Page 3.409.3 TABLE 1 Typical Conference and Seminar Topics for the Alumni Teaching Scholars Program Role of Difference in Teaching and Learning: Awareness and Implementation Teaching with Case Studies Ethical Dilemmas in Teaching Faculty Stress Teaching and Learning Styles Cooperative Learning Our students’ Views of Teaching Obtaining Feedback from Students From Teaching to Learning Grading and Evaluating Students Constructing a Portfolio Classroom Assessment Techniquespresent to the class in Engineering. Topics that were new to some members werestandards in thedisciplines of others. For example, assessment, recently
address any number of biological andenvironmental engineering problems, including bioremediation, composting, andbiological treatment of wastewater. However, ecological engineers should also beapplied ecologists, able to collaborate with theoretical scientists to develop, design, andconstruct solutions to complex ecological problems. Ecological engineers should be ableto address issues such as terrestrial and aquatic ecological restoration, integrated pestmanagement, biodiversity conservation planning, watershed sustainability analysis, andecological risk assessment. Developing and protecting the credibility of ecologicalengineering as a profession requires clear definition of the body of knowledge apracticing ecological engineer must master
, students receive basic information on low-level radioactive waste and disposal facilities for it. They are then asked to assess a siteselected for a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. The basic information neededto complete the case studies is provided in both written and electronic form.IntroductionIn environmental engineering courses, faculty strive to present the principles important indealing with a wide variety of environmental problems and to teach students to solve thetypes of problems they are most likely to encounter. However, because the environmental Page 3.497.1field is so diverse and the type of problems environmental engineers
(individual evaluation)(2 points per meeting)Critical self-evaluation, individual 50 points (individual evaluation)assessment of the project andsuggestions for improvements Total 350 pointsDivision of the evaluation of oral and visual presentation project points (20 points)Organization 5 pointsVisual communication 5 pointsOral communication 5 pointsInteraction (Question/Answer)5 pointsDivision of project report evaluation points (20 points)Quality of project idea 5 pointsAmount of technical content 5 pointsAmount of work done 10 pointsDivision of the peer evaluation points(20 points)Contribution
the initial compressive strengthis low for Test E compared to Test A, the gain in strength between 7 and 28 days is close to 70 %for Test E compared to 36% for Test A during the same period. All groups were given access to the raw data. They first summarized it into tables and thenexplored different methods of visually representing the data. This allowed them to gain hands-onexperience with Microsoft Excel, a program with which the majority were not previouslyfamiliar. Based on their tables and graphs, each student group applied their engineering judgmentto conclude the effect of SCM on concrete.Survey A survey was conducted to collect data from students to assess the effect of the mini-project on their understanding of the
purpose of this study was to assess student perceptions about ethical use of LLMs incollege coursework. A secondary purpose was to determine whether teaching about LLMsenhances student understanding of plagiarism and ethics in specific content areas. We alsointended to stimulate discussion among faculty and students about the ethics of LLM use inacademic settings and the workplace.Preliminary results from our cross-sectional survey conducted among college students clearlyestablished that they perceive generating ideas, exploring creativity and editing drafts as ethicaluses of LLMs such as ChatGPT. The quantitative and qualitative responses (convergent designmixed-methods) [17] including side-by-side comparison analyses demonstrated that
group;and 62 students were assigned to the immediate solutions group.No pre-test was administered for Phase 2. The earliest assessment of the students were the resultsof the first quiz. 88 students submitted the quiz with an overall average of 6.76. The averageresults for each group are below.Treatment Average Quiz 1 ScoreDelayed 6.75No Solutions 6.46Immediate 7.004.3 Data Collection and Data Analysis MethodsGraded material for both phases included 3 quizzes (24%), 3 assignments (30%), 4 reflectionexercises (16%), and 1 exam (30%). Quizzes were multiple choice and automatically graded.The same questions were used for all students. Assignments were
valuable support for students in their learning and exampreparation [3] .To assess the impact of study sheets on academic performance, past studies have explored therelationship between study sheet quality and students' exam performance. For instance, the studyby Song and Thuente [4], found a positive correlation between the quality of study sheets and theperformance of engineering undergraduates. Similarly, the study by Gharib, Phillips and Mathew[3], reported a preference for study sheet exams over closed-book exams in an introductorypsychology class. The study by Chang and Shieh [5] which explored the value of formula sheets(a type of study sheet) for physics examination, reported a significant correlation between thequality of formula sheets
in preparatory worksheets before class and programming assignments alignedwith lectures and PLG sessions. Additionally, the curriculum integrates online self-pacedtraining auto-graded modules from the MathWorks platform.The course's unique design, combining MATLAB programming with mathematical analysis in acondensed half-semester each presents both advantages and challenges. It offers an efficient wayto cover essential topics rapidly, emphasizing the practical application of programming tomathematical concepts. This approach necessitates precise curriculum planning to ensure contentis both deep and manageable within the limited time, requiring strategies that maximize learningoutcomes and thoughtfully designed assessments to accurately gauge
-ChampaignMiss Taylor Tucker Parks, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Taylor Parks is a research fellow in engineering education at the Siebel Center for Design. She earned her bachelor’s in engineering mechanics and master’s in curriculum & instruction from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. Her research focuses on promoting teamwork in complex engineering problem solving through collaborative task design. She currently co-leads the integration of human-centered design principles within select courses across the Grainger College of Engineering.Mr. Saadeddine Shehab, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign I am currently the Associate Director of Assessment and Research team at the Siebel Center for Design
accessibility, and engineering withempathy, the current NSF-funded project examines how high school interns’ perceptions ofengineering and self-identities as engineers are formed, nurtured, and cultivated as they designand create more accessible products for authentic community clients who are blind or visuallyimpaired. Across sites, the project emphasizes building an inclusive and diverse community ofinterns, including many who may not initially view themselves as engineers. Underpinning thiswork is the People Part of Engineering framework, which emphasizes that engineering withpeople, as people, and for people influences teens’ motivation and persistence of interest inengineering. To assess the effectiveness of the BBB teen internship model, the
regulators, and data conversion circuits.Students obtained more accurate results, matching calculations, and simulations compared tousing breadboards. In addition, students gained time spent on additional testing and analysis.Students completed assignments using both the customized PCBAs and conventionalbreadboards. Quantitative and qualitative surveys have been conducted to assess the impact ofPCBAs on students' learning experience, technical effectiveness, and educational impact. Studentfeedback on using PCBAs compared to traditional breadboarding has been analyzed and sharedin this paper. The use of custom PCBAs addresses known breadboarding impediments, includingloose connections, noise, probing challenges, and cluttered layouts. They reflect
approaches to teaching ethics. For many years, these programshave included an engineering ethics course as part of the first-year general education curriculum.Typically, the course covers normative ethical theories, a code of ethics, and three famous casestudies: The Challenger Disaster, SDI: A Violation of Professional Responsibility, and GilbaneGold. Students are assessed based on their report-writing skills, a method that can disadvantageinternational students. Additionally, senior students are expected to evaluate the ethical issues intheir capstone project designs. However, the generic approach to teaching ethics often results inless student engagement and superficial learning [11]. Graduating students are expected topossess in-depth knowledge
a simply supported steel beam with two point loads 1/3 from the supports. The beams had the same material properties, length and cross sections. Participants were asked to observe how the stress state and strain state changed for each condition and if this aligned with their conceptual understanding.4. Once exploring the app was completed, the IBM Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ) [15] was immediately taken. The PSSUQ is a 19 question survey assessing the satisfaction of users interacting with a system.5. Interview with the researcher about their experience with their app and if they would add any features to the app to aid in their use Figure 7: Simply Supported Steel Beam with Uniform Loading
development, including a skilled workforce, in anera of technological diffusion [7], [13]. Despite the improvements, there is a decline in studentscompleting higher education degrees in STEM areas. Approximately 40% of students enteringcollege to earn a STEM degree complete it [7], [13]. In 2019, only 41% of fourth and eighth-graderstudents and 21% of twelfth-grader students could be considered "proficient" in mathematics [14].A perception of poor performance in STEM education, rankings of US students on internationalSTEM assessments, increased education attainment in other countries, and the ability of thedomestic STEM education system to meet domestic demand for STEM labor exists [14]. Further,there are not enough engineers in the US to meet the
requiredto assess the nature and scope of impact of active learning on the learning successes of studentsin engineering and science courses. ABET's Criterion 3, Outcome 6, emphasizes thedevelopment of critical thinking skills in graduates. This outcome requires them to design andconduct experiments, analyze and interpret data, and apply engineering judgment to reach well-supported conclusions. While many engineering students demonstrate strong understanding ofengineering systems and the ability to approach problem-solving however most of them fail toharness their ideas into a functional (practical) design. For this reason lab or project activities areoften attached or integrated into engineering courses. Classroom lectures tend to focus more onthe
learn to work as part of a team, making decisions about design, materials, andmanufacturing processes. The students apply technical skills to practical scenarios, refining theirengineering expertise in a real-world context, making connections with local communities orindustries, and making them well-prepared and highly competitive in the workforce [1 - 7].Design projects offer students a great opportunity to bridge the gap between classroomknowledge and real-world applications, enhancing their academic experience and preparing themfor the workforce. From the faculty perspective, support ABET assessment [6, 8]Furthermore, capstone projects offer the opportunity to drive advancements in the improvement,design, or refurbishment of laboratory
return to in-person classes after our COVID-19 lockdown semesters, we haveimplemented a policy of “lightly-flexible” deadlines in three required undergraduate courses inour chemical engineering curriculum. Under this policy, now in effect for two or three years,example solutions and rubrics are not posted immediately when assessments are due, but insteadposted 48-72 hours later (the exact timing depends on the class). Students are permitted to uploadtheir work to our Learning Management System (LMS) without penalty up until the time thesolutions and rubrics are made available, and after this point, no credit is earned. This policy hashelped to alleviate some student issues and complaints about inflexibility, especially if atechnical glitch
learning experiences.Metacognition is a process to help a learner assess their own understanding has been shown as aneffective way of improving student’s learning outcomes [11] by allowing time to reflect on theiractions, decisions, outcomes, and discuss what they will do differently in future scenarios. Byfostering reflection through the process metacognition, students improved their ability to transfertheir learning from the VR simulation into real-world scenarios.Student FeedbackThis section of the paper will discuss the feedback received from the students regardingengagement and satisfaction related to using the VR simulation. These factors play a crucial rolein the overall effectiveness of using VR technology to teach the CI module. The
across students from differentdemographics. Example questions include “What applications do you see the soft robotic actuatorsbuilt in class being used for?”, “What is your intended career and why?”, “What is appealing/notappealing about engineering majors?”Data Collection The quantitative survey data were collected with a paper-based survey. Surveyswill take an estimated 10 minutes to complete. All interviews were conducted in person. Interviewswill last approximately 15 minutes and will be audio recorded. All data collection, analysis andstorage was conducted in accordance with IRB requirements.Data Analysis Descriptive statistics will be calculated for all measures at each time point.Correlations of measures will be assessed at each time
opportunities to celebrate, as well as lessons learned that will benefitothers doing work in pre-college engineering education and equity in STEM.MethodologyThe findings shared in this report were identified by the initiative’s internal and externalevaluators. The internal evaluation process conducted by the partner organization NationalAlliance for Partnerships in Equity (NAPE) assesses the impact of the program’s professionaldevelopment models and content [4]. This evaluation used pre-, post-, and follow-up surveyresults from IDEA Team participants. The pre-survey was conducted at the start of the program,the post-survey was implemented at the end of the summer institute, and the follow-up surveywas implemented after the action research projects had
project wasbroken into four larger parts, the overall project was scaffolded such that there were multipledeliverables for each part as shown in Figure 1. This resulted in nearly continuous engagementwith the project throughout the semester.Throughout the project, not only were the normal course outcomes assessed, but the project alsocontained EM mindset and skillset outcomes that were assessed at various points throughout thesemester. With these mindset and skillset outcomes combined, students were able to see the linkbetween an initial curiosity question and how it can relate to creating value for their organizationsand communities in successful and rewarding engineering careers. These outcomes were identifiedthrough icons, as shown in Figure 2
Paper ID #43311Board 351: Preparing Early Engineers Through Context, Connections, andCommunityProf. Eric Davishahl, Whatcom Community College Eric Davishahl serves as professor and engineering program coordinator at Whatcom Community College in northwest Washington state. His current project involves developing and piloting an integrated multidisciplinary learning community for first-year engineering. More general teaching and research interests include designing, implementing and assessing activities for first-year engineering, engineering mechanics, and scientific computing. Eric has been an active member of ASEE since
iteration.After creating the assessment rubric, I analyzed my answers and the ChatGPT answers againstmy merged rubric criteria to understand differences in how I wrote the code, how ChatGPT wrotethe code, and how the assignments were graded in my class. For each assignment, each rubriccriteria is given a score of low, medium, or high. A score of low meant it did not meet the criteria;medium meant it partially met the criteria; and high meant it completely met the criteria.In a second component of this study, we compared ChatGPT’s output for an open-ended projectassignment (similar to the required ’final project’ required in my AP CS course). The programwas a final program created for the AP-CS course, which was a Pokemon-style turn-based textgame. There
mightadd value to a future grant proposal. In 2022, IRISS provided virtual training workshops for theResearch Team on Team Science 101, Team Science Leadership and Shared Vision, and TeamScience Management and Communication [7]. In 2023, IRISS conducted a combined teamreadiness and social network analysis survey to collect measures of team readiness. Keyactivities included a workshop emphasizing collaborative writing and best practices for teamideation and grant writing. In addition, IRISS conducted two surveys focusing on team readinessand Social Network Analysis (SNA).Using SNA as an Assessment ToolSNA is a valuable method for understanding and evaluating the dynamics of Team Science. Oneof its main advantages is its ability to visualize and map
a process orientation [14] to report writing, with studentscompleting various milestones throughout the semester that represented various sections of thereport (e.g., executive summary, objectives, methodology). Dr. Roesler was interested inadditional methods of providing feedback to students before milestone drafts were assessed bygraduate teaching assistants.Over the course of the Fall 2019 semester, WAES team members John Popovics, BruceKovanen, and Gail Scott worked with Dr. Roesler to develop a framework for peer review. Inthis case, peer review was implemented during class time and framed as an opportunity forstudents to explore alternative organizational structures for the report and to improve their own.For example, when assessing
models and the mathematical formulas [1,2].These interactions allow students to apply what they’ve learned in a more tangible way and can evenopen up new areas of learning for students who believe they already have a strong familiarity with theconcept. The goal of this study is to use a simulated 3D projection that allows students to manipulateand view models from different vantage points until the visualization becomes familiar from all angles,and then assess the ways they engage and how this engagement elevates their overall understanding, aswell as their interest and confidence in the concepts presented to them. This study is part of a largerstudy of how students use AR visualizations through a smartphone app to enhance their
assistant professor in the Engineering Fundamentals department at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. He is passionate about teaching and research, and he strives to produce knowledge that informs better teaching. His research intersects assessment and evaluation, motivation, and equity. His research goal is to promote engineering as a way to advance social justice causes.Dr. Lulu Sun, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach Dr. Lulu Sun is a Professor in the Engineering Fundamentals Department at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, with a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of California, Riverside, and a former fire engineer at Arup. Her research, funded by agencies like the NSF and FAA
Paper ID #41598Board 42: A Comparative Analysis of Across Interdisciplinary Settings IntegrationPractice in Educational Data-Mining Class Using Community of PracticeMr. Brayan A D´ıaz, North Carolina State UniversityProf. Kevin Han, North Carolina State University ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024A comparative analysis of pedagogical approaches to foster interdisciplinarity in an educational data mining class using Communities of Practice. AbstractThis working-in-progress research describes the design and assessment of two pedagogical approachesaimed at fostering a
on the ways UGTAs might apply theseframeworks and lessons learned in their own professional development. UGTAs were asked toconsider: • Reflect on the last three years of workshops. What does diversity mean to you? • How do you utilize your background to promote inclusion? • What are qualities you look for in a company work culture and values? What are qualities and values you cannot overlook? • Analyze the “Our Values” pages of a company you are interested in. How do these values align with your own? 3AssessmentIn a pre-training assessment, UGTAs were asked about their expectations of the session,reflecting on past