possesssome correlation with attitude students [39], it is necessary to assess students attitudes whenimplementing YouTube pedagogy.As a result of the importance of attitudes in learning, many researchers have devised variousstrategies of measuring attitudes. Tools for measuring attitudes could be categorized as qualitative,quantitative tools or a combination of both [40]. While qualitative analysis tools, such as studentinterviews, provide rich data that can reveal new insights and allow for flexibility and clarification 2of students’ ideas, analyzing written comments or transcripts can be very labor intensive.Quantitative analysis tools, such as surveys, can allow for easier compilation of student
activities [5], activelearning not only improves students’ academic performance [6, 7], but also significantly enhancestheir retention rate in the STEM fields [8].In spite of the benefits reported by a myriad of studies, the translation of theory into classroompractices has unfortunately remained relatively slow in progress [9]. Besides the reluctance frominstructors to spend the necessary time to prepare interactive teaching materials [10], students’resistance to active learning also plays a crucial role. It is understandable that lack of students’participation would further hinder the instructors’ motivation to develop in-class activities. Toclearly assess such resistance, DeMonbrun et al. [11] developed a systematic questionnaire knownas the
Washington Accord. From theearly 2000s onwards, this has involved programs across a wide range of countries (excludingnon-UK Europe and Latin America, but otherwise involving nearly all other major players inthe field) accrediting their programs on an outcomes basis [7], [8]. For most programs, thishas involved a change toward more explicit inclusion of “practice” type aspects in thecurriculum, and assessment of these.Although there has been intensified homogenization of these aspects of the engineeringcurriculum, the impact has been generally at a high level, especially involving capstone-levelassessments. Accreditation has always also involved some degree of overall content analysis,for example, in the hours spent on particular subject areas, for
Mechanics, an M.S. in Engineering Mechanics, and a Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering from Virginia Tech. Her research interests are cardiovascular fluid mechanics and engineering education research, which includes engineering assessment, undergraduate research, design education methodologies, epistemologies of interdisciplinary education, and K-12 engineering education. Page 13.1372.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Utilizing a Social Cognitive Theoretical Framework to Investigate the Influences of a Summer Undergraduate Research Experience on Participants
next section ofthis paper discusses the system engineering approach used to systematically develop this project.3.0 Approach This Section presents the system engineering entrepreneurship approach used to develop the Page 12.142.6Chaos-XXX. We discuss the development process as it pertains to our project; however, theapproach is general and has the following advantages for complex, multi-disciplinary, integrationoriented university projects, 1.0 Provides a requirement driven approach and change control system for focused project development, impact assessments on schedule, cost, and performance, resource allocation
AC 2008-90: IMPROVING STUDENTS' UNDERSTANDING OF MAGNETISMChandralekha Singh, University of Pittsburgh Dr. Chandralekha Singh is an Associate Professor in the Department of Physics at the University of Pittsburgh. She obtained her Ph.D. in physics from the University of California Santa Barabara and was a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign, before joining the University of Pittsburgh. She has been conducting research in physics education for the past decade. The goal of her research is to identify the sources of student difficulties in learning physics both at the introductory and advanced levels, and to design, implement, and assess curricula/pedagogies that
organizations, as well it should be. However,too often accountability is associated with memorization because memorization is theeasiest and most reliable form of assessment. Given the complexity of the tasks that RPTsregularly perform and the importance of their performance to the safety of workerspotentially exposed to radioactive sources, memorization is insufficient for their Page 13.1181.3preparation. In this light, the ability to perform numerous problem-solving tasks isessential to job success. Hence, in order to assess performance needs, we needed a morerobust form of analysis for articulating the curriculum.Therefore, our needs analysis began with
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act(HIPAA). SOX requires an assessment of internal controls and procedures regarding theprocessing of financial data, including information technology (IT) systems, and may involvepenetration testing.5, 16 HIPAA requires a risk analysis of any system that maintains or transmits“electronic protected health information” which includes identifying and documenting potentialthreats and vulnerabilities and assessing current security measures.6 Combined, these have Page 12.1462.4increased the need for individuals properly trained in IW. This can also be seen in the increaseof “Ethical Hacking” programs such as the
Belize City, Belize in March 1996, and Co-General Chair of EI-99 held in San Jose in February 1999.Joy Krueger, Purdue University Joy Garton Krueger serves as Visiting Assistant Professor within the Purdue University College of Engineering, Department of Engineering Projects in Community Services (EPICS). Initially prepared at the undergraduate level as a science and mathematics educator in 1981, Dr. Krueger expanded her professional interests in educational and organizational assessment and evaluation, instructional research and development, and adult learning by obtaining Master’s and Ph.D. degrees from Purdue’s College of Education in 1987 and 1991. Since 1990, Dr. Krueger has held
. Leadership roles (also known as leadership profiles) willbe measured through the Managerial Behavior assessment tool developed by Lawrence, Quinn,and Lenk [25]. Team effectiveness will be measured through attitudinal questions from the TeamEffectiveness Questionnaire, instructor response, and grade reports. Teamwork activities assist in preparing engineering students on how to effectively workin teams upon graduation. Many institutions have implemented methods such as collaborativelearning, cooperative learning, and other forms of active learning to help promote teamwork inthe classroom. This study will help researchers and engineering educators identify the necessaryleadership roles within teams and how these roles will positively impact team
requirement to turning in homework, yet for some of the students this clearly wasall that was happening. The author did take class time to more fully explain the concept of peerreview as he envisioned it, and slightly modified the statement students were required to initial,in the hopes getting a more cooperative response. Penalties were also assessed for not havingwork reviewed.The author also surveyed the students midway through the course, roughly at the one-third andtwo-thirds points, after exams, to gauge their view of the peer review policy. The results wereclearly mixed. While some students did see the value to it and were glad to have the requirementto check their work, others saw it as nothing more than an additional administrative burden
; or if the concept being discussed depicted changes over time, such asthe formation of greenhouse gases (Betrancourt, 2005). All videos and animationsincluded learner controls to pause or reset the animations, which helped to improvelearning outcomes (Mayer & Chandler, 2001). Figure 4. A screenshot of drag-and-drop activity to self assess the understanding of mechanisms of heat transfer Page 11.477.5Worked examples were included in several lessons to assist the students in learningmathematical calculations. Worked examples, also called worked-out examples orworked solutions, include a problem statement, solution steps and the final answer
appropriate PTC as a guide. At a medium-sized technical university, studentsread and reported on PTCs as part of a senior thermal science laboratory course. At a largeresearch university PTCs were used as reference material in a laboratory capstone design course.In addition to instructor’s experiences, assessment data from student surveys are presented.1. Introduction to Performance Test CodesA. What Are Performance Test Codes The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)Performance Test Codes (PTCs) provide uniform rules and procedures for planning, preparation,and execution of performance tests and for reporting the results 1,2. A performance test is anengineering evaluation, based on measurements and calculations, whose results indicate
Community will: Be informed about state-of-the art scientific events as they develop Prepare for upcoming employment opportunities by upgrading their skills and credentials through short courses and training programs in relevant areas Provide open access and opportunities for creative, hands-on activities, and inspire K-12 students to pursue degrees and careers in science and engineering fieldsAssessmentTable 1. below, summarizes the performance criteria (i.e. metrics) to assess the constituencyoutcomes and to provide answers to the questions that follow. It should be noted that mosttechnology startup companies are funded through outside venture capitalists that are attracted tothose startups
shown in Figure 2. Firstidentify desired results, then determine acceptable evidence, and finally plan learningexperiences and instruction. This process is an alignment of content, assessment, and pedagogy. Page 23.544.6Figure 2 Wiggins & McTighe Stages of Backwards Design • Iden&fy Desired 2 • Plan Learning Results • Determine Experiences and Acceptable Instruc&on Evidence
Paper ID #5905Examining Graduate Students’ Philosophies of Education: An ExploratoryStudyMary Katherine Watson, Georgia Institute of Technology Mary Katherine Watson is a PhD candidate in Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) at Georgia Tech (GT). Through support from a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, she has been working to improve the quality of sustainability education in CEE at GT through development and application of a variety of assessment tools and educational interventions. In addition to research in the field of engineering education, Mary Katherine is the founding president of the
a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Teaching in- terests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Primary research projects explore the preparation of engineering doctoral students for careers in academia and industry and the de- velopment of engineering education assessment tools. She is a National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career (CAREER) award winner and is a recipient of a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE).Prof. Heidi A. Diefes-Dux, Purdue University, West Lafayette Heidi A. Diefes-Dux
engineering education. Samantha completed a BS in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University in 2008 and a MS in Mechanical Engineering with a focus in Design for Manufacturing from Stanford in 2010.Dr. Helen L. Chen, Stanford University Helen L. Chen is a researcher in the Department of Mechanical Engineering and the director of ePortfolio initiatives in the Office of the Registrar at Stanford University. Helen’s research interests are focused in three areas: academic and professional persistence in engineering education, the use of ePortfolios for teaching, learning, and assessment; documenting and evaluating pedagogical innovations in technology- augmented learning spaces. Helen and her colleagues Tracy Penny
administrators, he succeeded via a transition fromprocedural C++, with a virtual robot called Karel, to MATLAB, with a video game calledGorillas. These two versions of the course are compared and contrasted, with a focus on theauthor’s own contributions. Furthermore, the pedagogical approach is compared and contrastedwith that of relevant literature. As with the state of the art, the work argues in favour of teachingintroductory programming using MATLAB. Unlike the state of the art, the proposed approachexploits video game design and iterative and incremental development. Effectiveness of thecontributions are demonstrated through student, peer, and self assessments.1. IntroductionAt the University of Alberta, all 1st year engineers take a 12-week course
Agricultural Engineer Trainee. Dare’s M.S.E. thesis involved developing a model of the attributes that define an engineer’s global competence and assessing those attributes in students participating in international experiences, including Global De- sign Teams. In her Ph.D. work, Dare will focus her dissertation on the limitations of treated wastewater reuse in agriculture from the perspectives of technology, policy, and public perception with case studies in Qatar, Tunisia, Palestinian West Bank, and United States.Ms. Julia D Thompson, Purdue University, West LafayetteMr. Tiago R Forin, Purdue University, West Lafayette Tiago Forin is currently a student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He
Colorado in May 2011 and began doctoral work in the Higher Education Student Affairs Leadership program there in fall 2011.Dr. Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder Daniel W. Knight is the engineering assessment specialist at the Integrated Teaching and Learning Pro- gram and Laboratory. He holds a BS in psychology from Louisiana State University, and an MS degree in industrial/organizational psychology and PhD degree in counseling psychology, both from the University of Tennessee. Prior to joining the University of Colorado at Boulder, he gained extensive experience in assessment and teamwork in an engineering education context through the development and evaluation of a team facilitation training course
engineering students from systems, mechanical, electrical andcomputer engineering were assembled to tackle this project during the 2011-12 academic year.Each team was led by systems engineering students, who acted as the principal engineer and theproject manager, and mentored, by a systems engineering and an engineering managementprofessor. After evaluating various design alternatives, both teams came up with very innovativebottle recycler designs. Both teams were selected as finalists (top 9 out of 50 projects) in the BestSenior Design Project Competition. In this paper, we will present the educational approach howthese projects were conducted and assessed, and discuss the findings.Introduction “We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we
who encourage their students to take systematic notes duringlecture. The objectives of this study were to understand how students’ SRL skills changed afterusing EGN; and to evaluate how students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuitsimproved after using EGN.2. What are Enhanced Guided Notes?Guided notes contain incomplete information with blank spaces consisting of essential concepts,ideas, diagrams, graphs, problems, and conclusions. Standard guided notes, also called semi- orskeleton-notes, have been used in undergraduate teaching for quite some time. Unlike the guidednotes introduced in many studies15-17, the enhanced guided notes (EGN) developed by this studyinclude questions that prompt students to assess their metacognitive self
trusted. They created an intangible bond with us through theirexperiences, opinions, and the time they took to give us advice and counsel. Asprofessional engineers, many of us have the same opportunity - by getting involved intwo aspects that are vitally important to the engineering profession. The first is to make apositive impact on the life of a young, aspiring professional or student. The second is tohelp solidify the role of engineering in a fast paced, diverse landscape. How best to start?Begin by assessing what we have to offer as mentors. The main role of a mentor is tostimulate students or young professionals to think in new and creative ways. One of thebiggest values to bring to mentoring is a broad perspective - and how that
functionality.Surveys of 147 students used at the start of the semester have shown that only 37% of thestudents have prior experience with soldering or circuits. Of this 37%, only half still ratethemselves as confident in their soldering ability at the start of class. An end of class survey andexam questions specific to this project are used to assess the quality of the project, its deliveryand student learning. Results show that after completing this project 92% of students areconfident in their ability to solder without supervision and 93% of students use the circuit theybuild for this project outside of class. The overall rating for the project is a 4.8/5 using a Likertscale making it the highest rated project ever implemented in this class. This paper
plan? 2) Do participants react positively to the method and do they apply the method? 3) Is there a positive correlation between adhering to the method and effectiveness of the prototyping strategy taken?5.1. MetricsThere are several relevant metrics for the prototyping strategy experiment, in correspondencewith the research questions: 1) The change between the pre- and post- method strategies that participants describe. 2) Assessment of the method: a) How closely the participant followed the method (Likert scale of 1-10) b) How valuable the participant found the method to be (Likert scale of 1-10) 3) The value of the method in guiding the team towards a successful prototyping effort: a) Over-all effectiveness of
experiences or “doing the real thing” involve students the most in the learning process and result in them remembering more of the underlying concepts to be learned.4□ Cooperative learning is a structured form of group work where students pursue common goals while being assessed individually. The most common model of cooperative learning Page 23.439.2 includes five tenets: individual accountability, mutual interdependence, face-to-face interac- tion, appropriate practice of interpersonal skills, and regular self-assessment of team func- tioning. The focus is on cooperative incentives, rather than competition, to promote learning
necessarily an abstraction of the real-world problem.Stage 6: Analysis and ReflectionFinally, students return to a broad consideration of the Challenge itself. They reflect on how thespecific application they explored in Stage 5 can inform solutions to the broader Challenge.Questions they might consider include: How does the analysis contribute to the solution of theChallenge? What are the limitations of the tools and techniques? What other factors anddisciplines should be considered? They will also re-define the challenge (i.e., repeating Stage 2),so that the change in their understanding can be assessed.3. Framework ImplementationThe EGC framework was piloted in two courses in the Fall semester of 2012. These courseswere at different levels
assess the impact on studentlearning, the normalized gain from the Continuous-Time Signals and Systems Concept Inventoryexam will be analyzed from before and after the laboratory exercises were introduced.The laboratory exercisesA summary of the exercises that is organized by week is shown in Table I. A general descriptionof the activities for each lab is presented in this section. Detailed descriptions with specific signalparameters, instructions, and questions posed to the students can be obtained by contacting theauthors. Because Rose-Hulman is on a quarter system, the breadth of material in ECE300 ismore limited than what would be seen in a similar semester course at another institution.ECE300 focuses primarily on the frequency domain
that many of the students had used theopportunity to think through the topics, becoming well versed in them. The depth of thoughtdisplayed in the discussion responses was outstanding, well beyond the expectations of theprofessor.The use of this WebCT discussion technique provided benefits for this class.§ Allowed student participation at an individual pace;§ Included topics beyond the normal course scope;§ Required the students to participate in a class activity while not physically in-class;§ Challenged students to a high degree of thought (content and format) to receive high marks; and§ Allowed assessment of individual student thoughts and writing without using in-class time.A WebCT or other electronic based discussion could be