Paper ID #23301Peer Review and Reflection in Engineering Labs: Writing to Learn and Learn-ing to WriteDr. Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico Dr. Vanessa Svihla is a learning scientist and assistant professor at the University of New Mexico in the Organization, Information & Learning Sciences program, and in the Chemical & Biological Engineering Department. She served as Co-PI on an NSF RET Grant and a USDA NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revolutioniz- ing Engineering Departments project. She was selected as a
their “anxiety about grades” and careerpreparation. In thermodynamics, students would remark “…’well you’re taking away time Ishould be using to learn x content of the class’… they get this sense that if you’re takingtime away from that, they get upset.” A professor who taught capstone design in electricaland computer engineering experienced similar pushback from students who found teachingESI in that course: becomes very problematic not to see it as a bolt-on for the course and then you’re taking time away from something valuable you could be doing, something the students are going to ding you on when it comes to evaluation time.Students’ perception that ESI content comes at the expense of more valued technical contentcan create a wall of
describes how to provide collaborative learning opportunities and fast feedback onexam performance by adding a team component to examinations. The method is supported byresearch in collaborative and active learning pedagogy and has been applied to computer sciencecourses ranging from first-year programming to graduate-level artificial intelligence. This paperrelates the use of team tests in two different university settings, with a range of implementations.Furthermore, it offers suggestions for customizing the technique to fit a specific classroomenvironment.1. INTRODUCTIONFinding the time and opportunity to incorporate active and collaborative learning in your classescan be challenging. Team testing is a collaborative learning activity with low
Paper ID #281052018 BEST OVERALL ZONE PAPER, Best Zone I Paper: Assessment ofProgressive Learning of Ethics in Engineering Students Based on the Modelof Domain LearningDr. Sadan Kulturel-Konak, Pennsylvania State University, Berks Campus Sadan KulturelKonak is a Professor of Management Information Systems at Penn State Berks where she is also the Coordinator of Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ENTI) Minor and the Director of the Center for Entrepreneurship and Economic Development (CEED). She received her Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Auburn University. Her research interests are in modeling and
. Then the paper presents a broader impact of thecourse: two transferable modules (one on correspondence and one on report writing). Finally, thepaper concludes with thoughts about a formal assessment of this new approach. If found to besuccessful, this new approach would present an alternative paradigm for teaching writing in largeengineering colleges.Background: Although the course goals and structure are similar with traditional coursesin technical writing, the connection with the design course deepens the content Like many traditional technical writing courses, our pilot course (Effective EngineeringWriting) consists of goals specific to engineering writing. These goals include targeting theaudience, learning strategies for types of
] J. Kuhl, “Volitional aspects of achievement motivation and learned helplessness: Toward acomprehensive theory of action control,” Prog. Experimental Personality Res. vol. 13, 99-171,1984.[10] Y. Chang, L. Cintron, J. M. Cohoon, J. P. Cohoon and L. Tychonievich, “InstructionalDesign Principles of Diversity-Focused Professional Development MOOC for CommunityCollege Computing Faculty: Lighthouse CC,” IEEE Frontiers in Education, Erie, PA, USA, Oct.12-15, 2016.[11] C. J. Dommeyer, “Using the diary method to deal with social loafers on the group project:Its effects on peer evaluations, group behavior, and attitudes,” J. Marketing Ed. vol. 29, 175-188,2007.
new skills. For example, the students with themost prior programming experience would often take the lead on programming work, whichclosed off opportunities for students new to programming to gain access to such experiences.The closing off of opportunities is especially problematic since many students enter the courseexpressing a desire to pick up new skills such as Computer Aided Design (CAD), 3D printing,and programming. In other words, the prior-experience based role-distribution within teams hurtsstudents’ ability to make progress towards their own learning goals.Additionally, this specialization leads to a silo-ing of team members to their specific task,limiting opportunities for them to engage with all aspects of the design process
students to apply and reinforce their knowledge. Mainly they will take stuff directly from class and apply it to this project. So last year I had them work on [how to] make people participate in recycling programs. This year, we were interacting through the computer science department to design human powered devices. So they come up with a bench warmer for sporting events. Someone sits there and pedals, warms up the other people on the bench. There was another person proposing a pitching machine for baseball. So instead of having an electrically powered automated pitching device, you have somebody pedaling, and it throws different pitches.Contextual features are embedded into the learning experience
Rebold has chaired the Engineering department at Monterey Peninsula College since 2004. He holds a bachelor’s and master’s degree in electrical engineering from MIT, and has been teaching online engineering classes since attending the Summer Engineering Teaching Institute at Ca˜nada College in 2012.Prof. Nicholas Langhoff, Skyline College Nicholas Langhoff is an associate professor of engineering and computer science at Skyline College in San Bruno, California. He received his M.S. degree from San Francisco State University in embedded elec- trical engineering and computer systems. His educational research interests include technology-enhanced instruction, online education, metacognitive teaching and learning
1990further prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities [6]. These two Acts require post-secondary institutions to provide services (such as brailled text or adapted computer terminals forthe blind) unless these services would fundamentally alter the program or generate unduefinancial burdens [7].The student in this case was enrolled in an ABET accredited engineering program. To completethe program the student needed to complete all required courses or reasonable substitutes.Learning to use a 3D modeler was a required course, and learning engineering graphics usingassistive technologies was deemed to be a reasonable substitute.Visualization and mental imageryEngineering graphics courses commonly use the term visualization to describe
concepts by editing the hardware, software andOS, and, network policies. Unfortunately, such extensive and deep flexibilities are not providedin current cybersecurity curriculum.Furthermore, there is a definite gap in the Computer Science (CS) background ofunderrepresented minorities, including women as they enter undergraduate level educationalinstitutions [1]. In the past, mandatory K-12 CS education has consisted largely of learning touse various software rather than including concepts, skills and practices needed by computerscience engineers and technicians. Very little attention has been paid to developing the skillsneeded to prepare the students for entering the CS workforce. Recently, there has been a newemphasis on computer science
drawing skills were replaced by CAD, andcalculators and computers replaced slide rules. But there was hardly any change in theparadigm. Classrooms have remained teacher centric, learning in classrooms is overwhelminglya passive exercise, and standardization of curriculum and testing continues to remain the order ofthe day. Driven by the needs of Industry 4.0 and associated speed of technological change,conversation has started in many concerned circles about the future of work and future ofeducation. What should Education 4.0 look like? Here are some relevant quotes from recentpublications.“The emerging technologies have huge effect on the education of people. Only qualified andhighly educated employees will be able to control these technologies
for Engineering Education, 2011 m-Outreach for Engineering Continuing Education: A Model for University-Company Collaboration New Jersey Institute of Technology and Cell Podium, LLCThe most prevalent channel today capable of conveying educational and training content is thecell/smart phone. Cell/smart phones possess a unique combination of ubiquity, portability,connectively and low cost which together could make them a valuable educational tool.1 As amethod for providing training and education, m-learning is commonly defined as “e-learningcarried out by means of mobile computational devices” that are “small, autonomous andunobtrusive enough to accompany us in every moment of life”.2Today cell phones
study and identified that students were ill-equipped todeal with the rigors of the engineering curriculum, particularly in the areas of problem solving,professional writing, and computer programming. Therefore, to address these areas, UTA hasrecently created a new first year engineering course that uses the Student-Centered ActiveLearning Environment with Upside-down Pedagogies (SCALE-UP) method. This presentationwill include an overview of not only student performance broken down by several student groupsbut also early surveys showing student perception of the effectiveness of this method. The resultswill show that these pedagogies are effective in aiding students to learn the principles ofengineering. In addition, student surveys will show
co-director of the ASEE National Effective Teaching Institute. Address: Department of Chemical Engineering, Bucknell University Lewisburg, Pennsylvania 17837. E-mail: prince@bucknell.edu.Margot A. Vigeant, Bucknell University Margot Vigeant is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering, with research interests in engineering education, thermodynamics concepts, and bioprocess engineering. She is currently also an Associate Dean in the College of Engineering.Dr. Katharyn E. K. Nottis, Bucknell University Katharyn E. K. Nottis is an associate professor in the Education department at Bucknell University. An Educational Psychologist, her research has focused on meaningful learning in science and engineering
Texas at Arlington (UTA) embarked on a study to identify where theirengineering students were struggling over three years ago in an effort to address student success,persistence, and retention. In this study, the committee identified that students were ill-equippedin engineering problem solving methodology and basic engineering computer programming. Toaddress these concerns, a new course named Engineering Problem Solving was created utilizingthe Student Centered Active Learning Environment with Upside-down Pedagogies (SCALE-Up)method. This class has aided in improving student retention and persistence in engineering.However, to further enhance this effect, Supplemental Instruction (SI) was added to the existingjust-in-time tutoring model
education.Dr. Angela R Bielefeldt P.E., University of Colorado Boulder Angela Bielefeldt is a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder in the Department of Civil, Envi- ronmental, and Architectural Engineering (CEAE) and Director for the Engineering Plus program. She has served as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Education in the CEAE Department, as well as the ABET assessment coordinator. Professor Bielefeldt was also the faculty director of the Sustainable By Design Residential Academic Program, a living-learning community where students learned about and practice sustainability. Bielefeldt is also a licensed P.E. Professor Bielefeldt’s research interests in en- gineering education include service-learning
preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students.” Computers & Education, 53(3), 853-865.[2] C. Dede, M. C. Salzman, R. B Loftin, & D. Sprague. (1999). “Multisensory immersion as a modeling environment for learning complex scientific concepts” In W. Feurzeig, & N. Roberts (Eds.), Computer modeling and simulation in science education (pp. 282-319). New York: Springer-Verlag.[3] M. Bricken, & C. M. Byrne. (1994). “Summer students in virtual reality: A pilot study on educational applications of virtual reality technology.” In A. Wexelblat (Ed.), Virtual reality: Applications and explorations (pp.199-218), Boston, MA: Academic.[4] J. K. Crosier, S. V. G. Cobb, J.R. Wilson. (2000
pollution, other combustion- related topics, and engineering education pedagogy. He is the author of three student-centered textbooks in combustion and thermal-sciences. He is a Fellow of the ASME and was the recipient of ASEE’s Mechanical Engineering Division Ralph Coats Roe Award in 2009.Peggy Noel Van Meter, Pennsyvlania State University Dr. Van Meter is an Association Professor in the Educational Psychology program at the Pennsylvania State University. She teaches graduate courses on Learning Theory as well as Concept Learning and Prob- lem Solving. Her program of research focuses on students’ learning and problem solving with tasks that involve multiple nonverbal representations and text. She has recently
c Society for Engineering Education, 2019 A Multi-Instructor Study of Assessment Techniques in Engineering Mechanics Courses1. IntroductionThe authors have conducted a three-year study to explore the effects of a new assessment modelon student outcomes in a sophomore level Mechanics of Materials course. Preliminary resultsfrom the first two years were discussed previously [1]. The most recent set of results andconclusions are presented here, along with further discussion and lessons learned regarding itsimplementation. A key component of the latest phase of the study is the transition of the controlinstructor to the new method. For this instructor this paper includes a control
Research Center for Wireless Integrated MicroSystems (WIMS ERC)) [8]. Aprior study of the Rosetta Commons, a multi-campus computational biology REU, found itmatched outcomes for community, scientific identity, scientific self-efficacy, and intention topursue a science research-related career when compared to two single-campus life sciences REUprograms [7]. While this result is promising, a general knowledge gap remains regarding bestpractices for implementing multi-campus Sites and comprehensive evaluation of how theiroutcomes compare to those of traditional, single-institution programs.This paper describes a multi-campus REU program run across the four partner campuses withinthe NSF Engineering Research Center (ERC) for Re-inventing the Nation’s
Columbia University and a dual BS degree in Statistics and Computer Science at Peking University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Development of a Survey Instrument to Evaluate Student Systems Engineering AbilitySystems engineering skills are difficult to teach in a university setting. As a result, new graduatesmay require significant on-the-job-training and experience before they and their employers areconfident in their systems engineering skills. For example, NASA developed the SystemsEngineering Leadership Development Program (SELDP) to provide “development activities,training, and education” to more quickly cultivate systems engineers. We need