pathways. Our previous research sought to assess the attitudinal dimension of writing using a varietyof existing scales developed from the disciplines of English Composition and Rhetoric andPsychology, disciplines that have long-subscribed to the idea that students’ attitudes towardwriting impact their performance and competency in writing [16], [18]. In a nationwide survey ofover 800 graduate engineering students, we collected data from five existing surveys studyingwriting attitudes in some way, some of which are specific to graduate students, and some of whichwere modified slightly to reflect academic writing in an authentic disciplinary context instead ofin the classroom. While effective at capturing interesting information regarding
inflection in students’ learning trajectory and motivates them to develop anew model to address the new problem scenario.This entire process entails students to reflect on their own thinking. They are now able to engagein metacognitive self reflection of the models that they construct and discuss the underlyingassumptions and recognize the extent of applicability of these models. The students would thusnavigate an OAC as shown in Figure 2. Page 13.1048.11 Figure 2: Navigating the Optimal Adaptability Corridor through successive iterations of Model Development and Model DeploymentMathematics, physics and engineering
also enters the system. For example, what is taught today is strongly influenced by what today's teachers were once taught. Similarly, each student brings a history and, thus, certain characteristic into the system.4. Feedback Loops The interaction of elements of complex systems usually contains stimulating or inhibiting feedback loops. This feedback causes the activity of an individual element to reflect back Page 14.350.5 on itself. One aspect of engineering education that illustrates the existence of feedback loops is the element of formal assessment. A very simplified way to illustrate this is looking at how student learning
been available for several weeks. Page 14.222.10 Date of Lecture This student appears to be a Figure 5 - Number of days after posting of OneNote file until this particular student accessed the material - a reflective student.reflective student who made use of the OneNote and D2L combination of access in a timelymanner. A review of this student's records show that they finished the course with the sixthhighest
more than pictures, (3) when given time to reflect on the materialpresented, and (4) when proceeding in a stepwise manner [3]. However, reaching the studentswho best learn via external stimuli, with pictures, with activity, and when taking a more globalperspective on the information can be accomplished with few instructional changes. Pedagogicaltechniques such as presenting both abstract and concrete information, both problem-based andfundamentals-based exercises, and both images and text engage more students. Small groups alsoencourage activity and provide a break from traditional lectures [3].Grove and Bretz developed a survey for chemistry students to measure their metacognitive skills,or how well they understand the concepts and their
one weakness that could be changed. Page 11.380.54.3. Professional Decision Making Process (PDM)The students were taught an open-ended problem solving method consisting of six sequentialsteps: 1) Define the situation, 2) Define the goals, 3) Generate alternative solution ideas, 4) Plana solution, 5) Do the solution and, 6) Learn from the solution by reflection. This process waspracticed as a team process in labs. Our version of PDM is a direct adaptation of Charles Waleswork,8 though very similar methods are cited in cognitive psychology texts.94.4. Action ItemsThe teams were required to divide the work to meet each weekly deadline during the
factors whendesigning programs for students. Additionally, researchers should reflect on these factors whenevaluating the effect of programs or institutions on student outcomes.Organizational Knowledge TransferManagement literature on organizational knowledge transfer emphasizes ways in whichknowledge is shared across organizational boundaries and between organizational units toenhance performance and innovation2. Organizational knowledge transfer is “the process throughwhich organizational actors—teams, units, or organizations—exchange, receive and areinfluenced by the experience and knowledge of others”2 (p. 832). Knowledge type, andorganizational and social characteristics affect how knowledge transfer works. Tacit, specific,and complex
community, and can often lead the establishment of new and shiftedcommunity boundaries. They can provide opportunities for shared discussion and reflection bydifferent communities, as well as an initial platform for exploring the development of new,shared understandings and practices by different communities. Therefore, based on the theoriesand prior work described above and building on established relationships with communitypartners, the Making Connections project began a process to better understand the types ofculturally-embedded making familiar to community partners, engage in extended dialog withcommunity partners and collaborators about specific making activities and practices, and thenweave the funds of knowledge shared by community
review and the iterative process ofdeveloping classification systems. For instance, in both cases we used an inter-raterevaluation process to increase the reliability of the final results. The second phase was morequalitative, so we followed the eight “Big-Tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research37.For instance, to meet the “credibility” criteria, we extensively used the “member reflections”approach by sharing the interview transcripts and our results with the participants of ourstudy. The use of RTR, especially, allowed us to enhance the opportunities and the quality ofthe “member reflections” as our participants were highly engaged in reviewing and revisingthe transcripts and providing feedback on the analysis. The combination of
looking athomogeneous groupings of mid-year engineering majors at similar institutions [6], [32], [33].Cluster 3 mimicked the all high scores (high F, PI, FoP) of previously documented sugarstudents, reflecting clearly developed future goals, high sense of instrumentality of currentcoursework, and a feedback loop between future goals and present actions. Cluster 1 (wafflestudents), featured lower average F, PI, and FoP scores than Cluster 3 (sugar students). Thewaffle students’ scores appear lower on average due to their (often two) conflicting views of thefuture and thus less concrete sense of instrumentality (lower PI) and impact of the future on theirpresent actions (lower FoP). Finally, Cluster 2 encompassed cake students, who have
theGeneralized Observation and Reflection Protocol (GORP),45 which was developed by the Centerfor Educational Effectiveness at UC Davis and is intended for capturing classroom activities andinstructor pedagogies in real time. The platform is completely modifiable, and therefore, we foundit very convenient for this data set. In using the tool, we found it most convenient to “play” thereal-time screen capture recordings on a desktop computer with a large monitor and have theGORP tool on a touch screen tablet, so that as the data played, the researchers could click-on/click-off of the activities that were or were not happening.The GORP tool outputs time-series data into an excel spreadsheet, which we then uploaded intoMATLAB46 for data analysis and
instructor was strict with punctuality and had control over class participation. On theother hand, he made students participate and asked questions that made students think andengage. Often our interviewees compared their positive experience in their second semesterwith negative ones in the first semester. They criticized the distant and blackboard-focusedinstructors they had in their first semester. Student also pointed out that they did not believeinstructors took into account the fact that there were some important differences regardingthe academic preparation among first year students.Self-awareness and Self-efficacy When students reflected on their moments of crisis and how they overcame it, all ofthem suggested that their failures were
context of the performance criteria. objectives and the sustainability outcomes as curriculum. university’s core themes related to improvability and Outcomes are (i.e., strategic and learning endurance are not The program may be contextualized in the goals). necessarily considered. developing performance curriculum and reflect the
instructor reflection students Entry Data Implementation & Assessment Cycle Redesign Faculty the Course participants Collect Student Midterm Assessment Faculty,staff, and Midterm and instructor reflection
example, we have developed a first-year course in which students role- Page 26.679.5play as engineering interns and participate in two 8-week-long virtual internship programs [14].In one virtual internship, Nephrotex, students design a filtration membrane for a hemodialysismachine. In a second internship, RescuShell, students design an exoskeleton to assist rescueworkers. Throughout each internship, students interact with their team members and theirmentors via a chat program. Mentors guide them through the activities and occasionally ask themto reflect on their work in a digital engineering notebook. At the end of the course, studentspresent
-gamecontexts in order to push students to the edge of their capabilities2,3,4. While many traditionalteaching methods entail a punitive aspect, often without providing the student with any feedbackin the form of corrections, game-based learning provides instantaneous feedback so that studentscan persist until they achieve the correct answer, learning and improving from each failure2.Since games allow students to repeatedly try without repercussions, they encourage reflection onwhat mistakes were made and how to avoid these issues in the next attempt at the problem14.This reflection allows the students to make their own connections between previous and currentclassroom content, and how to best apply it. When a player does finally overcome a
reflect the modifications we made to the domainmodel and/or the items. Page 26.404.5Domain analysis & modelOne substantial portion of the redesign effort was revision of the domain model. This revisionoccurred as a result of continued, iterative domain analysis, using a Q-matrix to track alignmentbetween items and FKs, conducting think-aloud studies using individual TTCI items, andconducting larger-scale pilot studies using the full set of TTCI Heat items. Revisions to thedomain model occurred primarily in terms of the number and content of the FKs. This includedrevising the boundaries of the FK, creating new FKs, and condensing multiple FKs
homework assignments, midterm and final exams,and a final project. The final project required students to propose an electromagnetics-relatedproblem they would like to explore computationally, develop a computational model for theirproblem using MATLAB or a similar software package, and present their results in the form of ascientific journal paper. Example problems included finding a way to reduce lossy reflections offsolar cells and determining the maximum distance a railgun can launch a projectile.The professor perceived a few problems in this previous version of EENG 386. Students wouldfrequently clamor to see more example problems and applications during class time. While aclear attempt was made to devote time to these aspects of the course
be situatedin a world with social and material components, in which they interact. The sociomaterial worldshapes our students’ cognition (red arrows directed at subject), and then as part of their cognitiveprocess, they act in the world, reflecting their understanding back onto it (blue arrows).Figure 1: Situated cognition in a sociomaterial world. The subject, indicated by the head silhouette, issituated within and interacts with social and material agents within the world. The social and materialagents are intertwined such that they must be studied as a system, rather than individually. As one of thosesocial agents, the subject thinks, indicated by gears, about the world they are in, and the problem they wishto solve. This cognitive
helpful in refining this specific OEMP assignment and developing generalguidelines for writing OEMPs on any topic. If multiple students are not making reasonable, well-justified assumptions, this suggests that the problem should be redesigned to provide morescaffolding that helps students make more realistic assumptions or more explicitly prompts themto write out their justifications. Second, having students metacognitively reflect on their ownassumptions is an important factor in their development of engineering judgment. Byunderstanding what assumptions students are making and the impact these have on design,instructors can highlight productive beginnings of engineering judgment and help studentsunderstand when they have made assumptions that
identitiesrelated to a specific subfield within their major (e.g. “I see myself as a mechatronics person, butnot a fluids person”) and therefore we expect to find differences in responses between coursecontexts for the same student.We measured motivation and attitudes towards learning in a cohort of students simultaneouslyenrolled in three upper-division mechanical engineering courses. We adapted portions of theMotivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) into two surveys: an online surveyasking students to reflect on all of their mechanical engineering courses (“cohort context”), and apaper survey delivered during class in each of the three courses (“course context”). Thecohort-context survey included questions related to intrinsic motivation
’ Academic and Career PlansAbstractUndergraduate research experiences in engineering have recently received significant interest asmechanisms for attracting undergraduates to graduate-level work. In particular, the NationalScience Foundation’s Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) initiative aims to recruitstudents to careers in research. Our work employs a social cognitive theoretical framework toinvestigate how participation in a summer undergraduate research program influencesparticipants’ academic and career plans (specifically plans to pursue a Ph.D.) and their self-efficacy for future scientific research. A mixed-methods approach, incorporating surveyinstruments, interviews, and weekly self-reflective journal entries, was utilized to
point to students with a more dominant sequential style. Table 1: Summary of student and professor preferred learning styles. Students Professors Balanced Moderate Strong Total Total No. % No. % No. % No. No. Active 22 29.7 12 16.2 7 9.5 41 2 Reflective 22 29.7 8 10.8 2 2.7 32 3 Sensing 27 36.5 21 28.4 2 2.7 50 4 Intuitive 17 23.0 5 6.8 1 1.4 23
. Neutral, 4 = Somewhat Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree, DNO= Did Not ObserveThis team established interim goals to complete this 1 2 3 4 5 DNOMEA.This team reflected on its goals during the process of 1 2 3 4 5 DNOsolving this MEA.What evidence did you observe of goal setting? Notes: Table 4. Team Assessment Instrument.Individual team members respond to this survey using Likert scale responses: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree INTERDEPENDENCY • My team collaborated effectively to complete our assignments. • My
design tool S: Insufficient External Search P: Design tool output not presented correctlyThe errors in their design documentation, reflecting the errors in their design process,include: information integration errors, errors in application of design tools, insufficientsearch regarding external information sources, and errors in presentation of valid output fromdesign tools (such as AHP, Morphological charts, etc.). An explanation of these errors, andthe ways in which they were minimized with the DIST are presented below:Information integration error (M): This indicates an omission in the transfer of informationbetween design activities, which might include:‚ criteria generated in customer needs assessment not being used in
they became prepared forengineering work. Findings suggest that some preparation, and particularly with regard to non-technical skills (e.g., interpersonal skills), happens after graduation while on the job14-16.Through this analysis, we seek to bridge existing knowledge by following participants throughtheir undergraduate years and on into professional practice. As students, participants were askedabout the skills they thought would be important to their future work. Several years aftergraduation participants were asked to reflect back on their academic preparation and the skillsthat are important in their current work. We build on a prior analysis by Brunhaver et al.17 thatused interview data in a longitudinal examination of students first
Engineering EducationThe different roles assumed by faculty members reflect the type of curriculum used in theengineering classrooms. Some instructors enjoy the authoritarian stance and provide students thetraditional education 38. In the traditional education format students are told what they areexpected to know and concepts are presented deductively 10,16. Other instructors become toolaissez-faire and become a silent member of the classroom or mainly an observer—whereinstruction primarily allows students to grow and learn on their own with little or no extrinsichelp 25.The role of the instructor in the classroom for course development in engineering educationcannot be divorced from the understanding of theories of learning and the effectiveness of
1 4 6 2 1 4 6 2 26 Graph 1: Distribution of assessed courses by status 11% 22% Freshman Sphomore 22% 45% Junior Senior4.2 : Direct assessment dataThe data used in direct assessment were collected over two semesters; spring 2011 and spring2012. The data do not reflect the exact same courses, but there
support and feedback throughout all aspects of this endeavor. Page 25.614.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Exploring Cyberlearning through a NSF LensIntroduction Phrases like “Let’s Google It” and “Text Me” reflect the lifestyle of today’s millennials. Thoughsimple, they speak to an undisputed reality–the use of computing technology and high-speedcommunication is ubiquitous. The new opportunities that have opened up in undergraduate STEMEducation can be cited in support of this fact. Cyberlearning, the use of web-based technologies tosupport learning, enables
that prompted them to choose to studyengineering. The research question this study addressed was: What are the influences on thelived experiences of low-SES first-generation students who pursue engineering study?Methodological frameworkSince the first author wanted to “identify the meaning, structure, and essence of the livedexperience of this phenomenon for this person”, 24 she chose phenomenology as hermethodological framework. Phenomenology is the description of the lived experience. 25 Theaim of phenomenology is the description, reflections, and understanding of the lived experienceof a particular phenomenon and focuses on making meaning of what the participant reports. 24The first author chose phenomenology because she was interested in