Gamification Gamification, or the introduction of game-like mechanics into non-game contexts, hasreceived increasing attention recently, largely for its perceived ability to motivate participantsinto desired courses of action by making mandatory or mundane tasks rewarding in some way.Examples of this in the business world include frequent flyer reward programs, social programssuch as FourSquare or Facebook Check In, and app-type gamification of to-do lists, weight-lossprograms, or exercise programs. Application of gamification to education is a logical extension, as it has the potential tomotivate students to perform extra learning tasks that they might not otherwise do by couchingthose tasks in the larger context of a game, or by
. interesting. [3] The instructor encouraged student Student participation in field trip for COVID planning, participation. weekly journals and meetings, RFI inquiries [4] The instructor seemed to care about Course management software for building mentoring our learning. and collegial relationships. [6] The instructor communicated the Leverages announcement for technical newsfeeds, subject matter clearly. RFI responses to enable student-managed inquiries. [7] The instructor responded effective- Course management systems organized to integrate ly to questions raised in class. into large and small discussion/presentations Course evaluation categories compared to changes
alsobecomes part of the material on which the grade of the student is based. A partial list ofcompanies that have sponsored ILTM interns includes ARCO Chemical, Boston Scientific,Chase Manhatten Bank, Corning, G.E. Industrial Syst ems, G.E. Medical Systems, Goldman,Sachs & Co., IBM, Johnson & Johnson, J.P. Morgan, Lockheed Martin, Merck, Motorola,PricewaterhouseCoopers, Siemens, and UPS.Although both the on-campus and off-campus portions of the program are exceptionallydemanding, the responses of students have been overwhelmingly positive. A small sample ofstudents’ comments provided in past years at the end of the on-campus portion of the programinclude: · “The ILTM program has been one of the best experiences that I have ever had
. Preliminary assessment results will begiven at the presentation of this paper.The module begins with the presentation of basic digital imaging methods and issues, using PChardware and web cameras available in the department electronics lab. As student proficiencygrows, they advance in teams to the High Tech Tools and Toys Laboratory, which supports fivededicated imaging stations. At each station, the students face a particular imaging problem, whichthey solve using a variety of hardware and software tools. Solutions are structured to make surethe students can be reasonably successful with their novice level of understanding. The ‘Toolsand Toys’ include different cameras, frame grabbers and digital channels, and imaging softwareranging from MATLAB to
identify the ways thatpracticing engineers developed their epistemic frame9.The first of three methods used to collect our qualitative data involved interviews andobservations with practicing engineers within six different organizations across a spectrum ofengineering employers. Specifically, we aimed to work with employers from government andindustry, from small to large-multinational conglomerates in size, and across a broad range ofwork sectors. For more information about the six organizations we worked with during ourstudy, see Table 1. Page 15.1391.3 Table 1: Study Sites Overview. In choosing sites, we focused on getting a range of
morethorough concept exploration. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between embedded computingconcepts and other courses and topics across the curriculum. Figure 2 Embedded nexus of ECE curriculumCourse goalsOur primary motivation for adding the course was to incorporate this important area into our(somewhat dated) curriculum. The change was not driven by unsatisfactory assessment results orby employer, alumni or advisory board feedback. Even though we are a large public universitywith a mandated ratio of two in-state students for each out-of-state student, our students are well-prepared for the rigors of an engineering curriculum and have consistently met our targets forstudent outcomes. They are high-achievers who
leadership education program for graduating seniors in engineering (at aspecific university) is interviewing established leaders. Through the interview, small groups ofstudents prepare for and engage the established leader to explore the leader’s characteristics,experiences, and methods of leadership. Surveys have found this a more meaningful learningexperience for the students than traditional lecturing by the leader/speaker. Further, developmentof interviewing skills and improved understanding of the value of asking better questions hasalso been shown to increase student confidence in their ability to communicate, listen, andreflect.Development of questioning and interview techniques was used to improve communication andengagement in freshmen
higher individual achievement than do competitiveapproaches … ” 9. “This is one of the largest bodies of knowledge in education or socialpsychological health.” “… Although many teaching procedures have been recommended overthe past 60 years, very few are still around. Almost none are as widespread and institutionalizedinto instructional practices as is cooperative learning.” 12. “The meta-analysis (of cooperativelearning) demonstrates that various forms of small-group learning are effective in promotinggreater academic achievement, more favorable attitudes toward learning, and increasedpersistence through STEM courses and programs” 13. “The research evidence itself indicates thata) the theories underlying cooperative learning are valid and b
the French students did not showan interest in the concept of compromise. This looks like a plausible cross-cultural difference,but it was not a high frequency item.In sum, the before and after differences seem as great as the cross-national differences, althoughneither were large. This suggests that work shaped team behavior in this project as much asculture did, and that cross-national teams with students like these are easy to form because thedifferences are small. This is not to downplay the importance and even the value of culturaldiversity2. During the collaboration, we have found clear differences between institutional andpedagogical cultures, and these have affected the way the collaboration developed. But at theproject level, the
small), focus (i.e., research versus teaching), source of funding (i.e., publicversus private), and campus type (i.e., urban versus suburban versus rural). Details about eachuniversity based on the Carnegie Classification System [28] are presented in Table 1. Table 1: University characteristics University Student Research/Teaching Focus Source of Campus type ID* Population Funding U1 Large Master's Colleges & Public Suburban Universities: Larger Programs U2 Medium Doctoral Universities: Public Urban Moderate
post assessments within group, with a p-value of.05. A two-sample t-test assuming unequal variance was used to compare the two groups.Open ended survey questions were analyzed by performing a content analysis. Each responsewas entered into a computer software, then codes were assigned to the response inductively. Theinitial codes were later condensed into fewer codes based on program learning outcomes. Directquotations of responses that are provided in this document are verbatim to illustrate the responsesby theme.Class activitiesA one credit class was used to provide interaction between the students, time for assignments anddeliver course content. The first day, the faculty mentor gave an overview of the classexpectations and peer mentoring
depth as they apply to the course.Phase 1: Preparation for CharretteThe first three weeks of the course were devoted to preparing the students for the “charrettenight.” The students were provided a syllabus describing the scope of the project as well as thegoals for student learning. The eight goals directly relate to the ABET Engineering Criteria2000 for Criterion 3: Programs Outcomes and Assessment which are listed from A-K inAppendix D of Engineering Change.15 The eight goals along with their associated ABETobjective are shown in Table 3. As shown, the eight course objectives correlate to the ABETcriteria for program outcomes and assessments with the goal of enhancing student learningthroughout the capstone course
working on is the Esperance Town Beachrejuvenation.b) Numerical modelling for new canal systems. Research and numerical modelling for townbeach rejuvenation projects. Training (reading manuals etc).Civil 1a) A large multidisciplinary engineering consultancy with around 130 offices worldwide. Theyhave a rotational graduate development program and i am currently employed as a structuralengineer in their TW division. TW are concerned with the maintenance, analysis and upgrade ofoffshore platforms and an onshore LNG Plant. It is primarily Oil & Gas design and analysis.b) I am curently working on platform analysis and redesign of specific segments and modules asthe platform topside is constantly upgraded.Civil 2a) Current employer: Iron Ore
with the design and buildprocess of a small satellite. Of particular note in this paper is the experience at the US Air Force Page 7.849.1Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering EducationAcademy3 (USAFA) in using the design of a small satellite to teach students about spacecraftdesign. USAFA has launched several small satellite programs successfully and in doing so hasprovided the students real world experience with the end-to-end spacecraft design process. All ofthese efforts are commendable
framework for enhancing engagement in student-centered learning: own it, learn it, and share it,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 64, 4, pp. 707-734, 2016.[6] R.J. Beichner, J.M. Saul, D.S. Abbott, J.J. Morse, D. Deardorff, R.J. Allain, and J.S. Risley, “The student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (SCALE-UP) project,” Research-based reform of university physics, vol. 1, 1, pp. 2-39, 2007.[7] Purdue Polytechnic Institute (PPI), Purdue Polytechnic Employers Survey, 2013.[8] M. Weimer, “Problem-based Learning: Benefits and Risks,” Magna Publications, Accessed online: www.facultyfocus.com/author/maryellen-weimer-phd/, 2009.[9] ABET Technology Accreditation Commission, “Criteria
. Assessment Instruments and Procedure Learning Modules in this study are tutorial lessons that are assessed via the web, asasynchronous learning networks. These ALNs are “bite-sized” lessons that are intendedto be used in one sitting. Versions of the modules were specifically designed to appeal tostudents with different learning styles. This study analyzes the understanding dimensionsof a preferred learning style, which focuses on the characteristics of sequential and globallearners. In general, sequential learners are linear, orderly and learn in small, incrementalsteps. Global learners are holistic, systems thinkers, and learn in large leaps. Thesedifferences are expanded in Table 2. Four testing instruments were used: the Felder-Soloman
student type in [2] since theEFL students reside in a small Chinese province that is unlike large metropolitan cities, such asHong Kong or Beijing.Thus, there is some validity in adapting an instructional methodology that simplifies thecomplex, technical terms in engineering courses without sacrificing the learning benefit to EFLstudents. Lackey et al. [11] assessed the efficacy of a true and false question test vs. a traditionalproblem-solving or essay test (i.e., non-true and false test). The authors concluded that a variedtest item format helps improve the student use of cognitive skills and leads to an overall learningbenefit. Another study of international engineering students investigated the relationship betweenTest of English as a Foreign
engineering career pathways atdisproportionately lower rates than their peers. Research suggests that the disproportionately lowrates may result in students disengaging with STEM careers like engineering as they progressthrough middle school and high school. Therefore, to contribute to research exploring the gapbetween exposure and enrollment in engineering programs, this work in progress paper intendsto explore the relationship between middle school students’ perceptions of engineering, theirinterests, and self-efficacy to better understand how an out-of-school engineering interventionmay influence their engineering career aspirations.This paper uses a concurrent mixed-method, case-study approach, to analyze participants’ surveyand interview data to
, problem-solving,design, project execution and management skills to real-life civil and environmental engineeringproblems. The capstone experience has morphed over the past 20 years from a single projectcompleted by the entire graduating class in small teams to multiple projects with separatestakeholders for each capstone team. The current structure is a two-course sequence thatincorporates several pedagogical approaches to help students apply and hone their professionalskills. Standardized or common grading rubrics, guidance, and assessment tools have beendeveloped and used uniformly by all capstone groups under the direction of faculty advisors and acourse coordinator. These guidelines include mandatory weekly progress meetings with
University, Hamilton, Ontario).9. Stice, J. E., Felder, R. M., Woods, D. R., and Rugarcia, A. The Future of Engin eering Education 4. Learning How to Teach, Chem. Eng. Ed., 34(2), 118-127 (2000).Biographical InformationKEVIN P. SAUNDERS is a doctoral student in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Iowa StateUniversity.CHARLES E. GLATZ is Professor and Chair of Chemical Engineering at Iowa State University. He earned hisdoctorate in chemical engineering at the University of Wisconsin.MARY E. HUBA is the Assistant Vice Provost for Undergraduate Programs and Professor of EducationalLeadership and Policy Studies at Iowa State University. Huba provides leadership for outcomes assessment at IowaState. She earned her doctorate in educational
reasons, it is useful to have a laboratory component in teaching the Strength of Materialscourse effectively. Unfortunately many undergraduate programs in the country, including ourprogram in CEES, does not have this option available because of the large class size.A cost-effective approach to providing laboratory experience to undergraduate students is tocreate a “virtual laboratory” (Sun, et al., 2000). An exponential growth in the computer softwareindustry in recent years and availability of user-friendly software package programs have createda unique opportunity for engineering educators to develop virtual laboratory modules and tointegrate them into relevant undergraduate courses. To this end, three virtual laboratoryexperiment modules were
, A. L. (2011) “Assessment and Evaluation of a Comprehensive Course Modification Plan.” The Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship. Vol. 2, No. 2. 2. Gerhart, A. L. and Carpenter, D. (2013) “Campus-wide Course Modification Program to Implement Active & Collaborative Learning and Problem-based Learning to Address the Entrepreneurial Mindset.” Proceedings of the 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, GA. 3. Gerhart, A. L. and Fletcher, R. W. (2011) “Project-Based Learning and Design Experiences in Introduction to Engineering Courses: Assessing an Incremental Introduction of Engineering Skills.” Proceedings of the 118th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
differences wereassessed using Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA). Pre-test scores served as covariates. As thiswas the initial efficacy examination of the engineering-based curriculum described above, amore liberal p-value of 0.10 was considered, but only when the accompanying effect sizemeasure (i.e., η2) reached a meaningful level. In the social and educational sciences, η2 values of0.01 indicate a small, but meaningful effect, while η2 of 0.06 to 0.13 are indications of mediumand large effects, respectively.Results indicate that in three of the five participating schools, youth who experienced thecurriculum modules in the classroom reported significantly higher social cognitive beliefs thanthe comparison group (see Table 5). Specifically, higher
fabricatewood and metal parts, rather than creating the parts themselves. Under this training program,students were not adequately familiar with the equipment in the lab. As a result, student designprojects and prototypes were of low manufacturing quality, student confidence in their hands-ondesign and manufacturing skills was reduced, and there was an increased risk of safety violationsdue to lack of experience.5) Increased awareness of advanced manufacturing technologiesOne identified weakness of our undergraduate mechanical engineering curriculum was the lackof manufacturing technology coverage beyond basic machine shop processes such as milling,turning, or welding. The typical Air Force engineer is a program manager more than anengineer. As such
setting. The number of topics covered in the course was large enough that itwas not possible to cover all topics in any sort of depth on an exam. Exams were therefore arather blunt and unsatisfactory assessment tool for this type of course.At this institution, lab sections are generally taught by graduate teaching assistants. TA dutiesrange from supervising students to demonstrating equipment to grading lab reports.Demonstration type labs both helped and hindered TAs in their ability to educate the students intheir sections. Demonstration labs were relatively easy to teach to the TAs. Because only the TAwas handling the equipment, the number of possible errors or equipment malfunctions wasgenerally low, which saved the TA from having to help
Education, 2015 Design, Development, and Implementation of the Instructional Module Development System (IMODS) Division: NSF Grantees Poster Session AbstractThere is a growing demand and interest in faculty professional development in areas such asoutcome-based education (OBE), curriculum design, and pedagogical and assessment strategies.In response to this demand, a number of universities have established teaching and learningcenters to provide institution-wide, and sometimes program specific support. A team ofresearchers is engaged in a User-Centered Design (UCD) approach to develop the InstructionalModule Development System (IMODS), a software program that facilitates course design.IMODS will
speaker. He received a Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering and Engineering Man- agement from The University of Alabama in Huntsville, a Masters of Business Administration from Nova Southeastern University and a Bachelor of Science in Materials Engineering from Auburn University. He has authored several articles on follower component of leadership and is active in research concerning capstone, engineering education, and leadership processes. He has served as newsletter editor/secretary, program chair, division chair and awards chair in both the Engineering Management and Engineering Economy Divisions of ASEE. He is a fellow of the American Society of Engineering Management and serves as the 2015 ASEM President
engineeringprinciples and allowed students to apply them to a practical application. On a more generallevel, the projects were an introduction to research, to understand the scientific/engineeringmethodology and produce a journal type paper and conference presentation on their project.Secondly the projects required students to work in teams to experience the collaborative researchand development environment. The Theremin team projects incorporates all of these learningoutcomes and fit well into the framework of an advanced academic summer program. The outcomes can be assessed using two sources of data. First, the journal articleswritten by the students are a testament to their level of technical competence achieved and theirunderstanding of research and
input ofassociates at TI was invaluable in assessing both the make-up and needs of the intended audience.This was done through questionnaires filled out by participants in TI training seminars. It was thatthe target audience consisted of people with engineering degrees who knew how to program andwere often involved with the design of a DSP microprocessor based product. These engineersfound that they needed DSP knowledge for their work but they did not usually have the luxuryreturning to school to obtain this expertise. They engineers in the target audience were likely to beimplementing DSP algorithms but not designing them.3.2 Topic selectionThe course curriculum was then determined based on the target audience. In a typical universitycourse
, Inc. For 14 years he owned and operated an organic farm, where he developed and directed a yearlong apprentice program in sustainable agriculture, ran informal education programs both on the farm and as outreach in local schools, and designed and fabricated small-scale farming equipment. He holds a B.S. in Engineering Physics from Cornell University and an M.S. in Physics from the University of California, Irvine.Dr. Danielle Harlow, University of California, Santa Barbara Danielle Harlow is a professor of STEM education at the University of California, Santa Barbara. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Student Communication of Engineering