human CapitalDr. Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University Dr. Jennifer Love is a full-time faculty member of Northeastern University’s College of Engineering, most recently in the First Year Engineering program. She is currently the Associate Director for the Center for STEM Education. She has a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1993), a Master of Science in Biomedical Engineering from The University of Iowa (1997) and a Doctorate in Education from Northeastern University (2022) where she recently completed her
Research Council [5-6].New pedagogical approaches to EC include an increasing focus on topic-specific proceduralwriting; engineering-specific templates and citations; and highly structured assignments withclear applications and a team-based component. Studies have shown that engineering students inparticular respond best and perform better in technical writing tasks with clear deadlines,expectations, peer review phases, and rubric-based assessments [5].EC pedagogy is also changing as a result of the overall importance of engineering technical workrises in industry. Calling it the Communication Coefficient (CC) method, researchers advocatethat engineering students’ experiences in the communication classroom can be improved if theyare advised in
a process orientation [14] to report writing, with studentscompleting various milestones throughout the semester that represented various sections of thereport (e.g., executive summary, objectives, methodology). Dr. Roesler was interested inadditional methods of providing feedback to students before milestone drafts were assessed bygraduate teaching assistants.Over the course of the Fall 2019 semester, WAES team members John Popovics, BruceKovanen, and Gail Scott worked with Dr. Roesler to develop a framework for peer review. Inthis case, peer review was implemented during class time and framed as an opportunity forstudents to explore alternative organizational structures for the report and to improve their own.For example, when assessing
the results of an investigationof an intervention with the potential to improve students’ identification of the optimal solution tothe problems posed by sponsors.The intervention represents an extension of research funded by an NSF IUSE: EHR Multi-institutional grant to improve writing support for engineering students on their technicaldocuments through the use of peer writing tutors from non-technical backgrounds,collaboratively trained by engineering faculty and writing tutor supervisors. The project, WritingAssignment Tutor Training in STEM (WATTS), has been conducted in three universities overthree years and has demonstrated statistically significant improvement in STEM undergraduatewriting after students received tutoring from WATTS
Processing for Assisting in Writing English SentencesAbstractMany non-English speaking international students come to the United States to pursueundergraduate engineering programs. However, most of them struggle to learn and use Englishproficiently. This struggle to learn and use English poses various challenges. For example, suchstudents struggle to describe their plans and thoughts to their college peers and colleagues atwork. Also, it is mostly harder for such students to make their place in academic or industrycareers. Some of these difficulties arise because students cannot identify sentence structures ordifferences between various types of sentences in English. Writing in complete sentences is oneway to convey
severaldimensions—formality, level of detail, conciseness, sentence structure; and (4) serve as a tool toeducate engineering students’ on the true distinctions between human writing and LLM-sourcedtext, challenging them to find LLM-written content online (e.g., social media posts and LinkedInblogs). Using additional tools that analyze syntax (Expresso), students can become aware of theirown writing style, how it contrasts with their peers, and how to objectively alter and improvewriting tendencies that challenge readability. Below in Figure 3, modules 1-3 are presented as aseries of steps with the inclusion of experimentation and play, which are integral for truelearning. Adult learners reported adapting and adopting selected LLM-assisted
Paper ID #43872Poetry Writing as a Creative Task to Enhance Student LearningEmma S Atherton, University of Florida Emma S. Atherton is an incoming Management Consultant and a recent graduate from the University of Florida with a Master of Engineering in Industrial and Systems Engineering, with a concentration in Production and Service Operations. She additionally received her Bachelor of Science in Industrial and Systems Engineering from the University of Florida, with a minor in Sales Engineering.Prof. Elif Akcali, University of Florida Dr. Elif Akcali is an Associate Professor in the Department of Industrial and
composed of a single peer mentor guiding asmall cohort of students. At the start of each fall semester, mentors were asked to write a briefbio segment introducing themselves and their interests. Each first-year student was required tojoin a peer mentor group. Mentees were then grouped based on shared interests with mentors.Once paired with a mentor, the mentees were strongly encouraged to engage in weeklyinteractions, either through attendance at a one-hour event or by maintaining regularcommunication with their mentor. With the goal of improving community bonds amongstfirst-year students, these events were typically fun, social events: meals together, game nights,sporting events, and so on. This arrangement provided first-year students with the
existing assignments and course structure, the embedded technicalcommunications faculty member assessed where writing interventions could be added to the flowof the course without adding too much additional work for students or faculty. This resulted in: 1. Adding status memos where each team member, in rotation, took turns sending out weekly agendas, leading meetings, taking minutes, and communicating project status via the memo genre. 2. Embedding points in assignment rubrics dedicated to revision to incentivize students to review and incorporate changes based on previous instructional feedback. 3. A peer response activity for student presentations where each student in the class was guided in providing
continued success in industry [12]-[16]. Despite the importance of technicalcommunication skills, there exists a disparity between what academia reports the technicalcommunication capabilities of recently graduated engineering students is and what industry isreporting. Other research has found that 50 percent of mechanical engineering department headsconsidered recently graduated students to have strong technical communication skills, whereasindustry leaders considered only 9 percent of graduates to have strong technical communicationskills [17]. This disconnect may exist because of a lack of targeted communication and writingassignments that do not teach an iterative and peer review process for writing [18]. There mayalso be a need for engineering
Paper ID #42974Small Shifts: New Methods for Improving Communication Experiences forWomen in Early Engineering CoursesDr. Jonathan M Adams, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Prescott Jonathan Adams is an assistant professor of rhetoric and composition and the writing program administrator at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, AZ. His research on rhetorical theory, infrastructure, and communication pedagogy informs his teaching of courses in rhetoric, composition, and technical communication in engineering.Ashley Rea, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, PrescottBrian Roth, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
Paper ID #45014Exploring the role of engineering judgment in engineering educationthrough writing praxis in a 3rd year systems engineeringwriting-in-the-disciplines [WID] courseDr. Royce A Francis, The George Washington University Dr. Royce Francis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Management and Sys- tems Engineering [EMSE] at the George Washington University. At George Washington, Dr. Francis’s engineering education research explores the relationships between professional identity formation and engineering judgment. His other research interests include infrastructure resilience and risk assessment
maintain quality control over instruction and to better understand andrespond quickly to graduate students' needs and preferences, the Hub's co-directorslimited the delivery of tutoring instruction to themselves. Both instructors are full-timeteaching faculty in the technical communication program housed within the engineeringschool, and both have decades of teaching graduate-level academic communication inspecific fields, including engineering, law, and international relations.This type of instructional delivery bypasses some of the questions encountered by someuniversity writing centers such as the efficacy of peer or undergraduate tutors [3], aswell whether tutors should be generalists or specialists within students' fields. Astechnical
research courses could also considerincluding references related to the dissertation writing process (e.g., institutional templates, writing centerinformation, online resources) to better prepare students for the transition to the writing phase of theirdoctoral program. Finally, gatherings could be offered for those students in the writing phase (e.g.,,writing retreat or writing day) to provide a space for them to share with their peers and make meaningfulprogress on their dissertation.Future work will focus upon completing interviews with doctoral students of the program during theSpring 2024 semester to better understand the results obtained about their experiences and perceptions ofcoursework and research activities (i.e., pre-writing and
collaborators attracted close to $1M in research grants to study writing transfer of engineering undergraduates. For technical research, he has a long-standing involvement in research concerned with the manufacturing of advanced composite materials (CFRP/titanium stack, GFRP, nanocomposites, etc.) for marine and aerospace applications. His recent research efforts have also included the fatigue behavior of manufactured products, with a focus on fatigue strength improvement of aerospace, automotive, and rail structures. He has been the author or co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed papers in these areas.Dr. Charles Riley P.E., Oregon Institute of Technology Dr. Riley has been teaching mechanics concepts for over 10 years and
, GFRP, nanocomposites, etc.) for marine and aerospace applications. His recent research efforts have also included the fatigue behavior of manufactured products, with a focus on fatigue strength improvement of aerospace, automotive, and rail structures. He has been the author or co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed papers in these areas. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Work-in-progress: An Investigation of Engineering Undergraduates’ Writing Transfer from Two First-Year Writing-Intensive Sites to Introductory Engineering LabsAbstractTransfer of learning theory explains how learners can apply their previously acquired knowledgeand skills in a new situation or
Paper ID #40935Ethics Case Study Project: Broadening STEM Participation by NormalizingImmersion of Diverse Groups in Peer to Near Peer CollaborationsDr. Brian Aufderheide, Hampton University Dr. Brian Aufderheide is Associate Professor in Chemical Engineering at Hampton University. He com- pleted his PhD in Chemical Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. His areas of expertise are in advanced control, design, and modeling of biomedical, chemical and biological processes.LaNika M. Barnes, Albemarle County Public Schools (Charlottesville, Virginia) LaNika Barnes, a certified High School Science and Equity Resource
technical writing skills in STEMdisciplines is well documented. Solutions have been proposed, implemented, and inconsistently sustained.One approach to improving disciplinary technical writing is through Writing Assignment Tutor Trainingin STEM (WATTS). WATTS is an interdisciplinary, collaborative approach in which STEM faculty workwith writing centers and generalist peer tutors to provide just-in-time assignment-specific feedback tostudents. WATTS research was funded by an NSF IUSE collaborative grant (award #s 2013467,2013496, & 2013541). In WATTS, the STEM instructor collaborates with the writing center supervisorand prepares materials for the tutor-training including assignment examples, a glossary of terms, areas ofconcern, and the
communicatetheir ideas. In this approach, students are encouraged to formulate their thoughts in writing andthen engage in oral interaction with a peer. VNPS on the other hand is a teaching technique thatinvolves students leaving their seats and participating in a group setting while standing at a verticalnon-permanent surface like a whiteboard to accomplish a task. An added advantage of the VNPSapproach is that it provides students the opportunity of seeing the work done by other groups,thereby gaining insights into ideas they may decide to adopt. It has been suggested that the use ofvertical non-permanent surfaces for group tasks promotes greater thinking, classroomparticipation, discussion, persistence, and knowledge mobility [12].The overarching
district and is in the process of creating a mentorship program to help high school students transition to university. His research interests include first-year university students’ experience, high school students’ transition to university, peer-to-peer mentorship, and student support networks.Ms. Sarah Huizar, University of Texas at El Paso Sarah Huizar is a Program Manager for UTEP’s Center for Research in Engineering and Technology Education (CREATE). She develops, implements, and manages a wide range of activities through the center’s STEMShine grant. She specializes in mentorship, essential skills building for freshman engineering students, project planning, community building through eSports, writing and design.Dr
advancement ofChatGPT:“It’s a good tool for explanation, not great for solving calculations.”“It should use better resources when providing information.”“Updating to current data rather than data two years old.”Conclusion:Although the process of writing an essay was remarkably simpler when ChatGPT was used forwriting, independent writing yielded more accurate and dependable results. By so doing, studentsnoted that when they do research on their own, they can use valid sources such as published booksand journal articles rather than blogs and non-peer-reviewed research works. Furthermore, studentsunderstood that the statistics provided by ChatGPT are not up to date for they should rely oncredible sources such as official government websites for the
. Therefore,researchers suggest that guided and scaffolding peer reviews approach has a positive impact ondeveloping engineering students’ technical writing skills in lab courses [11], [12]. In addition,Geisler [15] claimed that the transition from novice to expert is mediated by academic literacy1 This project was funded by a University of Michigan Enhancing Engineering Education Grant.practices. Thus, many researchers developed new curricula using the Writing in Disciplines(WID) approach to integrate technical writing into engineering lab courses [13], [16], [17].Engineering education scholars connect engineering thinking with the teaching of lab-intensivecourses. Wolff [18] suggested engineering educators should explicitly teach students about
skillsFigure 1b: The first-year bottom skills.Among second-year students, time management was the most important skill receivingapproximately 74% of responses (Figure 2a). Understanding the mathematical language in aproblem and self-learning and recognizing the need for lifelong learning received responses of45% and 43%, respectively. Work in teams, the last top skill, effectively received a response of31%. In Figure 2b, communicating effectively in writing was selected as the least valued skillfrom the second-year students, receiving 7% of responses. Applying the Engineering code ofethics and Managing a Project using appropriate project management tools tied for the secondlowest important skill with 4.8% of responses. Conducting a proper literature
Paper ID #43068Work in Progress: Establishing a Peer-Mentoring Program for Transfer First-YearEngineering StudentsMrs. Leslie Bartsch Massey, University of Arkansas Leslie Massey is an advanced instructor in the First-Year Engineering Program at the University of Arkansas. She received her BS in Biological Engineering and MS in Environmental Engineering from the University of Arkansas. She previously served as a project manager for the Arkansas Water Resources Center, but returned to join the College of Engineering faculty in 2013 to pursue her passion of teaching.Mr. Chris Cagle ©American Society
,” ijli, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 1–47, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.54855/ijli.23231.[8] M. Salvagno, F. S. Taccone, and A. G. Gerli, “Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing?,” Crit Care, vol. 27, no. 1, p. 75, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s13054-023-04380-2.[9] F. A. Shah, “IS CHATGPT A SILVER BULLET FOR SCIENTIFIC MANUSCRIPT WRITING?,” JPMI, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.54079/jpmi.37.1.3219.[10] T. Day, “A Preliminary Investigation of Fake Peer-Reviewed Citations and References Generated by ChatGPT,” The Professional Geographer, vol. 75, no. 6, pp. 1024–1027, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1080/00330124.2023.2190373.[11] F. Farhat, S. S. Sohail, and D. Ø. Madsen, “How trustworthy is ChatGPT? The case of bibliometric analyses,” Cogent Engineering
feedback quality (Task, Gap, and Action) forstudents who received the intervention, with the largest gain in students writing peer commentswith more actionable feedback We also found a significant difference in the length of peerfeedback comments between the class with the intervention and the class without theintervention. However, throughout data analysis, we observed gaps in our chosen framework,and as such, we are developing and testing an improved rubric to quantitatively rate studentfeedback. This paper will help instructors learn an approach toward aiding students in writingactionable feedback, improving the overall quality of qualitative peer comments. Further, wepresent the development of a rubric that can be used to assess peer feedback
with groups, N/A Please share how the peer Reassured Me, Gave me compliments, Work through mentors helped you develop problems with me, Gave me extra time, Provided direction confidence when working in /support, Encouragement, Welcoming, Kind, Let students try the makerspace classroom. first/ fostered learning, Helpful, N/A (Confidence) Please share what new Programming /coding, Writing, Presentation skills, Soldering, technical skills you learned in Tool use, Drafting, 3D printing, Prototyping, Other, Circuits, this course. (Technical Skills) N/A How did the peer mentors
can change the ways we collaborate, learn, read, and write. Teaching engineering communication allows her to apply this work as she coaches students through collaboration, design thinking, and design communication. She is part of a team of faculty innovators who originated Tandem (tandem.ai.umich.edu), a tool designed to help facilitate equitable and inclusive teamwork environments.Mark Mills, University of Michigan Mark Mills (he/him) is a Data Scientist on the Research & Analytics team at University of Michigan’s Center for Academic Innovation. He directs and supports analytics across CAI’s portfolio of educational technologies. His experience is in prediction and classification of longitudinal and hierarchically