Paper ID #7674Student Engagement Strategies in One Online Engineering and TechnologyCourseDr. Julie M Little-Wiles, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI Dr. Julie Little-Wiles is a Visiting Lecturer in the Department of Technology Leadership and Communi- cation in the School of Engineering and Technology at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) where she teaches courses in Leadership Philosophy, Leadership Theory, Ethics and International Management.Prof. Patricia Fox, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis Patricia Fox is Associate Chair of the Department of Technology
of the course theyteach and previous online teaching experiences. Best online teaching practices are beingdiscussed in terms of ways of delivering the lectures, assignments, examinations,communication, class initiation, and attendance and participation requirements. These questionshave been investigated via a survey conducted at University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCCharlotte). Based on the survey, faculty and student challenges with online teaching and facultyperception of ideal online-teaching environment are also discussed. The results show that thereare some variations among these factors mentioned above.IntroductionMotivation:As distance education becomes more widespread, the benefits of distance education are veryclear: in
evaluate innovativepedagogical approaches without rejecting the positive aspects of traditional skills andapproaches. In this effort remotely accessible experimental setups are being developed andimplemented. Tools such as podcasting, synchronous sessions, and threaded discussions are usedto further enhance students’ learning experience of online education without sacrificing thetraditional advantages of online learning which include the flexibility of taking courses anytime,independent of geographical boundaries.This paper summarizes the step-by-step approach that was adopted by SETM for the design,development, implementation, and assessment of our online engineering degree programs. Someof the various features that were used, such as online
module in progression. The first module was on“Development of a Syllabus that is Compliant with Quality Standards” from accrediting bodiesand the academic unit providing the courses.Step 2: While studying this module she also reviewed content from a repository of model syllabiand a standard syllabus template developed by our College. After reviewing the module andthese templates, the Mentee had a pretty good understanding of what a good syllabus should looklike.Step 3: With this knowledge, the Mentee drafted a syllabus for the online course that she wouldbe teaching in the future. A checksheet was also available in the content section of the moduleand the Mentee used this to evaluate her syllabus based on the specific requirements
source paradigm of massive information sharing has spurred manyopportunities for education. Massive open online courses (MOOC), which arefreely available courses that combine social networking with online videos andassessment, will grow in the coming years to reach learners of all ages. Unlikeconventional classes, MOOCs can potentially reach an unlimited number ofstudents worldwide. MOOCs have the advantages of engaging learners whoparticipate according to predefined learning goals, prior knowledge and skills, andcommon interests (McAuley, 2010). Although they share some similarities totraditional courses, such as preset syllabus, timeline, homework, and exams,MOOCs are usually zero or low cost, require no physical attendance, and offer noformal
penalized. Another tidbit when using MasteringEngineering® is that advancepreparation is recommended for an instructor to acquire the course access code through Pearsonafter a login has been established for the instructor. Doing this in advance allows the instructor toinclude the information on the syllabus to alert students on what is needed for the course and tolessen student frustrations to a friendly tool that can assist their learning by completinghomework online. Academic dishonesty is always a topic of concern, where it is not alwayscertain whether or not a student has received or given help. To help overcome this issue,Professor A and B also gave in-class quizzes to also assess student learning of topics. From theseresults, it was quite
practices and individual course design5 while departmental committees composed ofgroups of faculty are responsible for curricular development. Froyd5 describes the pervasiveclassroom practice in engineering departments as lecture-based and summarily characterizes thepractice as “teaching as you have been taught.” In this system, individual faculty members areprimarily responsible for changes in practice and to implement change they must move past theclassroom culture in which they developed and have continued to practice for many years.The reward structure in research universities does not support extensive faculty focus onteaching. Promotions and tenure still rest primarily on achievements by faculty in producingscholarly publications and
assessment practices, or describe orillustrate actual or potential student learning activities are provided in appendices. The attachedappendices include these artifacts: 1. The prior course syllabus revised for the new course design. 2. An example of a guest speaker biography ( used in the prior course for the Tuesday night 9:00 pm free pizza talk). Page 23.379.5 3. Rubrics that will be used to judge the quality of the presentations by guest speakers as well as students and to guide the reflections written on guest speakers and student presentations to help students learn to identify and
identifying common concepts, student learning objectives and assessmentmethodologies was a search of university websites for courses entitled “Introduction toEngineering”, “Engineering 1”, or courses with similar titles. When such a course wasidentified, a further search for the course syllabus was completed. A team of undergraduateresearch assistants was tasked with executing this internet search and summarizing results incooperation with the principle investigator during the spring semester 2012. Each syllabus foundwas reviewed to ensure that the course was meant to apply as a common engineering courserather than a technically oriented, discipline specific course: for example, delineating between“Introduction to Engineering” and “Introduction to
literature in this field. There is no single book or textbook that includesall the topics planned for our development. A tentative course syllabus was developed and powerpoint slides for each of the topics has been compiled based on the research of existing books andjournal/conference publications. The PI has practical experience on PV systems through threeprojects he completed for Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) and DOE,and that experience has been embedded while designing the power point presentation. Thecourse topics and a summary of the power point slides for each module are presented in thefollowing:3.1 Course Module Topics Solar Resource and Renewable Energy Introduction to Photovoltaic Systems
engineering disciplines mayparticipate in one design project. These aspects require a design syllabus which effectivelyprovides guidance for all students on a team. Page 23.397.2Recently, the IRE faculty developed a new method of teaching engineering design which fits intofour design courses. In this method, students learn and practice major design components such asscoping, generating, evaluating, and realizing ideas at two introductory and advanced levels.They are also given opportunities to learn other aspects of engineering design. This method notonly defines different expectations for junior and senior students, it makes the grading fair
focus is in active learning and project based learning in engineering and technology education. Contact: kgt5@txstate.edu Page 23.1286.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Unrealized Potential: Course Outcomes and Student LearningAbstractDo you recall those course-level student learning outcomes on your syllabus? Ones that wereargued over in some curriculum planning meeting long ago when they were developed to satisfyan accreditation agency. You know, those outcomes that students rate at the end of the semesteras to how well they agree that they learned various things in
. The direct assessment results show consistent high quality student performance.The indirect assessment was done in the form of online course exit survey. Figure 12 shows thescreen shot of a small portion of the survey. The survey consists of 53 questions in sevencategories, including course outcomes, course items, course syllabus, course instruction, facultyitems, assessment techniques, overall evaluation, etc. The course exit survey was done for eachcourse for every semester. Figure 12 screen shot student course exit survey from EvalTools@Table 3 summarizes the average course exit survey score (in the scale of 5) for these threecourses from Fall 2010 to Fall 2012. It shows an overall evaluation of 905 and above. Whenanswering
whether or not a class instruction is adequateby itself and vice versa. Question 2 and question 3 are under the second category that measuresthe advantages obtained from adding DARWin 3.1 to the course syllabus. Questions 6, 7 and 9represent the third category, they evaluate the software as an engineering tool in terms of ease ofoperation, extent of tutorial required to get students started and its rank amongst other softwaresthey used in their undergraduate study thus far. The last category includes question 8 andquestion 10. These two questions are used to assess students’ satisfaction concerning the numberof assignments they had to work on using the software and the quality of assistance they receivedfrom the instructor to help understand the
discussed what topics and activities students couldchoose. The negotiable elements reinforced the strategic core, but give students autonomy topursue personal interests (purpose) and competencies. For example, students could choose totake the hour exams that the interactive engagement students took or they could choose to createdesign projects or educational resources.3.2.3 Create course structures To present the strategic core and the negotiable elements in a way that supportedstudents’ sense of competence, we required students to create three learning agreements thatreplaced the normal course syllabus. These learning agreements would be completed in purpose-based learning teams to foster students’ sense of relatedness. For example
, more than half switched to a different, non-engineering, STEM major.This paper describes the course. The Background that led to this course is contained atAppendix 1.For the past 5 years I have taught an upper-division undergraduate course in engineering careerskills and ethics at UCLA. (see Appendix 2, Syllabus of ENG185 “The Art of EngineeringEndeavors” .) As part of the class, students write a short, ungraded biography which describestheir reasons and preparation for their engineering studies. In addition, students take a survey(also ungraded) that further illuminates their preparation and interests relative to engineering andan engineering career (Appendix 3.) Based upon the information I collected and the experience Igained talking to and
institutionsworldwide who had faculty members participate. Department administrators were solicited viaemail requesting that the instructors responsible for teaching design at their institution respond tothe survey. Later, instructors of record for relevant courses were contacted directly by email andrequested to respond. The survey was conducted online using the open-source survey packageLimeSurvey. For the first time since the start of this survey series, an incentive consisting of acase study normally sold by the CACHE Corporation was offered to responding facultymembers. The report consists primarily of the statistical and demographic characterization of thecourse and its content, with some additional summary responses related to the course from open-ended
develop the students fromremembering (1. List) to highest level of cognitive domain, analyze, evaluate and create (6.Argue, and 7. Communicate).The grading breakdown did change substantially from 2009 to 2012, as can be seen in Table 1.Less weight was given to course participation and the final paper, while two debates were addedto the schedule and grading in lieu of two open-discussion classes.In 2009, the homework was comprised of two relevant current event reviews and two relevant Page 23.1273.3webpage evaluations. Samples of the required format were provided in the syllabus and postedon the online learning management system. Students were then
interdisciplinary subjectsneeded to be covered, the following reference texts are used and recommended to the students.Based on these and additional references the following course syllabus was developed19-23. It Page 23.602.4focuses on wind energy, wind power systems and solar/photovoltaic (PV) energy generation. Toa lesser extend it focuses on other renewable energy sources and related technologies. Wind andsolar energy conversion system make up about 80% of the course since wind and solar energyrepresent the fastest growing areas of renewable energy in the past decade. Therefore the keyareas that the course focuses are the wind and solar energy sources
particular majors in their career quest.12An exploration of 14 universities’ online course catalogs in Vanderbilt’s peer and aspirationalgroups indicates that career development courses currently offered at institutions vary almost asmuch as the institutions themselves. The surprisingly small handful of institutions who offersuch courses either offer them through a centralized career center or through the engineeringschool within a college or university. The speculation over the type of institution that may offercourse-based resources for students’ career development is discussion for another paper. Five ofthe 14 universities sampled offer career development courses with variable credit hours from
the coursematerials and explore major themes, comparison of views, applications, and higher-orderthinking skills [2].Chatmon et al. [2] use virtual hands-on laboratory exercises, online cooperative groupdiscussions, think- pair-share activities, student-generated laboratory exercises, and student-ledcurrent event reviews in information assurance courses to advocate the active learning. One ofthe main finding of this study suggests that the active learning activities are welcomed bystudents as they have a sense of being involved in their learning experience.Engineering Technology is one of the popular fields in College of Technology at EasternMichigan University that provides wide range of program of studies for students interested inthis
beused to drive prospective customers to Kickstarter and other websites to assess consumerdemand. The materials and supplies budget could be awarded for the development andproduction of print and online marketing collateral. The materials and supplies budget was alsoused to purchase prototyping materials for the 3D printer.Understanding the best use of $2,600 for equipment to support students was a central challengewith the inaugural offering of the course. We leveraged existing physical resources at theUniversity and beyond campus; including computers, scanners, printers, white boards, andmeeting spaces and production labs. We knew we may need various computer software and newmedia technology to support student efforts.Customer validation and
gone immediately to file complaints.Asked to provide a written complaint, only one agreed to sign it, the rest presumably deterred bythe Honor Code should the facts be examined. The complaint claimed that the “courseorganization was changed after Drop Day”. The cited basis was the instructor’s comment that theformal lecture phase of the course was over as of Nov. 16 as per the syllabus, with the rest of thetime to be devoted to iterative application of the knowledge, preparation and conduct of acomprehensive test, discussion of the test, a further lecture to address issues seen in the test, anddiscussions of the final stages of the assignment. It is not known if the complainers attended anyof these; they certainly did not go and correct the
20 0 2 0 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly AgreeFigure 4: Survey results relating to ABET outcome fOutcome f is the “Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility. Although this isprimarily addressed in the lecture class and tested by an online quiz, The assignments associatedwith the project assessment process included elements designed to encourage students toconsider their group members, and their professional and ethical responsibilities to theirteammates. Since engineering ethics is offered and required as a separate course, this was lessemphasized, which may account for the larger number of neutral responses
’ answers are focused on timemanagement and other details of the course; we convey this advice to new students byattaching the wisest and wittiest statements to the syllabus. Of greater interest here is thestudent feedback that shows the wider perspective: “Take this course before solid mechanics, dynamics, and structures.” Page 23.1101.19 “Take this course before taking “Elements of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences” and the math course in partial differential equations in Nuclear Engineering. The concepts learned in this course will help put you in the mindset of
introduction to programming with C++. Theimplemented strategy blended pre-recorded online lectures and homework assignments, with oneweekly optional face-to-face meeting. The same instructor taught both the blended instructionand the traditional face-to-face lecture. The focus of this study was twofold: a) determinepotential negative impact of the blended format, and b) identify the major predictors of finalperformance in this course. A one-way ANOVA analysis indicated no statistically significantdifferences in final course score between the control and the treatment groups. The analysis of aproposed path analysis model showed that self-efficacy, perceived engagement and perceiveddifficulty are significant predictors of students’ final performance in
present that dataeffectively.This specific course is part of a distance education curriculum and as such requires delivery ofcontent and assessment via various online tools across both campus provided internal networkresources and the Internet. The course syllabus outlines nine key course objectives; however,specific to this research effort, the following course objectives were considered for the currentstudy efforts – that upon completion of this course, each student will be able to: 1. Apply project management concepts by working on a group project as either project manager or active team member. 2. Demonstrate the use of various project management applications to help plan and manage a technology project. 3
students and advisors. Like a course syllabus, it is a sort ofcontract and spells out the roles and responsibilities of both advisor and student. It is meant to beupdated each semester and contains practical information such as resources, deadlines, andrelevant campus offices. It also should contain learning objectives or outcomes. Such a syllabuscan then provide a basis for assessment of an advising program or individual advisors.If the ideas of Lowenstein24 are applied to the syllabus, i.e. that the advisor’s job is to inculcatethe student with the entire curriculum, both formal and informal, then the advising syllabuswould be expected to differ for liberal arts degrees and professional degrees. In the case ofengineering degrees, we propose that
isreleased freely for educational purposes, such usage is permitted by copyright law.Fig. 4 shows screenshots from Version 6 of the game. As shown in Table 2, each version has atitle, and the last version is called Software Engineering. This is because it is taught, in the lastclass, after software engineering concepts are introduced in the last part of the course. Studentsrecognize that the waterfall model has not been used, which leads to a discussion of the IIDmodel. Other concepts, such as modularity and reusability, are exploited to introduce anothercomputer player, the final boss, to the game. As shown in Fig. 4, he is hard to beat. Fig. 4: Screenshots from Gorillas in MATLAB (Version 6), programmed by the author. 3.2. Syllabus
) students. The only well-studied aspect of homework policy is the comparison of outcomes in courses using onlinehomework versus traditional homework. There are many studies comparing these two deliverymethods at varying levels1,4,5,6,8,11,12,19. Most studies conclude that web-based homework issuperior to (or at least not inferior to) traditional homework in terms of homework completionand student outcomes.Aside from studies of online homework, however, there are very few other studies investigatingthe effect of various mathematics course policies on homework completion and studentsuccess. The most recent study in this area7 compared the effect of weekly collectedassignments versus weekly quizzes in a Calculus I course. There was no