course design. In phase II, participants are engaged in a 4-weekasynchronous online course that begins to address backward design as it relates to eachindividual’s course and allows participants to experience online learning from a studentperspective. Participants work with various instructional materials to gain foundationalknowledge and are required to engage in peer discussions to help explore pedagogical ideas andstrategies. Each week, participants submit assignments that are meant to serve as working draftsfor later refinement in the course design process. These assignments include defining courselearning outcomes, mapping out and aligning formative and summative assessments, creating anassessment, creating a syllabus, and identifying
for technology tools used in the course, and a direct link to thefirst online interaction - an introduction discussion and syllabus acknowledgement.For the course at large, the group started with the identified lecture presentations that would needto be recorded. The campus is very fortunate to have several green screen studios and after theinitial orientation, a standing appointment was scheduled where the professor could go in andrecord with the media specialist. The files would then be sent to GOEE’s audio-visual specialistwho would composite the presentation feed with the actual image of the professor. An exampleis shown in Figure 1.Figure 1. Composite of instructor presentation and instructor lecturingThe instructional designer could
% Figure 14 Figure 15Recommendations and ConclusionThe objective of this study was to create a standard online course design format that wouldsupport student learning and provide faculty members with a template to reduce design effortsand allow faculty members to focus on content as well as student interaction. Based on theresults of this study and the student survey, the course structure proved to be easily navigated bystudents ensuring that time was not wasted looking for required resources and assignments.Providing a defined starting point for students with set expectations using introductory materialand live orientation in addition to a standard syllabus is imperative if faculty members are to
accreditation effort.QM Standards and Course Content DevelopmentThis course teaches database system design concepts followed by SQL queries. Theoreticaldatabase models were developed during the designing period. After practicing SQL querylanguage, students practice on developing a database on the server side. The server-sideprogramming language PHP is used to access the database producing a dynamic database drivenwebsite. Many practical skills are involved in the course project development. Delivering theskillset effectively over the online format poses challenges to the instructor.Before QM was applied, the course used traditional syllabus for online teaching which covers thefollowing contents: Instructor’s name, course offering date period, material
learning objectives that werelisted in the course syllabus and summarized in Table 2. At a minimum, the CPS Assignment wasdesigned to satisfy Learning Objectives 1, 2 and 5. The assignment also satisfied some of theABET criterion required by program accreditation. Incidentally, the learning objectives were thesame for both the online and face-to-face courses.Table 2: (OLS 35000) Course Learning Objectives. This course satisfies ABET criterion c, e, g, h and j- The Course Objectives are: 1. List and explain 5 reasons why creative thinking and problem-solving are important in today’s global economy. (h, j) 2. Describe the 5 components of the Creative Problem Solving Process. (c, e) 3. Create a Mandala. (c, e, g) 4. List 5 major barriers to
Paper ID #21745Using Online Tutorials in an Introductory Engineering Graphics Course toImprove OutcomesDr. Nancy E. Study, Pennsylvania State University, Erie Dr. Nancy E. Study is on the faculty of the School of Engineering at Penn State Behrend where she teaches courses in engineering graphics and rapid prototyping, and is the coordinator of the rapid prototyping lab. Her research interests include visualization, standardization of CAD practices, and haptics. Nancy is a former chair of the ASEE Engineering Design Graphics Division and is currently the Circulation Manager and Treasurer of the Engineering Design Graphics
, nontraditional, and veteran undergraduates in engineering.Mr. Matthew Paul Jouffray c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Communicating Findings about Online Forum Use among Undergraduates in Distance-delivered Calculus: Developing a Help seeking Usage ModelAbstractThis paper reports on the synthesis of multiple user-centered design (UCD) tools to develop amodel for student help seeking in STEM courses. Data used to construct the model was gatheredamong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduates enrolled indistance-delivered calculus. The resultant help seeking “usage model” serves as a final projectoutcome of an NSF sponsored TUES Type I project entitled “Online Learning Forums
Paper ID #21789Using Experiential Learning in Course Curriculum: The Case of a Core En-gineering Graphics CourseDr. Martha M. Snyder, Nova Southeastern University Martha (Marti) Snyder, Ph.D., PMP, SPHR teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in learning design and technology, design thinking, project management, and computing privacy and ethics. She also chairs doctoral student dissertations. Marti researches effective designs for teaching and learning in face-to- face, blended, online, mobile, and virtual learning environments; and issues relating to technology use among older adults. Her work crosses multiple
applications. Several EE professors had agreedupon a System Engineering curriculum scheme (See Figure 2). At the yearend of2013, the capstone DCS then was renamed as“Dynamic System Simulation andImplementation (DSSI).”DSSI aimed to help students synthesize and integrate skillsand knowledge acquired throughout the SE course.Figure 2: An illustration (at round 0) of System Engineering curriculum scheme that categorizes 100-300 courses into cornerstone, keystone and capstone, respectively.Self-improvement from round 0 to round 1From round 0 to round 1, the DCS professor decided to do self-reflection on previousSC syllabus and examination of System Engineering course structure. Figure 3 listsfour standard steps in system engineering design shown in
analysis is: when is the impact of SP felt the most? Inother words, when is Sb − Sa maximized? Note that any positive value of this difference indicatesa reversal, an occurrence of SP. For example, consider that the weights wm , wh , and the totalnumber of homework asigments n are given by the course syllabus and that a student has ahomework average ∑ni=1 hi /n after n assignments. Then, the effect of SP, if felt at all, will bedirectly proportional to the score of the dropped score and inversely proportional to the grade in −1his or her midterm exam. If we write ∑ni=1 hi /(n − 1) = (∑ni=1 hi − hn )/(n − 1), the functionSb − Sa is linear with respect to the worst homework hn and the midterm grade m
StudentsFigures 8 and 9 demonstrate the assignment grades for graduate and undergraduate students,respectively. Histograms and the adjusted normal probability plots demonstrate that both cohortswere very successful in securing high grades. One student from each group did not turn in theassignment and therefore received zero.Table 5 summarizes evaluation results both the course and instructor received at the end of the Fall2017 and Fall 2016. In total, 23 students responded to the questions and filled out the online surveyout of 25 registered students in Fall 2017. On the other hand, 20 out of 27 students responded tothe questions at the end of Fall 2016 in which the IMSG was not offered as an activity to thestudents. The results indicate that the overall
• Provide guidance for improving the quality of courses • Certify the quality of online and blended college courses across institutionsMethodsWe utilized a case study approach15 of three mezzanine engineering courses at Arizona StateUniversity. These courses were selected to reflect three distinct required subject areas that fallwithin the mezzanine: statistics, robotics, and statics and dynamics. This institution uses a projectspine curricular approach, meaning that students are required to complete a project-based class inevery semester of the program. Mezzanine courses can be described as courses that align withand intellectually support the students’ current and future project courses. Our interview protocolincluded prompts to explore
. The results were simply given back to the facultymembers as stacks of scribbled-on questionnaires. Although the questionnaires often containeduseful information, they were also rife with contradictory, confusing, and illegible feedback.Now that our university has an online option for SRIs, the legibility problem has been mitigated,but the confusion and contradictions remain endemic to the process. In general, the engineeringfaculty attitude we most encounter regarding the mandated SRI is that they are unfortunate,unfair, and flawed summative judgements of their teaching and courses. They are not viewed ashaving much, if any, formative use.With the introduction of our SGID process, we were able to not only provide actionable resultsfrom
term-longteam project worked by a team of 4 or 5 students. The project work is delivered over 5 sprintsalong with a number of shorter team exercises that get submitted. The contribution of theseelements to the final grade is shown in Table 1 below. Table 1 - Contribution of Course Components to Final Grade Course Component Percentage of Final Grade Two in-class exams 10% each Final exam 25% Term project 43% (40% over 5 sprints, 3% for team exercises) Individual Exercises and online discussions 12%The three exams are a combination of short
the beginning of the course to assess their retention ofknowledge and to reinstate the importance of understanding of these for the proposedcourse. Also pre and post course assessment surveys were given to get the feedback fromthe students of their level of knowledge and understanding on this subject matter.Since this is a new course, no textbooks are available under this title that contained thesetopics. Advanced level research papers are available, so do the online materials fromcompany brochures, discussion forums and catalogs. Additionally, some students havepersonal experience in certain areas of some topics of this course that helped inpromoting discussions in the class.Besides the course syllabus and a course map, following learning
receivedinclude: • “The course was really easy with easily understood concepts, but the test had a lot of true false that were difficult. It seemed like the tests were designed to trick not test.” • “The course seems to be more of a survey of many concepts and ideas as opposed to a set of connected concepts that build on one another. This is okay, but I feel like some of the lectures could be reorganized for more flow.” • “I liked that Learning Suite (the online schedule and grading system) was very organized, and the course structure was the same all semester, but I didn’t learn much…It would be more appropriate as a 400 level course to be less broad and delve more deeply into
. Prather C., Harrell H.K, Bartlett L.E., and Wentworth S.M. (2016). Enhanced Radio Lab Experience Using ePortfolios. 123rd ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29 2016, New Orleans, LA.12. Jovanovic V., Mize M., Rodrigo R., and Verma A. (2016). Use of ePortfolio as Integrated Learning Strategy in Computer Integrated Manufacturing Online Course. 123rd ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, June 26-29 2016, New Orleans, LA.AppendixePortfolio AssignmentYou will develop an ePortfolio that will contain all the material (artifacts) you produce on allactivities you worked on during the class (tests, HW, peer-review feedback, project, etc.), and areflective letter.The reason I do this is because some of my former students have
Paper ID #23162Motivational Factors of Undergraduate Engineering Students in Introduc-tory Non-technical CoursesDr. YunJeong Chang, University of Virginia Dr. YunJeong (Eunice) Chang is a Research Scientist at the University of Virginia. She earned her PhD in Learning, Design, and Technology program from the University of Georgia. Her research interests involves supporting teaching and learning in higher education and designing online or blended learner- centered learning environments within STEM context.Dr. Rider W. Foley, University of Virginia Dr. Rider W. Foley is an assistant professor in the science, technology &
for meeting many of the country development objectives. There have been numerous approaches to improve the abilities of professors to prepare and deliver courses. Structured independent learning using published resources (e.g., books, online), workshops, seminars, and mentoring are among the most common. This paper describes a peer mentoring program to build the capacity of water resources and environmental engineering professors in Pakistan. The program is delivered using an online learning management system, Canvas. The peer mentoring is conducted through weekly interactions via video conferencing with additional learning facilitated through Canvas. Structured instruments guide mentor review and feedback on the creation of syllabi, lesson
their senior projects as the culminating effort towardsgraduation. This course includes lectures in technical writing and technical reporting techniquesas highlighted in Table 5. Table 5 Senior Project Class (EGT417) syllabus activitiesCombined with the EGT291W class, vertical integration offers additional opportunities for thestudents to improve their writing and communication skills. Attention was also given in theattainment of the students’ outcome “g” (SO7) which is mapped according to the ABETaccreditation criteria [22] as depicted in Table 6, below: Table 6 Table of Course EGT417 Competencies to Students Learning OutcomesConclusionDespite the inconclusive results of the survey, a wealth of evidence can be found in
similar sentiments: “Theother thing that we don't really do and we haven't done this anywhere that I've worked and itwould be really nice if we could is get these instructors of different courses together to talk aboutexactly what to cover, to even just look over the syllabus. What's covered, what they expect theirstudents to know, and what they don't expect their students to know as well.” This participantalso shared: “For all I know, whoever teaches next semester's course that follows [course], theymight expect that their students understand one topic really very well and students are coming inwith no idea how to do it because I don't spend any time on it because I don't think it's thatimportant.”These statements are further supported by
and the system must be fully functional. The team must be able to demonstrate the operations of the design in realistic user environments.The course is set up as a workshop-style course. Topics are introduced and then discussed withthe teams to see how each topic is applicable to the individual projects. Students are able to applythe topic to their own projects, as well as other teams’ projects in an open setting. Topics coveredin the two courses are listed below in Table 5.Table 5. Syllabus Material for Senior Innovation I and Senior Innovation II Fall Semester (2 credits - 1x per week 1:50 min) Topics Activities Team Building
st 1 year 64% 61% 85 + 42 = 127 2nd year 23% 25% 31 + 17 = 48 rd 3 year 8% 9% 10 + 6 = 16 4th year 5% 5% 7 + 4 = 11 During the first week of the semester, students self-enrolled in teams of 6 or 7 for an out-of-class design project using the self-sign-up group feature of Canvas (Instructure, Salt Lake CityUT); these same teams were also used for all in-class learning activities. Class periods devoted toactive learning where indicated as such on the course syllabus and schedule. On these scheduled
thebranch that contains the earliest instance of that file), but experience has shown that this structuregreatly facilitates the overall management of the course. Some simple automated scripts havebeen developed to help manage this structure and organization, keeping content synchronizedacross branches, as well as to perform some automated checks on the Courseware (e.g.,compliance to coding standards, integrity of internal cross-reference links, etc.).Courseware DeliveryEach week of the course addresses a new concept or technology with a lecture, including live-coding demonstrations, and accompanying Courseware including the assignment for the week(see Course Syllabus, below, for details). Courseware, including the solution for the previousweek and
understand the content while also preparing them for commonpoints of confusion or difficulty.Curriculum Implementation, Evaluation, and RefinementUpon completion of the summer program, participating teachers will have formed a syllabus andinstructional materials for an engineering design-centric course. They are expected to implementthe resultant course or modules in their schools within one (1) academic year of programparticipation. Hk Maker Lab provides ongoing financial and pedagogical support for theseclasses. The financial support ($1000/year) is used to purchase supplies necessary for the labactivities and design work. Pedagogical support is supplied by an Hk Maker Lab program teammember, who joins the teachers in their classes as a de facto
, 2017].[2] “Best Undergraduate Engineering Program Rankings (No doctorate),” U.S. News and World Report, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.usnews.com/best- colleges/rankings/engineering-overall. [Accessed Nov. 27, 2017].[3] “Engineering Curriculum,” Harvey Mudd College, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.hmc.edu/engineering/curriculum/courses/engineering-course-descriptions/#84. [Accessed Nov. 30, 2017].[4] “ES 203 Electrical Systems, Course Syllabus,” Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.rose- hulman.edu/~berry123/Courses/ES203/ES203_Syllabus.pdf. [Accessed Nov. 27, 2017].[5] “Mechanical Engineering (ME),” Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, 2017. [Online
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 A Comparison of Learning Outcomes and Learner Satisfaction in a CADD Course With Flexible and Rigid DeadlinesAbstractAn introductory computer aided drafting and design (CADD) course has been offered in aflipped format for six years. The course syllabus details the schedule of topics, assignments andassessments. Because of the volume of material, a rigid course schedule was kept (i.e., no latework allowed). This model is adequate for the majority of learners. However, some students, fora variety of reasons, fall behind by not watching lecture material or missing assignmentdeadlines. Given the obvious advantages of a flipped classroom for self-paced learning, we askedthe
housesmany modern classrooms. The classrooms contain flexible furniture, white-board-lined walls,and ample technology to encourage instructors to use active learning pedagogies. Thispurposeful design of the classrooms motivated the authors to add more active learning activitiesto the curriculum of a mechanics of materials course that was taught in one of the newclassrooms.The incorporation of active learning techniques was not new for the instructor of record.Previously, he co-developed a learning environment called Freeform founded upon the research-based pedagogies of active, blended, and collaborative learning [1-3]. The mechanics ofmaterials course utilized the Freeform framework, which included online video solutions forevery example problem in
differs from thetraditional multidisciplinary approach of parallel perspectives that can often be found incourses with sequential independent modules taught by professors from various disciplines.The course’s redesign was also a response to the need to embed the territory-based approachin disaster risks management, especially given the fast pace of the climate change process at aglobal scale.The course was redesigned in terms of methodology and evaluation method, in order toencourage self-learning and the integration of knowledge and skills acquired in previouscourses. The course’s new syllabus included conceptual and methodological interdisciplinarycontents related and articulated to the development of DRM plans e.g. Mitigation,preparedness and
Engineers.” The new course leverages available online materialsdisseminated by The Johns Hopkins University as well as materials disseminated by the NationalEnvironmental Health Association (NEHA) to emphasize environmental health practice indiverse communities – from urban settings in developed nations to rural villages in lessdeveloped countries. The new course employs a previously reported format including blendeddelivery, a flipped classroom, and mastery learning (D.B. Oerther, “Reducing costs whilemaintaining learning outcomes using blended, flipped, and mastery pedagogy to teachintroduction to environmental engineering,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ASEE AnnualConference & Exposition, Columbus, OH, USA, June 25-28, 2017. [Online