Paper ID #11802A Plan to Diffuse Mobile Hands-On Teaching and Learning in Puerto RicoDr. Juan C Morales, Universidad del Turabo Dr. Juan C. Morales, P.E., joined the Mechanical Engineering Department at Universidad del Turabo (UT), Gurabo, Puerto Rico, in 1995 and currently holds the rank of professor. Dr. Morales was the ABET Coordinator of the School of Engineering for the initial ABET-EAC accreditation of all four accredited programs at UT. He has been Department Head of Mechanical Engineering since 2003. His efforts to diffuse innovative teaching and learning practices derive directly from the outcomes assessment plan
Paper ID #12518Supporting Students’ Plans for STEM Careers: How Prepared are HighSchool Educators in Appalachia to Help?Dr. Cheryl Carrico, Virginia Tech Cheryl Carrico is a Postdoctoral Research faculty member for Virginia Tech. Her current research fo- cus relates to STEM career pathways (K-12 through early career) and conceptual understanding of core engineering principles. Prior to her current role, Dr. Carrico spent over 25 years in the aerospace in- dustry conducting and leading R&D, design engineering, and project management for composite aircraft components. Dr. Carrico received her B.S. in chemical engineering
guided by learningmotivation, metacognition (thinking about one's thinking, and knowing one’s learning beliefsand strategies), and strategic action (planning, monitoring, evaluating progress, and taking properaction)” 1,2,3. Most educational researchers agree that the self-regulation process is a cyclical process andincludes three major phases: (1) planning, during which learners set goals, make strategic plans,and judge their self-efficacy; (2) execution, which involves learner's performance and control oftheir learning efforts, and use of learning management strategies and self-monitoring; and (3)self-reflection, which involves the self-evaluation of mastery, causal attributions, and reactions tothe learning task and performance after
plan to their primary plan ofattending medical school. A majority of applicants described seeking out the internship todecide if they wanted to teach in the future. Students reflected on wanting the teachinginternship because they thought they would enjoy teaching or they wanted to teach, and on theskill of teaching being valuable in their career path or in any career path. These students wantedthe teaching internship to develop teaching skills. Some students described seeking out theinternship to help better themselves in other ways, such as for resumes (i.e. the internship was agood opportunity that they did not want to pass up). A majority of students described wantingthe internship because of their desire to help others, or to “pay it
were up to eight additional questions on each quiz covering objectives nottargeted by this study. Each quiz has a corresponding companion study plan assignment. Thecompanion study plan assignment included both target and nontarget objectives. The study planassignment presented students with practice questions and a “quiz me” activity for eachobjective. In the experimental condition, questions covering three of the six target objectivespresented in the preceding week were massed, as in the control condition. Questions coveringthe remaining three target objectives were spaced according to the following scheme (depicted Page
have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The research on nontraditional students has been published and presented at two academicconference proceedings. American Society for Engineering Educators in 2014 at Indianapolis,Indiana called “Nontraditional Student Access and Success in Engineering” and Frontiers inEducation in 2014 at Madrid, Spain called “Getting Better With Age: Older Students AchieveHigher Grades and Graduation Rates”. Page 26.636.7What do we plan to do during the next year to accomplish the goals?The researchers plan on investigating the relationship between economic status andnontraditional students to see
field of engineeringeducation and their graduate students (2013, n = 9 faculty, n = 8 graduate students; 2014, n = 8faculty, n = 10 graduate students), and ii) three broader participation workshops at national andinternational engineering education conferences (AAEE 2012, n = 16; ASEE 2013, n = 112; FIE2014, n = 18). This paper describes the model of the ongoing collaborative engagement process,summarizes findings and insights concerning research quality, and outlines plans for future work.IntroductionThe long-term goal of the research program initiated by this NSF-funded CAREER project is tocultivate, catalyze, and systemize a much needed theoretical discourse within the engineeringeducation research community around research quality in
hour video conferences which include additional training and reporting on our effortsto develop our plan for spreading the use of our educational ideas (in our case Mobile Hands-OnLearning). Included in the process is a requirement to test out our hypotheses (e.g. our valueproposition, possible income streams …) through a minimum of 100 customer interviews. Theprocess ran throughout January and February and was nearly a full-time effort. After February,we have continued to work on the plan we developed (to create a new division at ASEE to bringsome structure and support to MOHS pedagogy). There was also a one day workshop at ASEE inwhich the 9 pilot groups presented to help educate and recruit the next cohorts. Based on thesuccess of the pilot
Paper ID #11209Integrated Active Learning Tools for Enhanced Pedagogy in a Software En-gineering CourseDr. Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University Acharya joined Robert Morris University in Spring 2005 after serving 15 years in the Software Indus- try. His teaching involvement and research interest are in the area of Software Engineering education, Software Verification & Validation, Data Mining, Neural Networks, and Enterprise Resource Planning. He also has interest in Learning Objectives based Education Material Design and Development. Acharya is a co-author of ”Discrete Mathematics Applications for Information
microcontrollers and FPGAs. Kief retired from the Air Force in 1998 following 20 years of military service. His final military assignment was at the Air Force Operational Test and Evaluation Center (AFOTEC) at Kirtland Air Force Base. Kief holds a B.S. and M.S. in Computer Engineering from the University of New Mexico. He has published and taught in the areas of digital and programmable logic, satellite design, and system verification and validation. He is also an IEEE senior member.Dr. John Reutter III, Drake State Community and Technical College Dr. John Reutter is Director of Planning and Research for Drake State Community and Technical College with responsibility for guiding the College’s strategic planning process and
from the National Science Foundation Advanced Technological Education (NSFATE) program. The program is now completing its second year and graduating a first group ofwell-prepared photonics technicians ready for employment in the growing photonics industry inthe state and across the US. The second year marked the successful completion of the programcurriculum and further development of the Optics and Photonics Laboratory. Outreach activitiesincluded summer programs for high school and middle school students. The paper describes theoutcomes of the two year project in relation to the objectives of the NSF ATE grant. Challengesand lessons learned along the way are discussed, together with plans for sustainability and futureexpansion of the
progress and planning for the future.”SummaryStudent and faculty survey responses indicate that both groups view as effective strategies to Page 26.423.9increase graduate students' research knowledge and skills. The most common experiences notedwere research experiences with Center faculty, being mentored by them, and attending and/orpresenting at seminars and conferences. Student ratings (on a scale of 1 to 5) indicated that theirskills and knowledge had increased most in terms of their ability to work independently in a lab(mean = 4.22); knowledge of areas of research related to bioenergy (mean = 4.11); datapresentation skills (mean = 4.00); and
26.358.3excellent rate.Programming changes occurred during the first five years of this program. A major addition theprogram occurred in spring 2005 with the introduction of the “Guaranteed 4.0” by Donna O.Johnson.7. This learning system is taught to all CIRC scholars and the major reason that moststudents in the program improve academically and are more efficient in their time spent learning.Another part of the 4.0 Plan that is very valuable to helping the students organize their life sothat they plan for adequate learning time is a detailed time management schedule. Students findthis system very helpful and many continue to use this system after they graduate. The“Guaranteed 4.0 Plan” is an excellent learning system and is considered to be a major reason
provide participants a meaningful research experience and enrichment activities to increase thelikelihood that participants will attend graduate school in engineering/science. This model targetsthree cohorts from which data is collected. Each data source provides unique information thatcontributes to a comprehensive analysis of the impact and experiences of program participantsand to an understanding of the academic trends of all SURE program applicants. The pre- andpost-program surveys, focus group session and interviews with participants include a series ofquestions about students’ research interests, and participants’ perceived impact of SURE onresearch skills and planned graduate school attendance. The faculty advisor survey includesquestions
Paper ID #11309Exploring Military Veteran Students’ Pathways in Engineering EducationDr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, West Lafayette Joyce B. Main is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Dr. Catherine E. Brawner, Research Triangle Educational Consultants Catherine E. Brawner is President of Research Triangle Educational Consultants. She received her Ph.D.in Educational Research and
productdesign, planning, fabrication, assembly, and testing. They constitute a core body of knowledgethat all graduating engineers and technologists in manufacturing related fields should master.Focusing on the learning outcomes makes it easier for other interested institutions to implement Page 26.252.3the resulting model because instead of force-fitting a new curriculum into their programs, theycan simply map their outcomes to the MILL model outcomes. This is accomplished by usingonly those courses that are most relevant to their program outcomes. The adopting institutionsimply maps the MILL course-level learning outcomes to its institutional program
the use ofadditional resources about research-based teaching and learning3 to scaffold their discussions.Each instructor chose a new (to them) interactive teaching strategy to use in an upcoming course.Groups met regularly throughout the school year to discuss and plan their teaching. The group Page 26.765.2leaders continued meeting throughout the year (again via phone conference), as well. Conferencecall meeting notes, longer narrative descriptions written by group leaders, and survey data werecollected to study the design of the groups.ResultsResearch Question #1- Faculty Development ModelThe survey results indicated that the faculty
assist in instrument testing andvalidation; 3) to complete a literature and prior art review and construct our test instrument informs appropriate to both engineering students and practicing engineers with the assistance ofpsychometric experts; and 4) to develop an instrument testing and validation plan appropriate toour research goals and contexts.Significant ResultsIn this section, we summarize the following: 1) Delphi Study key findings; 2) results ofcollaborator recruitment efforts; 3) a summary of our instrument research, instrumentconstruction process, and face validity study; and 4) the design of our unique testing andvalidation process
Oregon Sea Grant and the Institute for Natural Resources. Prior to her work as research administrator Julie spent many years working for non-profit organizations and as a U.S. Peace Corps Volunteer on marine conservation issues including state and regional research planning and policy initiatives, citizen-science water quality monitoring and enforcement, marine habitat restoration, marine reserves establishment and monitoring, endangered species conservation and management, and community-based conservation pro- graming in the Pacific Islands. Julie has a MSc. in Marine Resource Management from OSU. She serves as an advisor to the office of research development, and serves on the National Alliance for Broader Impacts
understanding key elements that !are the essential elements of a K-12 engineering education. These elements need not be presentin every engineering lesson or unit, but should be addressed throughout the K-12 engineeringcurriculum. The key indicators and their descriptions are shown in Table 1.Table 1: A Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering Education (FQEE-K12)2, 26Key Indicator DescriptionProcess of Design (POD) Design processes are at the center of engineering practice. Solving engineering problems in an iterative process involving preparing, planning, and evaluating the
towards the learning objectives of the laboratoryrather than on “how to do the laboratory.”This paper presents the overall integrative approach of advancement, development andimplementation of our state-of-the-art offline and online learning environment to supportand enhance students’ learning and training as they use simulated systems to design andconduct virtual and real-time machining experiments and calibration of precision machinetools.In the sections to follow, we present a comprehensive assessment and evaluation plan and itsoutcomes, guided by five foundational evaluation questions, designed to focus data collectionand analysis on a) the project’s stated objectives and outcomes, b) broader issues such asdissemination of project information
learning styles as assessed by the Myers-‐Briggs Inventory [3]. Additionally, when considering the external obstacles and characteristics of NT students, it cannot be assumed that students are largely isolated from worldly concerns. Students may have learned to recognize “A” level mastery of the subject matter, and have a good idea of how long it will take to achieve it, but still have their plans interrupted by externally imposed changes in work schedules, by sick children (especially in single parent households) or other non-‐academic factors. These constraints are less severe with traditional students however divergent constraints are greater
. Page 26.352.2The Green-BIM teaching method developed by the author with the support of the NSF TUESprogram provides students with building models containing integrated architectural informationto implement sustainability practices that goes beyond both conventional 2D solutions usingelectronic drafting board and 3D modeling for purely visualization purposes. Students areexpected to enhance their learning ability of sustainability practices through an innovative virtualapproach using BIM. The course taught using the Green-BIM teaching method seeks to deepenthe knowledge and skills for BIM technology in order to deliver the state-of-art skills andknowledge of sustainability. As one of the assessment plans, there is a need to assess the impactof
performed an initial evaluation ofthe impact of an REU program in bioengineering for students transitioning between theirfirst and second years in college [14]. As this program was targeted towards studentsearly in their collegiate programs, the researchers planned to track the students as theycontinued their studies. Such data can enhance our understanding of the impact of a UREon retention.In addition to these studies, Hathaway et al. considered 291 students involved inundergraduate research at the University of Michigan from a wide range of disciplines.They found that structured programs led to more positive results than unstructured UREs,in terms of pursuing graduate studies and that students with a wide range of abilities canbenefit from a URE
providing scholarships to communitycollege transfer students; providing support services including peer tutors, conferences, lectures,presentations, and career planning workshops; and increasing student engagement in college- anduniversity-wide activities that contribute to persistence.This paper details the process of development and implementation of a systems approach toevaluation, where the assumption is that our program is itself lodged in a larger system withvarious stakeholder interests and desired outcomes. The assessment plan was created by usinglogic and pathway models that relate activities in the ASPIRE Program to short term, mediumterm, and long term outcomes. The assessment plan further identifies how activities supportoutcomes and
gasifier design in resource limited environments, the team is working inter-nationally with Ahmadu Bello University and the National Research Institute for ChemicalTechnology in Zaria, Nigeria. This enhances the education of US students by providing experi-ences with a transnational collaborative team.In this paper we will present technical aspects surrounding development of a number of newlearning cartridges, both low-cost vacuformed models already fabricated and classroom tested Page 26.1155.3and those in the planning stages including a Solid Works image and COMSOL model of a newsimplified Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger and the Biomass cartridge
Facilities-Based and Hands-On Teaching ApproachAbstractThis paper presents an overview of and the latest outcomes from an NSF TransformingUndergraduate Education in STEM (TUES) funded project, “Building Sustainability into ControlSystems Courses.” The new teaching strategy leverages an energy efficient academic building toexpose students to modern heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) and sustainablebuilding concepts. Students perform new process control laboratory experiments, are taken ontours of the building’s HVAC mechanical rooms, and are shown the Building ManagementSystem. A formative assessment plan is guiding the development of new curriculum materialsand assignments. Direct and indirect assessment results
Paper ID #11321Factors Associated with Student Participation in Cooperative Education Pro-grams (Co-Ops)Dr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, West Lafayette Joyce B. Main is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Dr. Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University Matthew W. Ohland is Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He has degrees from Swarthmore College, Rensselaer
calculations. Theseproblems are ideal for structuring problem based or cooperative learning activities around. Theproblems are based on actual real world issues encountered by engineering professionals at thelocations studied. Also, the Engaged material is currently structured for self-directed learningallowing students to proceed quickly to new information within the site and through outsidelinks.Currently, collaborators are being sought who will develop lesson plans that employ the Engagedin Thermodynamic material. These could take different forms, involve different teachingpedagogies, and be of short or long duration. It is intended to make these lesson plans availablethrough the website for others to use or adapt.AcknowledgementThis material is
trajectory5. Along with the trend,several particular aspects have been sketched for the future scenario. (i) Distributed Generation: In recent years, new generation deployments have been shrinking in scale meanwhile dispersing geographically, driven by changes in policy, business models, and technologies3. Since planning