future, and identifying what could and should be). The design focus of this outcomeaffords it strategic importance in satisfying ABET requirements. While the focus of programs may bebiased towards the “conceive” and “design” tools, opportunities exist for educating students in how toeffectively transform these designs into compelling graphic depictions and develop students’ abilities toeffectively orally communicate these depictions to others.Criterion 6 (Understand Economic, Environmental, Global and Societal Contexts and Impacts) is basedupon ABET outcome h (The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineeringsolutions in a global / societal context.), and the Gordon-MIT “Making Sense of Context” capabilitycategory (making
Faculty Development WorkshopAbstract: A central mission in the educational research community is to improve learning. Thepurpose of this project was to identify key factors that mediate in learning in the context of a fac-ulty development workshop focused on assessment. Data were collected by a six personresearch-participant team using multiple approaches: direct observations, pre-workshop surveys;semi-structured interviews; a post-workshop prioritization survey; and a workshop e-journal.Analysis and triangulation of data revealed the five most significant factors impacting learning:(a) put the learners in the role of performer and provide assessment that helps the learners im-prove their performance, (b) concept attainment (especially
student’s ability to design a system, component, or Multi-part *process to meet desired needs.Assess the student’s ability to function on multi-disciplinary Multi-part *teams.Assess the student’s ability to identify, formulate, and solve Multi-part *engineering problems.Assess the students understanding of professional and ethical Multi-part *responsibility.Assess the student’s ability to write reports, emails, and other Multi-part *documents effectively.Assess the student’s effectiveness with oral communications Multi-part *skills including presentations and meetings.Assess other communication skills including CAD. Multi-part *Assess the student’s ability to understand the impact of Multi-part
engineering problems by comparing results from both application of models/physical principles and measurement data. 5. Students will apply basic teaming principles (such as the Tuckman’s Model) and team effectiveness practices while working with their teams. 6. Students will write a technical report and give an oral/multimedia presentation following [course name] technical communication guidelines which include formatting, explaining and justifying aspects of the project. 7. Students will construct detailed project plans using basic project management techniques (such as scheduling and budgeting) and methods (such as Gantt charts). 8. Students will self-evaluate their prototype design decisions and reflect on the
presented with an overview of the module to provide contextand discuss the biology concepts supported through the design challenge. Carbon imbalance isrelated to the topics of photosynthesis, respiration and the cycling of matter within the carboncycle and placed within the context of human impact. An engineering design challenge toaddress this issue centers on designing an algae farm to sequester CO2. Participants in theworkshop will be engaged in an engineering redesign activity that will improve one of thesubsystems of the algae farm.Participants will be able to: 1. Apply the engineering design process to a narrowly focused problem. 2. Make their thought processes apparent through discussion and design packets 3. Develop connections
Cunningham [5],encouraged a natural engagement in the design process, presented in Figure 1 below, whichmeant that children may communicate their design and even do so as they created their solutionsin lieu of drawing a plan. Students communicated their thinking even as they synchronouslyplanned and created. Similarly, children could change their designs to improve traps as they werein the creation stage, in order to “promote creativity and a solution” that best suited the problem[5]. This model is representative of skills students need for 21st century jobs and is intentional asa nonlinear model of problem-solving and is open-ended at each stage of the design process. Figure 1. Engineering Design Process based on Engineering is Elementary
ethicspolicies, rules, and regulations. Instructor-led training programs mostly rely on lecture-basedpresentations and individual reading and writing assignments5 whereby trainees assume a passiverole in learning. Traditional classroom training has advantages and disadvantages. It is the mostcommon, expected, and accepted approach for training across a variety of learning goals.Additionally, this training has been shown to have the desirable effect of overall improvement inethical outcomes.6 Through passive engagement in the training content, students may learn therules, regulations, and policies of a profession, but it may be that students do not learn the beststrategies for enacting these principles. Traditional classroom training programs do not
weekly professional development workshop seriesfocused on providing students with the skills necessary to succeed in their summer researchproject and beyond. Active-learning workshop activities include: scientific communication(delivering an elevator pitch for different audiences, presenting at lab meeting, writing aconference abstract, making and presenting a scientific poster), research methods (hypothesisgeneration, laboratory documentation, data management, searching the scientific literature), andidentifying the broader impacts of their research (scientific outreach, research ethics andalgorithm bias). In addition to developing students’ research skills, a major goal of this workshopseries is to develop a sociotechnical mindset in the
guiding students to actively engage withthe material and with other students. PLTL is based on the idea that peers, i.e., other studentswho have recently completed the course, can assist students in learning.While PLTL has been suggested as an alternative to cooperative learning 7, our adaptiveapproach is to combine PLTL with cooperative learning techniques to establish and nurturelearning communities.8 We recruit students with an interest in helping other students. These arenot necessarily the students with the highest grades in the courses, but are instead studentsrecruited based on their willingness and ability to work in teams dedicated to problem solving.Our view is that as peers, the students leading the sessions are not domain experts
rates than others. The analysis of these artifacts is an ongoing process, yettwo models will be shown here to address the main strategies students engaged in while re-designing the model.Modeling Strategy One: Separate agents for each school typeThe most used modeling strategy to represent three school types with varying social, economic,and vaccination conditions is displayed below (Figure 2). This strategy places three types ofagent to represent students from each of the three school types in the same interactingsimulation space: A large public and affluent school; a large public and not affluent school; anda small private affluent school. A slider for each student type controls each the level ofvaccination for each agent class. The agents in
common examination questionswould immediately compare students’ ability to mechanically solve basic math problems andprovide some rapid feedback on the cadre of students in the first offering of the new course.Questions could also be added to the “Student Ratings of Instruction” survey for the new courseto solicit comments comparing the instructional styles of a traditional MA course and the newcourse, with a focus on the impact on learning. Performance in subsequent courses wouldevaluate retention and understanding of the material, with courses taught in Spring 2009providing early feedback. A long-term comparison of persistence in technical majors wouldevaluate the effect on student engagement. Direct assessment techniques based on
perform economic value analysis especially from the qualityperspective. The typical engineering economic value analysis, which they already completed acourse on, is useful in comparing the two designs but to some degree; they needed to gatherinformation about the concept of cost of quality (CoQ) and CoQ calculations in order to producea complete value analysis.The original assignment before the integration of EML constituted end of chapter questions thatasked students to solve problems using the statistical tools on a given set of data. The newassignment helped students in achieving the same course learning outcomes, moreover,facilitated exercising the skills needed for EM such as evaluating and communicating the valueof a product from technical
requiredto investigate details of the impact on specific learning and teaching systems as well asapplications.AcknowledgementsThis work has been funded in part by a USQ Senior Learning and Teaching Fellowship. Theauthors would like to thank the test subjects for their time and feedback.References1. Norris, P., Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. 2001, Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press2. NBN Co. NBN CO - About: Our purpose. 2011; Available from: http://www.nbnco.com.au/about-us/our-purpose.html.3. Kuipers, F., R. Kooij, D. De Vleeschauwer, and K. Brunnström, Techniques for Measuring Quality of Experience, in Wired/Wireless Internet Communications, E. Osipov, et
skills in robustly defining problems based on user needs and analyzing systems by their structures, functions, and mechanisms while being guided toappropriate biological analogues. Students document their progress in the EDPL in real-time as they navigate thechallenge. The unit ends with communicating and sharing design concepts and simple prototypes.BIRDEE Objectivesl drive greater engagement in engineering, particularly among femalesl improve student engineering skills, especially problem definition and ideation skillsl increase student awareness of the connection/impacts between engineered and living worldsResourcesThe curriculum is freely available online on the BIRDEE website, birdee.ceismc.gatech.edu, along with links to
information that may be directly applicable to my career or academic goals.While all increases in student ratings for the PBL version of the course as compared to the exam-based instructional model were found to be statistically significant, the largest increases werenoted in the questions elucidating perceived relevance of assessment to content covered in thecourse, and impacts on critical thinking and communication (bolded rows in Table 1). Graphicaldata showing each course section individually is presented in Figure 2 for visual comparison.Figure 2. Student learning experience evaluation data from exam-based sections of the course(gray) and project-based offerings (dark red
predicted the equilibrium fractions ofpearlite and pro-eutectoid α-ferrite / cementite for eutectoid, hypoeutectoid, and hypereutectoidsteels. Secondly, students in MSE 498 computed the ternary phase diagram for a Fe-C-Crmartensitic stainless steel, and determined an appropriate level of case hardening by surfacecarburization to trade-off competing constraints of hardness, toughness, and melting point todesign a case hardened steel optimized for a particular application.5. Student performance on examinationsIn this section, we present data on the impact of the curriculum changes on students’ examscores. We focus only on MSE 201 and 206 because these two courses were the only ones taughtby at least two different members of the CoP that also had
and engagement and the development of skills used in real-world situations such as“negotiation, debate, teamwork, cooperation, [and] persuasion.” [11] In a literature review of theuse of games in chemistry classrooms, one example by Clapson et al. (2020) traced thedevelopment of learning resources for use in a second-year materials chemistry course forengineering students. The authors noted that “these games and activities helped students tounderstand the relationships between chemical structure and observable materials properties.Likewise, some activities leveraged a friendly competitive atmosphere to boost engagement andlearning.” [12]Project OriginThe idea for an astrobiology role playing game was inspired by a conversation between a
ofinformation [4,5,6]. Collaborative learning activities, such as Engineering design projects, canhelp students clarify their understanding of a subject, make connections between differentconcepts, and engage in critical thinking. Moreover, social interaction in collaborative learningcan increase engagement and motivation and help to create a positive learning environment.However, it is essential to note that the benefits of collaborative learning depend on the qualityof the teamwork, and effective teamwork necessitates good group dynamics, clear goals, andefficient communication [7,8,9]. The question that remains unanswered is how to assessteamwork effectively.Peer evaluations can be a useful tool to assess team skills as team members are in the
real-worldunderstanding of how manufacturing systems operate, how they can be optimized, and how theycan be maintained. A learning factory may include equipment and tools used in actualmanufacturing facilities, such as production lines, assembly stations, and automation systems. Itsfocus on “active learning” allows participants to apply theory in practical situations and acquiretechnical and problem-solving skills in a safe and controlled environment. In addition to learningthe required technical skills, a learning factory allows engineering students to practice theircollaborative skills in teamwork and communication. However, a physical learning factory isextremely costly that requires significant spatial and financial resources. Furthermore
students to rethink what it means tobe an inventor or entrepreneur and to consider the larger social context of innovation. As areflective project, students wrote short response papers or made presentations based on theirwork. We measured the students’ responses to the interventions through anonymous surveysconducted at the end of the course. We knew from earlier projects of this sort that studentsenjoyed the insight into the world of working engineers that archival collections provided them.In this intervention, we were particularly interested in responses from first year students,compared to students farther along in their engineering education. Engaging first-yearengineering students with the real-world experiences of engineers may support
engagement with coding and robotics, and early childhood preservice teacher learning.Nidaa Makki Nidaa Makki is a Professor in the LeBron James Family Foundation School of Education at the University of Akron, with expertise in STEM Education. She has served as co-PI on several NSF projects, investigating STEM education interventions at the K-12 and undergraduate levels. She also has expertise as program evaluator for various STEM education programs, and has led teacher professional development in Physics Modeling, Engineering Education, and Problem Based Learning. Her research interests include teacher learning and practices in science education, engineering education, and student learning and motivation for STEM
within each metric. For the performance-based grading system used in SEED,students are provided with criteria and targets ahead of time. Teams receive a grade based onhow closely their system performance matches the best performing team in each specific designcriteria.Study MethodsTo assess the impact of SEED Lab on students’ skills relevant to engineering practice, a casestudy activity was developed as an open-ended prompt to elicit students’ concepts of the designand development process. The case study activity presents a hypothetical capstone design projectand asks students to describe their general approach to completing the project, rather than for aspecific solution. The case study activity was chosen as a way to elicit students
our engineering curriculum[9], it is evident that team-based activities and prototyping geared toward solving these problemscan result in increased inclusion of students with disabilities. These solutions can have adramatic impact on the ability of people with disabilities to complete coursework and engage incourse-based ADL independently. Incorporation of guest lecturers including therapists,rehabilitation engineers, and people using assistive technology (known as “need-knowers”during the course) in conjunction with design thinking and rapid prototype fabrication led toremoval of two barriers to success identified by students with disabilities. The purpose of thispaper is to discuss results from two semesters of a new elective engineering
Programming Language Course and the Effectof the Thinking Styles of the Students on Success and Motivation. Turkish Online Journal ofEducational Technology-TOJET 15, no. 4: 32-45, 2016.[5] Clark, G. and D. McKinney. The Impact of an Innovative Learning Environment for aProgramming Course. Poster presented at the Eighth Annual South Alabama Conference onTeaching and Learning. Mobile, AL, 2018.[6] Bennedsen, J. and M. Caspersen. Failure rate in introductory programming. ACM SIGCSEBulletin, 39(2), 32-36, 2007.[7] Watson, C. and F. Li. Failure rates in introductory programming revisited. ITiCSE '14Proceedings of the Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education,39-44, 2014.[8] Jordan, K. and G. Stein. The Math Gap in an Inclusive
ofspaceflight (at CU Boulder). These issue briefs offer concrete, factual information related to thetopic to be discussed as well as present multiple perspectives on the macroethical impact of thework, including perspectives of marginalized populations and communities not forwarded inmainstream discourse. We have now developed and utilized several issue briefs and are currentlydeveloping more on additional topics.ResearchIn the research arm of this project, we ask two research questions to understand students’perceptions and inform the development of curriculum: RQ1) What are undergraduate students’ current awareness and perceptions of macroethical issues in aerospace engineering? RQ2) In what ways do students feel their education
plasticsused for civil infrastructure such as bridges. The fundamental content covered includesmechanical properties, diffusion, polymers, and composites. There is a biomaterialsmodule on stents that teaches students about crystallography and mechanical propertiesof metals. Lastly, a sports materials module teaches the mechanical properties ofpolymers and composites while exploring more about skis and snowboards. Eachclassroom module contains background resources for faculty, lecture notes, active inclass exercises, homework problems, and a team project. The project is designed to be anopen ended research project that engages the student more deeply in the moderntechnology covered by the module. Detailed information on the content of these modulesis
in a similar experience to workplace activities, participantspracticed and developed non-technical “professional skills” as well as developed positive mentalconditions for self-directed learning and metacognition. Nine participants strongly emphasizedthat these industry projects with clients was one of the most unique parts of IRE that enabled asmooth transition into the workplace. By engaging in the industry projects, participants coulddevelop “a feel of what I would be expecting (in the workplace)”; they needed little “baby-sitting” from supervisors. Participants also developed communication skills, which enabled themto “understand needs,” “tap into people’s wealth of knowledge,” and “seek feedback” fromothers.Moreover, industry project
ReviewOur research explores the factors influencing women’s enrollment in engineering majors, focusingon the impact of institutional and cultural dynamics that vary across global, regional (MiddleEastern), and local (Lebanese) contexts. The engineering majors available at the AmericanUniversity of Beirut (AUB) under the Maroun Semaan Faculty of Engineering and Architectureinclude Computer and Communications Engineering (CCE), Computer Science Engineering(CSE), Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE), Industrial Engineering and Management(INDE), Mechanical Engineering (MECH), Chemical Engineering and Advanced Energy (CHEN)and Civil and Environmental Engineering (CIVE). Our study builds on existing research thatexamines the roles of social norms
Hofstein, A. (1994) “Factors that Influence Learning during a Scientific Field Trip in a Natural Environment” Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 31(10). Pp. 1097-1119. (3) Gunjan, S. (2015) “Collaborative Learning Experience in a Construction Project Site Trip” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education Practice. 141(1). (4) Owolabi, O. (2017) “Construction Site Tour as a High Impact Pedagogical Technique to Actively Engage and Enhance Students Performance in an Online Engineering Class” Paper #20848. Spring 2017 Mid-Atlantic ASEE Conference. ASEE. (5) Owolabi, O. (2017) “The Impact of Construction Site Tour during the First Week of Class on Student Learning in an Introductory
-time coding,freehand drawing on a digital tablet, classroom, studio, or office desk (Guo, 2014). The videoscreated for this course are instead set in the labs where students will work on experiments andprojects. First-year and computer-aided design courses have used videos for a variety of topicsincluding: technical writing, software, programming, drawing, modeling, communication,problem solving, and teamwork (Fraley, 2015; Shah, 2013; Shreve, 2011). However, the videosused in these courses prepare students to complete assignments and take exams. On the contrary,the NI ELVIS and CAD video viewed before the lab prepare students to complete hands-onexercises in the lab and for their project. This makes the visual learning aspect of the videos