artsand communication university students towards science literacy activities and applications. Sahen-dra linked mathematical self-efficacy with representation during mathematics problem-solving andfound that high self-efficacy students were more likely to use strategies requiring multiple repre-sentations, and reference those representation when verifying their solutions [17]. In engineering,Lent et al. [14] measured self-efficacy of succeeding in engineering courses as (a) completing basicscience and math requirements with good grades, (b) excelling in upcoming semesters and years,and (c) completing required upper-level courses for the degree. Carberry et al. [18] developedan instrument for measuring engineering design self-efficacy. It asked
Bandura is used as the theoretical foundation for this study. It incorporatesthe elements of behavioral and the cognitive aspects of learning such as attention, motivation,and memory functions [13-14]. According to this theory, the learning outcomes depend on threefactors:(a) personal factors: internal cognitive factors based on knowledge and attitude(b) behavioral factors: outcome expectations influenced by observable behavior in others(c) environmental factors: social norms, community access, social support, and barriers The social cognitive theory was applied to this study to explain the relationship between anindividual student, the peers or instructor/TA, and the learning environment. A visual illustrationmodeling this relationship is
students in STEM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21341[3] Collins, T. W., Grineski, S. E., Shenberger, J., Morales, X., Morera, O. F., & Echegoyen, L. E. (2017, May). Undergraduate Research Participation Is Associated With Improved Student Outcomes at a Hispanic-Serving Institution. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6309399/.[4] Estrada, M., Burnett, M., Campbell, A. G., Campbell, P. B., Denetclaw, W. F., Gutiérrez, C. G.,… Zavala, M. E. (2016). Improving underrepresented minority student persistence in stem. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-01-0038[5] Estrada, M., Hernandez, P. R
otherwise unknown. Please select for each question the correct answer as well as the corresponding reason. Question 1 (2 points, if both items are correct) Item 1.1 vL(t) and v0(t) A are in phase, B are not in phase, C can have the same or a different phase, Item 1.2 because a the inductance and the source are connected in parallel. b the inductance and the source are connected in series. c at the inductance the voltage leads. d between source and inductance, there is a branch with R and C. e the phase relation depends on the
. Graham has served as principal investigator on research projects addressing GIS technology and ed- Page 23.908.1 ucation, including projects on a) the development of a GIS carbon footprint model and b) anti terrorism and airborne contaminants, which recently were presented at the ESRI International GIS Users Confer- ences. From 2006 to 2013, Dr. Graham has presented his research at state, regional and international conferences. Dr. Graham has received several awards including National Black Herstory Task Force c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013
equations above by substituting the secondone into the first one, we have y = λγ ' x + λς + ε = Πx + zThus, Π = λγ΄ and Cov(z ) = λλ 'ψ + Θ ε , where ψ = Var (ς ) and Θ ε is the diagonalcovariance matrix of ε . As one type of structural equation modeling method researchers have wheninvestigating multiple-group differences on a latent construct 5 , MIMIC modeling iscritical to validation research. It can be used to (a) fit a theoretical model to a set of datavia confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), thus assessing a test’s construct validity, (b)determine whether groups differ in terms of their latent variable means, and (c)investigate potential measurement
Sample port SiCl2H2 Figure 1. Schematic of the equipment simulated by the two virtual laboratories: (a) bioreactor and (b) chemical vapor deposition reactor. The virtual laboratories provide student teams dynamic access to data as they choose what runs and the measurements to make in a structure that requires iterative convergence on a solution, which specifically promote and develop students’ use of strategic knowledge. Success is intimately coupled not only to the ability to develop models to analyze and interpret this new information, but also to the ability to identify what information will be useful and how to move closer
1 Strongly Disagree 2 Disagree 3 Neutral 4 Agree 5 Strongly Agree Table 2. Survey Prompts Prompt Prompt Description A I enjoy the “Fluids Friday” sessions B I find the “Fluids Friday” sessions to be distracting to my learning C I would like the “Fluids Friday” sessions to continue D I wish more courses had things like “Fluids Friday” to help maintain my interest E I am more likely to attend a Friday
’ engineering identity, suggestions will be proposed forengineering staff to optimize the design of PBL curriculum and incorporate effective learningactivities to improve students’ teamwork experience.Reference[1] D. P. Dannels, “Learning to be professional,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, vol.14, no. 1, pp. 5-37, 2000.[2] B. Johnson and R. Ulseth, “Development of professional competency through professional identityformation in a PBL curriculum,” in Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, November, 2016,pp. 1–9. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2016.7757387[3] F. Dehing, W. Jochems, and L. Baartman, “Development of an engineering identity in the engineeringcurriculum in Dutch higher education: An exploratory study
info, test cases, and discussion questions have been removed from the WTL labs inorder to focus solely on the source code.To analyze and demonstrate the application of our codebook, we examine three cases, Case A:Block-level, Case B: Unitization, and Case C: Every-line. We used the visual organizationclassification to distinguish between each case because, currently, each lab submission can onlybe assigned a single class within this category. We have chosen not to include Insufficient orNone, as those visual organization classifications are determined by the absence of writing andare self-evident in terms of analysis.We classify every lab submission in two phases. In the first phase we determine VisualOrganization strategy. First, we identify
retentionmodel for engineering education have resulted in a few changes. First, the pre-collegecharacteristics have been altered as additional characteristics related to persistence in engineeringhave been identified including (a) quantitative skills, (b) attitude about studying engineering, (c)commitment to engineering, and (d) study habits.17 Second, Veenstra et al. proposed threeintermediary factors that affect a student’s decision to remain in engineering: (a) academicsuccess; (b) commitment to the college of engineering; and (c) commitment to learning thediscipline of engineering.18 Third qualitative research examining Tinto’s concepts of academicand social integration as it relates to disciplinary retention in engineering suggests a moreintegrated
0.11 0.15 0.18 -0.05 0.18 0.08 0.14 -0.04Item Response Patterns & Open-ended Response QuestionsThe analysis of item responses and the examination of students‟ answers to the open-endedquestions provided information on how students answered each question. Table 2 shows thepercentage of students who selected a specific answer. Two questions in the assessment wereopen-response to a previous multiple choice question. These two questions are discussed indetail.Table 2. Item Response Patterns Option Q1 Q2 Q4 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 A 13.9% 13.4% 3.4% 10.9% 45.2% 6.1% 13.2% 1.7% B 3.8% 16.2% 4.0% 16.2
undergraduateengineering1, there has been less interest in the development of innovative study programsdevoted to increase performance and retention in Engineering.This paper reports on the impact of the Engineering Workshop Program (EWP), a problembased, peer-led and collaborative group study program offered to all first year engineeringstudents taking the Engineering Analysis (EA) sequence in the School of Engineering atNorthwestern University. A previous study on the EWP program from 2001 to 20032 found apositive impact of the program on the academic performance of women. In this initial study,female workshop participants were statistically significantly more likely to be awarded a gradeof B+ or better in 6 of 9 quarters than their female counterparts who did
engaging future engineers. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 48-88.Bendixen, L. D., Schraw, G., and Dunkle, M. E. (1998). Epistemic beliefs and moral reasoning. J. Psychol. 132(2): 187–200.Campbell, C. M., Cabrera, A. F., Michel, J. O., & Patel, S. (2017). From comprehensive to singular: A latent class analysis of college teaching practices. Research in Higher Education, 58(6), 581-604.Creswell, J.W,, and V,L. Piano Clark. 2007. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2014). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching, and research. New York: Routledge.Faber, C., &
. Page 23.1366.5 Diagram A B C D E F G 1. Correct system structure N N Y N Y N Y 2a. Species balance N Y Y N Y Y Y 2b. Correct species N N Y N N N N 3a. Number of data missing 3 5 4 4 2 2 1 3b. Located efficiently Y Y Y Y Y Y N 4. Streams labeled N Y Y Y N N N 5. Free of distractions N Y Y N
) Administrator dashboard view: Those given an Admin role can view and edit flight plantemplates for any major and also have all the same functionality as Advisors.Fig. 3) Flight plan templates are created for each major degree program. Revisions can be madeat any time by a GEFP administrator. Department advisors must agree on an annual currenttemplate for each major.Fig. 4) Students mark off milestones as they are completed. They can also click on any of themany hypertext links and will be directed to a relevant page that might provide instructions onhow to carry out the milestone or event registration details. (a) (b)Fig. 5) (a) An advisor might provide a helpful comment on a
the training modules were designed forfacilitating students’ conceptual change by helping them develop appropriate schemas orconceptual frameworks for learning difficult engineering concepts specific research questionswere: 1. How effective did the schema training modules help engineering students develop the appropriate schemas for learning difficult key engineering concepts in a. diffusion; b. heat transfer; and c. microfluidics? 2. How effective did the schema training modules facilitate students’ conceptual change in terms of the kind of emergent process language they displaced?Research Design An experimental study with 60 junior or senior engineering students was conducted at alarge Midwestern US research
University for reviewingthis paper and providing constructive feedback.References[1] W. Zhou and X. Shi, “Culture in groups and teams: A review of three decades of research,” Int. J. Cross Cult. Manag., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 5–34, 2011.[2] A. S. Tsui, S. Nifadkar, and A. Y. Ou, “Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations,” J. Manage., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 426–478, 2007.[3] S. Wei, D. M. Ferguson, M. W. Ohland, and B. Beigpourian, “Examining the cultural influence on peer ratings of teammates between international and domestic students,” in the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2019.[4] J. Wang, G. H.-L. Cheng, T
versions of industry-type equipment that can beused to illustrate engineering concepts in the classroom- fluid mechanics and heat transfer in thiscase. The module consists of a base unit with rechargeable batteries, fluid reservoirs, pumps andtubing, and receptacle ports to which different detachable equipment cartridges can be installed(e.g. venturi, orifice and packed/fluidized bed cartridges) depending on the instructional need.Also connected to the base units are digital displays to monitor readings (e.g. differentialpressure and stream temperatures) and a rotameter to control readings.Figure 1 below shows a typical DLM with heat exchanger cartridge installed. The moduleconsists of two reservoirs (Tanks A & B), and a pump, rotameter, gate
a twenty-item engineering attitude sub-scale and a nine-item job-interest subscale with nine items along three interest dimensions: (a) Invent (jobs and activities that involve inventing and building/designing cars and buildings); (b) Help (jobs and activities that involve helping people and the environment; and (c) Figure Things Out (jobs and activities that involve figuring out how things work). Questions about engineering career attitudes included items such as, "I would enjoy being an engineer when I grow up" and "Engineers help make people's lives better".Modified Draw-a-Scientist Test (mDAST). While the DAST and DAET drew from relativelysimple “draw a scientist” or “draw an
said, “I feel that this is one of the greatthings about this class. I've never had a class where the answer key is worked out right in front ofyou. It really helps to understand the material and the steps needed in each type of problem.” (a) (b) Figure 4. Percent of respondents that found homework solution screencast helpful for (a) Fall 2007 and(b) Fall 2008 (Note: Fall 2008 students had the option of choosing “didn’t look at it” for this question.)Like the other screencasts, Fall 2008 students tended to watch the homework solution screencastsfrom start to finish (36%, N=40/116). Twenty-five percent of the 116 student respondents re
evaluation results, in order to determine a project’s merit. An evaluation approachacts as a guide for a given evaluation [2]. Evaluation is considered to be a transdisciplinary field[3]. However, evaluation approaches have developed distinct differences based on: (a)philosophical or ideological differences, such as those derived from a positivist versus aconstructivist paradigm; (b) methodology, such as experimental, case-based, or policy-driven;and (c) disciplinary boundaries, such as education or social services [4]. Thus, the evaluationapproach should align with the nature of the program, the purposes for the evaluation, thesensibilities of the program stakeholders and decision-makers, and the utility of the evaluationdata. We developed an
skin. Datafrom all these devices were synchronized using a software package called imotions, a platformused to do biometric research [Figure 1(b)]. imotions also recorded screen capture while theparticipant worked on the workstation. Before the task started, the participant was prompted tofill out the before-task Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ), which is a validated self-report instrument based on CVT that assesses student emotions in academic settings [12]. Figure 1: (a) Shimmer device attached to participant’s foot, (b) Workstation with frontal camera, keyboard, and
ofthree NGSS disciplinary core ideas (ETS1.A, ETS1,B, and ETS1.C) that relate to the three-stepNGSS engineering design process. More information about these topics can be found on theirstandards summary page [34].The working draft of the assessment instrument contained at total of 17 items, some of whichwere supplementary assessment measures and alternate, short form, versions of the ADE items.These consisted of ten selected-response items focused on concepts represented in NGSSstandards MS-ETS1 and MS-ETS1-2. We also designed four simple problem-solving itemsaimed at capturing indications of students’ ability to make use of the engineering design process,touching to elements in both NGSS standards MS-ETS1-3 and MS-ETS1-4, and cross
one’s skills and experiences beyond the classroom. Astudy was conducted at NYU Tandon School of Engineering and found students lack support inidentifying and developing their career pathways. This study indicates that a combinede-portfolio and micro-credentialing platform could benefit students by a) providing students witha tool to reflect on and showcase their experiences, b) matching students with upper-class andalumni mentors in career pathways they are interested in, and c) providing them with curatedlists of on-campus and experiential opportunities and micro-credentials that would support theircareer pathways.IntroductionEvery student’s experience through engineering school culminates in different results -- students’future pathways range
grade bands (90% <= A <=100%, 80% <= B < 90%, 70% <= C < 80%, F < 70%). Due to low sample sizes (from lowresponse rates per survey item), this study takes a more qualitative approach to analyzing thesurvey responses. Survey response data were grouped by grade band. Frequencies of categoricalresponse data from the surveys were totaled for each band. Standardized frequencies (proportionof code frequency for a grade band) of responses were compared between bands.8. ResultsMany different dimensions were analyzed from the survey responses. The subset of metricspresented below in Tables 1-6 focuses on several issues: (i) student attitudes about collaboration(in-person and online), (ii) student attitudes about technology in
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Engineering Education and Quantified Self: Utilizing a Student-Centered Learning Analytics Tool to Improve Student SuccessAbstractThis evidence-based practice paper assessed the implementation of a quantified-self learninganalytics tool, called Pattern, and how it impacted study behaviors across multiple sections ofengineering courses at Purdue University. The goals of the implementation of Pattern andsubsequent research was to explore: (a) student study activities that correlated with success, (b)student study behavior change from exam-to-exam, and (c) whether the use of Pattern impactedstudy habits. Results indicated that simply studying longer does not correlate with
(Larpkiataworn, 2003). Result of prediction Actual Persistence Status Not retained Retained Not Retained True (A) False (B) Retained False (C) True (D) Table 2. Example classification table. Note: A, B, C, D represent the numbers of observations within each classification. The overall prediction accuracy measures the fraction of accurate predictions within thetotal number of all observations. Its range is 0 to 1, and perfect score is 1, which corresponds Page
aims to provide national data and trends amongABET-accredited undergraduate engineering programs. (a) (b) Figure 2. (a) Summary of Retention Benchmarks (BM) 1 through 3, among student ethnicities and genders, legend is shown on the left and data points or fluctuations between the two years are not shown (b) Benchmark 4, showing interquartile ranges of BM1 through BM3. The bottom and top blue lines indicate lower and upper quartiles respectively, while the middle red lines indicate medianThe data from the first 3 benchmarks are summarized in Figure 2(a); it
the activities of various stages.Deliverables are achieved at the end of each activity. The gate keepers review thedeliverables with the help of the criteria and take decisions (GO/KILL/HOLD/RECYCLE)during the gate reviews.For example, the first stage is to establish context and need. The main activities of this stageare namely . a. Survey stakeholders b. Collate the inputs from various stakeholdersThe working team consists of the faculty members responsible for quality improvement inprograms, curriculum redesign and some more faculty members to carry out the activities partof this stage. The gate keepers are the senior administrators of the academic institution, thehead of the department of the program concerned and curriculum design