multidisciplinary teams as specified in the ABETEngineering Accreditation Commission Student Outcome (d) an ability to function onmultidisciplinary teams. This paper presents an experience of using a team-based case studyproject as an active learning tool in the EE and CS required course for assessing the attainmentof this student outcome. The performance indicators clearly demonstrate that the ABETEngineering Accreditation Commission Student Outcome (d) is successfully attained.I. IntroductionSince the ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 accreditation, efforts to satisfy Criterion 3(d) anability to function on multidisciplinary teams have resulted in a large literature on the topics ofteam-based learning,1 collaborative learning,2 learning organization,3
accessthe KS questions continuously during the unit of instruction as a formative learning guide. Post-KS immediately prior to a summative exam enable comparison of student self-assessments oflearning with faculty assessments of student performance. Fundamental Hydraulics is a junior level fluid mechanics course required for civilengineering majors at a small university in the Western United States. KS were employed ineight sections of Fundamental Hydraulics from Spring 2019 to Spring 2021 with a total studentpopulation of 118. Prior research on KS in this course has shown that student self-assessmentsvia KS are well-aligned with their exam scores. Given the data set in this course, we furtherexplored relationships between student
experienceexclusively in solid geometric modeling. Through the paradigm of Project Based Learning, ascaffolded approach encouraging student exploration and experimentation was employedacross the study. Page 25.26.2 Figure 1 - Parametric surface modeling Figure 2 - Freeform Polygonal modelingThe choice of software for each task was based on marketing material analysed from a rangeof software and claims on what they are designed to do, in addition to the researcher’sexperience having had success with both for similar design tasks. The parametric surfacemodeling program chosen for the study was SolidWorks 2011. For the
number of the writing samples as “Not Acceptable” (16% of samples/evaluations),meaning that based on these assessments, (a) the faculty evaluators would not recommend a sixthof the engineering students for a job requiring only basic writing skills, (b) the writing required Page 23.1369.3extensive repair (more than people in the workplace would want to address), and (c) the studentwould not graduate if graduation depended on writing proficiency. This study also points out that“a large portion of the ‘Not Acceptable’ papers showed significant non-native speaker issues.”Furthermore, the study indicated that not many writing samples showed “Strong
interdependence).”!A third expert participant (Lau) also weighed in to present three “pictures” of what he tries toassess in his students’ work, using a hierarchy of big (“emphasizes connectedness, compassion,and participative reality and evolution”), medium (“systems thinking of […] the kind thatecologists and geoscientists think of which is about life/earth/cosmos systems”), and small(“Ability to understand and use analytical/assessment tools like LCA, Eco-footprint, risk, etc. inthe design of new things”).These conversations informed the development of our initial gateway concept framework.However, rather than through a systematic qualitative analysis informed by grounded theory andconducted through Dedoose (a qualitative data analysis software
assessments. In total, she has been on the leadership of more than $24 million dollars in research awards. Her research on evaluation of online learning (supported by two NSF awards #1544259,1935683, ) has resulted in more than 20 peer-reviewed conference and journal publications related to engineering learners in online courses. She was a FutureLearn Research Fellow from 2017-2019; a 2018 recipient of the FIE New Faculty Fellow Award and was the 2021 Program Chair for the Educational Research Methods Division of ASEE.Julie S Linsey (Professor) Georgia TechTracy Anne Hammond (Professor) Dr. Tracy Hammond is the current Secretary of the Faculty Senate and passionate about Faculty governance. Hammond is Director of the TAMU
expertise include evaluations of engineering education curricula and programs, informal education and outreach programs, STEM teacher development, and climate change education programs. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Assessing Student Learning of Civil Engineering InfrastructureAbstractAs part of an ongoing NSF-funded effort, materials have been developed for teaching civil engi-neering infrastructure topics to undergraduate students. These materials are currently beingadopted by members of the Center for Infrastructure Transformation and Education (CIT-E)community of practice. CIT-E is a group of faculty from 25 universities in the U.S. and Canadaseeking to improve infrastructure
Paper ID #39187Work In Progress: Evaluating the Cultural Context of Engineering andEngineering-Related Concept Inventory Assessment ItemsShauna N. Adams, Purdue University, West Lafayette Shauna is currently a PhD student in Engineering Education at Purdue University. She previously worked for 10 years as a Systems Surety Engineer and 15 years as a coordinator/advisor of various pre-college en- gineering programs. Shauna earned her BS in Mechanical Engineering from North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University and her MS in Mechanical Engineering from The Ohio State University. Her research interest includes
assign the weight of theedges, and would specify the situation to be tested (which concepts are active). The softwarewould provide the calculation and the outcome to be analyzed. Or, in anther case, if he/she Page 9.545.13 Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Educationwould like to assess his/her students, he/she could choose some concepts and ask students togive the weights, and the program can make the calculations and gives the outcomes.The main importance of this methodology is to offer clues to make a
the content of textual artifacts or other forms of discourse. An application scenario isthe assessment of essay question answers for large-enrollment sections. The instructor has keypoints she is looking for in the essay answer. CRA text-analysis software can be used to generatea concept map of what each student wrote and resonance cluster analysis can be used to groupsimilar results. Each map presents the highly influential words in the essay. After grouping, theinstructor could read sample answers from each cluster and assign a grade range to the entirecluster. Teaching assistants could then add or deduct points to each individual essay foreloquence of writing.In addition to evaluating student work, CRA might be used to support continuous
graduate engineering programs (Table 2)compared to 63.4% of Whites. In the same year, underrepresented minorities accounted for 9%of all engineering doctoral degrees earned that year (Table 3). Although there has been animprovement in the production of URM PhD, large disparities still exists given the under-representation of minority faculty in academia. Major barriers to increasing graduate studentsand faculty diversity is identified as a three-body “pipeline” problem that requirescomprehensive intervention from pre-college to PhD. First is the K-12 pipeline problem due tothe under-preparation of students at the pre-college level math and science, resulting in fewerstudents transitioning to college. Second, the college pipeline problem due to the
later in thecurricular program to effectively educate students in the skills.From these examples it is easy to determine what skills need to be taught within the educationsystem, but the question lies in how to effectively teach such skills and assess that the studentshave learned them.Innovation PedagogyInnovation, by definition, is stated as being “1: a new idea, method, or device : novelty, 2: theintroduction of something new” [4]. This definition is quite fitting when describing innovationpedagogy, as it is relatively new within educational practices and introduces new concepts intoteaching methods. In innovation pedagogy, curriculums are described as having a flexiblestructure with alternative forms of study and assessment that integrate
, UTeachEngineering, and the TEAMS Program at the University of Boulder. Dr. Rivale’s research uses recent advances in our understanding of how people learn to evaluate and im- prove student learning in college and K-12 engineering classrooms. Her work also focuses on improving access and equity for women and students of color in STEM fields. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 How Engineering Experts Solve Complex Problems: Findings to Influence Engineering Education and Student InnovationAbstractThis study compares engineering expert problem-solving on a highly constrained routineproblem and an ill-defined complex problem. The participants (n=7) were recruited from twolarge public
Materials Engineering at the University of Oklahoma. His research and teaching interests include transport phenom- ena, biomedical engineering, surfactants, and modification of surfaces by admicellar polymerization with over 130 archival publication and patents. He has served in a variety of administrative positions including NSF Program Director, Associate Dean for Research, and Director of the Bioengineering Program.Gary Robert Brown, Office of Assessment and Innovation Dr. Brown has been in higher education for more than 30 years. He has an interdisciplinary PhD and been working with colleagues in almost every discipline. His expertise is in educational assessment with a strong background in technology and innovations
the awardee to provide engineering educators andresearchers with a robust method of evaluating the fairness of educational assessments withsmall sample size using a combination of CTT, item context analysis, and think-aloud interviews.Such combination requires less training in psychometrics, making it easier for educationpractitioners to use. Using this method, engineering educators can evaluate the fairness of theirclassroom assessments and minimize implicit bias. This is especially useful in engineeringeducation as student population typically do not allow educators to examine assessment fairnessin depth using advanced psychometric analyses due to small group size for certain studentgroups. Engineering instructors can also use the findings
Paper ID #6365Experimental Assessment of Higher-Level Data Analysis SkillsCapt. Julie Ann Layton, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute CPT Layton is a master’s degree candidate in the RPI Dept. of Industrial and Systems Engineering.Prof. Thomas Reed Willemain, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Page 23.572.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Experimental Assessment of Higher-Level Data Analysis
” who is responsible for being sure thatthe assessment of the outcome is on track according to the timeline. S/he is also responsible forcollecting and analyzing the data on a systematic basis. The faculty member prepares a briefreport that includes a description of the method(s), where in the curriculum the outcome isassessed (for program assessment purposes), and a brief report of the findings. The report ispresented at a summer faculty ABET meeting and, based on the findings, recommendationsmade for program improvement. The faculty champion is responsible to follow-up and report onthe success of the improvements. With a small department there is the advantage that 100% ofthe faculty are involved in every step, as opposed to a smaller
Warehouse (CW) fits within the ecosystem.Study DesignAs the Concept Warehouse propagates into Mechanical Engineering, we seek to understand howthe instructors’ use of the Concept Warehouse relates to dimensions of the educationalecosystems. To maximize the range of contexts in the sample, we are studying five diverseinstitutions: a large public research university, a small private university, a 2-year college servinga large number of under-represented students, a large non-PhD granting public university, and abilingual public research university. Our design includes initial semi-structured interviews withfaculty to understand their contexts and their initial thinking about use of the ConceptWarehouse, classroom observation and follow-up
engineering courses as well as various courses in Mechanical Engineering, primarily in the mechanics area. His pedagogical research areas include standards-based assessment and curriculum design, the later currently focused on incorporating entrepreneurial thinking into the engineering curriculum.Dr. Todd France, Ohio Northern University Todd France is the director of Ohio Northern University’s Engineering Education program, which strives to prepare engineering educators for the 7-12 grade levels. Dr. France is also heavily involved in de- veloping and facilitating the Introduction to Engineering course sequence at ONU. He earned his PhD from the University of Colorado Boulder where his research focused on pre-engineering
activity and 4 institutions having highresearch activity. Some institutions only offered Master's degrees: 2 institutions were small ormedium Master's universities and 3 institutions were large Master's universities. The remaininginstitutions offered only Associate's degrees or professional degrees: 3 institutions offered onlyAssociate's degrees and 1 institution was a professional academic institution.MetricsWe define the following metrics for analysis: ● Completion rate - the percentage of the class that submitted the lab and passed at least one assessment. ● Number of attempts - the number of times a student submitted a solution to pass the assessments. ● Class score - the overall average score amongst all the students in a class
the earliest stage of a collegestudent’s education.Focus on the importance of the first year is not limited to engineering education. Many collegeshave developed new first-year programs designed to smooth the transition from high school tocollege. Some focus on study skills and transition issues, others use learning communities tobuild a network of social support for the academic mission, and yet others build first-yearseminars connecting students with faculty research interests.6 Among engineering educationprograms, however, freshmen seminars typically focus on bringing engineering and design intothe curriculum earlier, largely to spur student motivation, retention, and assistance in choosing amajor.7,8,9 These first year engineering
classrooms in order to help students make connections among the STEM disciplines and achieve deep understanding. Her work focuses on defining STEM integration and investigating its power for student learning. Page 26.260.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Assessment of Curricular Materials for Integrated STEM Education Improving K-12 STEM education has a priority on numerous education reforms in the 1-7U.S. To that end, developing and sustaining quality programs that focus on integrated STEMeducation is critical for educators. Integrated STEM education provides
or 5 to design, build, test, and report in varying open-ended project contexts (from 11sections of the course taught between Fall 2011 and Winter 2015). The study is presented as aposter because the researcher is eager to connect with others at ASEE to consider new questionsof interest. The data set includes demographic data (gender, race, TOEFL score when applicable,SAT/ACT scores, first year GPA, final course grade), as well as team assessments (student self-assessments and assessments of teammates, team report scores, and team satisfaction ratings).In this large data set, many comparisons were significant. Findings of interest regarding teamsatisfaction included a pattern of satisfaction by team gender breakdown. Teams with two ormore
students also participated in the formal mentoringprogram with an experienced researcher as their faculty mentor and a network of mentors acrossthe NHERI sites.Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from NSF NHERI REU student participantsthrough pre-program and post-program assessments. These assessments were developed from thegoals of the NHERI REU program which include to (1) provide meaningful research experiencesto undergraduate students, (2) provide mentorship from an experienced faculty researcher, and(3) foster a community of researchers in natural hazards engineering research. This paper delvesdeeply into the mentoring experiences of students, highlighting the structure of the mentoringprogram and the outcomes from the students
] J. A. Fredricks, P. C. Blumenfeld, and A. H. Paris, “School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the Evidence,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 74, pp. 59–109, Mar. 2004, doi: 10.3102/00346543074001059.[9] M.-T. Wang, J. B. Willett, and J. S. Eccles, “The assessment of school engagement: Examining dimensionality and measurement invariance by gender and race/ethnicity,” J. Sch. Psychol., vol. 49, pp. 465–480, Aug. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2011.04.001.[10] M. W. Ohland, S. D. Sheppard, G. Lichtenstein, O. Eris, D. Chachra, and R. A. Layton, “Persistence, engagement, and migration in engineering programs,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 97, pp. 259–278, Jul. 2008, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00978.x.[11] J. P. Connell
AC 2008-992: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF DIFFERENT 3D SCANNINGAND REVERSE ENGINEERING TOOLS FOR UNDERGRADUATE PROJECTSAtin Sinha, Albany State University Atin Sinha is the Regents Engineering Professor and Coordinator of the Engineering Program at Albany State University. He received his Ph.D. in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Tennessee Space Institute in 1984. He had worked in aeronautical research and industry (National Aerospace Laboratory-India, Learjet, Allied-Signal) for 12 years before moving to academia in 1990. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in Oklahoma. His current research interest is rapid prototyping and reverse engineering. He is also engaged in motivating
teaching assistant in capstonecourses.Examples are common of the beneficial nature of capstone courses in engineering curricula [7].Frequent surveys of ABET-accredited programs reveal that capstone courses occur in numerousengineering disciplines and across school sizes [1,8-9]. Likewise, the benefits of mentoring forengineering students--whether by peers, faculty, or industry liaisons--are well-documented in theliterature, particularly with regard to qualitative assessments of student, faculty, and sponsorsatisfaction with the capstone experience [10-12].Less frequent, however, is the examination of the effect of capstone engineering courses onstudent success metrics such as grades, retention, and persistence to graduation. Studiesmeasuring
valuable part of our curriculum. Theeffort found most closely resembling ours is that of Stone and Hubing 16 at the University ofMissouri-Rolla (now Missouri University of Science and Technology) which has aspects of bothproject management and design of experiments; within the context of their overall engineeringdesign methodology course, however, these were limited in comparison to the emphasis atCCSU.In our overall program assessment plan, computerized exams are used to judge student ability touse software tools learned in support of engineering concepts and practices. An example of thisassessment occurs in the program’s senior project research class, ME 497. In this course,students prepare the general project design proposal, performing
examplesare detailed here: o Literature Review: In this activity, the instructor collects a set of recent journal publications relevant to a specific topic being covered in the lecture. The class is divided into small groups (3-4 students). Each group is tasked with reading and analyzing one or two papers and presenting their findings to the class. The breadth and depth of this activity can vary as desired. For instance, the instructor may want the students to get a broad view of the different research directions in a field like nano-biotechnology. In this case the students would be provided a large range of articles and given an option about which to explore. Alternatively, the goal may be for students to understand how
knowledge due to the existence of poor prior knowledge ormisconception, and (3) use of discussions or peer learning.Engineering Clinic at Rowan UniversityThe four engineering programs at Rowan University (RU) have common Engineering Clinicclasses throughout their programs of study. Students enroll in Clinics in each of their eightsemesters at RU. Each clinic class involves students in teamwork (often interdisciplinary),hands-on activities, and report writing and presentation. For a more detailed discussion, seeReference (16).The Freshman Clinic is focused on engineering measurements (Fall) and competitive assessment(Spring). The Sophomore Clinic is focused on engineering design. The course is team-taughtwith communications faculty17-18. Where