AC 2009-2195: DEVELOPING A STANDARD STUDENT INTERFACE FORONLINE COURSES THROUGH USABILITY STUDIESRenee Butler, Southern Polytechnic State UniversityChristina Scherrer, Southern Polytechnic State University Page 14.445.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Developing a Standard Student Interface for Online Courses through Usability StudiesAbstract – In recent years there has been significant growth in the popularity and offering ofonline education. Due to limited availability of instructional designers and developmentresources, faculty are often called upon to develop the content, learning strategies, and userinterface for online
CD. Instructors use various approachesfor providing course content. The course material can consist of a course syllabus and/ora getting started overview, posted in-class presentation slides, lecture notes, recordedaudio based lectures, assignment descriptions, textbooks, articles, links and additionalresources and supplemental material.The learner-instructor interaction, the dialog and feedback between the learner andinstructor, is implemented through many mechanisms. During the online course, theinstructor proactively interacts with the students in a variety of ways, depending on thestyle and preferences of the instructor, as well as the nature of the course content.Instructors use a combination of weekly online discussions, e-mail, web
AC 2010-675: IMPROVING WRITING IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTALENGINEERING COURSES USING CLAQWA, AN ONLINE TOOL FOR WRITINGIMPROVEMENTMaya Trotz, University of South Florida Dr. Maya A. Trotz is an Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of South Florida. She received her B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and her M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Civil and Environmental Engineering from Stanford University. Her research, teaching and service are at the nexus of geochemistry/water quality and global/community sustainability. Her interests are interdisciplinary, applied and seek to forge non-traditional university
is no exception (Quinn, Amer, Lonie, Blackmore, Thompson &Pettigrove, 20126; Shambhavi & Babu, 20157).An opportunity for faculty to develop skill and expertise in teaching both placed-based andonline, education developers at KTH Royal Institute of Technology created a course entitledTeaching Strategies and Design for Online and Blended Learning (see Appendix A for a copy ofthe course syllabus). The course is equivalent to two weeks of full-time studies. KTH, and mosthigher education institutions in Sweden, require at least ten weeks of full-time studies in the fieldof teaching and learning in order to be tenured.In order to assess the value participants found in the experience of learning in an online and
concrete example for other engineering educationresearchers of how Learning Management System (LMS) interaction data from onlineundergraduate engineering courses can be prepared for analysis. We provide the rationale anddetails involved in choices related to data preparation, feature creation, and feature selection aspart of a larger National Science Foundation-funded study dedicated to developing a theoreticalmodel for online undergraduate engineering student persistence. LMS interaction data providesdetails about students’ navigations to and submissions of different course elements includingquizzes, assignments, discussion forums, wiki pages, attachments, modules, the syllabus, thegradebook, and course announcements. The sample dataset presented
Paper ID #26149Pathways of Students’ Progress through an On-demand Online CurriculumDr. Jim Morgan P.E., Charles Sturt University Jim Morgan is the father of two daughters and the spouse of an engineer. Before joining Charles Sturt University as Professor of Engineering and Inaugural Course Director in 2015, he was on the faculty in civil engineering at Texas A&M for over 30 years. Jim has been active in the freshman engineering program at A&M for nearly 20 years; was an active participant in the NSF Foundation Coalition from 1993 to 2003; also has received funding for his engineering education research from the
levels at the beginning of the proposed experiment. The instructors ensured that the subject matter covered in both learning methods was identical. The online and classroom section of all courses had the same syllabus, textbook, instructor, homework assignments, exams and week by week schedule. Online learning modules for each chapter were made available to the students in-sync with the weekly material prescribed in the syllabus for each course. In the onsite version of each course, the instructor assured keeping pace with the syllabus. The pre-recorded online lectures were not made available to the students in the on-site sections of the courses. Thus the students had the same amount of time to work on homework and
Page 22.828.3 All alternative problems 2 70.0 n/aA private company, Sapling Learning, provided the online homework system employed in thiswork. While Sapling has been providing online homework for several years in areas likechemistry and biology, Fall 2009 was the first time chemical engineering content was available.The questions are organized by chapter and topic to follow the textbook (Felder in this case) andthe course syllabus. Sapling provided a Ph.D. chemical engineer as a “Technology T.A.” to setup the assignments and assist the instructor. In this case, the Technology T.A. kept theinstructor’s extra effort required to use the Sapling system to less than 1 hour per week. Thecontent is web
the barriers instructors face when using activelearning in first- and second-year STEM courses in online-settings at post-secondary institutions.Here, we focus on fully online courses, taught in both asynchronous and synchronous settings,that have no in-person component. For our purposes, we define active learning broadly, as anytime the instructor goes beyond simply lecturing with the students taking notes. Active learningleads to improved student learning, more engaged students, and increased interest in STEM (e.g.,[1]-[5]). Additionally, active learning increases the quality, number, and diversity of STEMgraduates [5]. Despite these positive findings, adoption of active learning in classrooms has beenslow [4], and researchers have sought
identifying the strategic core, we discussed what topics and activities students couldchoose. The negotiable elements reinforce the strategic core, but give students autonomy topursue personal purposes and competencies. For example, students could choose to take thehour exams or they could choose to create design projects or education resources. Page 25.357.93.3.3 Create course structures To present the strategic core and the negotiable elements in a way that supportedstudents’ sense of competence, we required students to create three learning agreements thatwould replace the normal course syllabus. These learning agreements would be
content.Moreover, the two instruments developed in this study may form the basis for a broaderframework for the formative evaluation of engineering courses.IntroductionInterdisciplinary courses commonly known as service courses are offered by almost allengineering departments to meet the ABET’s essential program outcomes criteria 3a-3k toprepare the future engineers for a successful and productive career1, 2. These courses areprimarily developed by the departments for non-major engineering students with three mainobjectives3: 1) to prepare the students to efficiently solve the interdisciplinary problemsconfronted by entry level engineers in the industry4; 2) to adequately cover the relevant portionof the syllabus for professional certification and
• Provide guidance for improving the quality of courses • Certify the quality of online and blended college courses across institutionsMethodsWe utilized a case study approach15 of three mezzanine engineering courses at Arizona StateUniversity. These courses were selected to reflect three distinct required subject areas that fallwithin the mezzanine: statistics, robotics, and statics and dynamics. This institution uses a projectspine curricular approach, meaning that students are required to complete a project-based class inevery semester of the program. Mezzanine courses can be described as courses that align withand intellectually support the students’ current and future project courses. Our interview protocolincluded prompts to explore
online math refreshers. These student supports can beeffective and necessary for students who find themselves struggling with difficult content or whoare unprepared for college work. Yet they are often reactive in nature as they are generallyutilized by students only after they have already begun to struggle academically and/or haveexperienced disappointment in engineering.Temple’s Center for the Advancement of Teaching (CAT) has sought to reframe the problem toaddress possible underlying issues around course design and pedagogical choices that maycontribute to student failure and attrition. With the support of the Vice Provost forUndergraduate Studies, the CAT created Project SOAR (Student-Oriented Active Redesign), ayear-long course redesign
led by faculty members who have experienced success in their classrooms or whofeel that their experiences may be valuable to other faculty members. Engineering faculty haveserved as leaders for three workshops.Searchable Database. CxC also offers an online searchable database for faculty interested inlooking at syllabi, rubrics, and assignment ideas. The resources in the database are produced byfaculty at this institution and are also gathered from other universities, providing a wide scope ofideas, discussion, and viewpoints on issues regarding communication.The Engineering Communication Studio (ECS). The ECS assists Engineering faculty throughconsultation on syllabus and assignment generation, help with meeting C-I course requirements,and
, Austin Ohio State University University of Washington Pennsylvania State University Virginia Tech Polytechnic Univ. of Puerto Rico Washington State University Page 22.418.8 Note: Web addresses of online course catalogs used are presented in Table 7 at the end of the paper.small universities, which may have a different institutional culture and relationship to otherdisciplines, such as environmental studies and social science, where sustainability education ismore developed, are under-represented
Developer at a cultural institution in his home country, Greece (2000-2011). c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 A Student Engagement Evaluation Methodology Inspired from Usability Engineering for Extracting Course Design RequirementsAbstractMeasuring student engagement inside the classroom and developing techniques forimproving it has been traditionally very challenging for educators. This research paperdescribes a student engagement evaluation model that combined data from three sources: in-class observations using the Behavioral Engagement Related to Instruction (BERI) protocol,one-to-one student interviews, and anonymous online surveys. We tested this model on ahigher-level elective
Page 25.1320.8engineering design tradeoffs. Faculty can aid students in making a habit of refocusing back to“big ideas” throughout the course by intentionally making connections between smaller andbigger ideas. For instance, in the design of a project, the assignment might ask students to run acost-benefit or design tradeoff analysis as part of a report. Additionally, students can find reallife engineering projects in newspapers or online articles and reflect on how the skills they arelearning in the classroom present themselves outside of the academic realm6.LimitationsOne of the limitations in this study is in the nature of the course. Although ECE 101 follows apre-defined syllabus and has had similar course objectives over the years, like
“Tailored Instruction and EngineeringDelivery Using PROTOCOLs” (TIED UP). In ‘tailored instruction’, the course syllabus will bere-organized into an integrated modular concept format where complex engineering conceptswill be presented as networked sub concepts in a web interface, creating a virtual neural space.Each of these networked concepts and sub-concepts will be further linked to several learningtools such as animations, short concept lecture videos (4-6 minute duration) and mandatedstudent activities that are designed leveraging latest insights from established theories of neuroand cognitive science with the help of a number of PROTOCOLs. PROTOCOLs are systematicbrain based learning principles to be followed while delivering a new concept
model developed by the authors thatencourages students to learn and solve complex problems pertinent to current challenges facing society. Since its beginnings, the IBL model has evolved to improve upon course aspects and processes from previous course iterations [1]–[11]. IBL is currently implemented into a cardiovascular engineering course within four institutions across the United States. This model strives to emphasize freedom and responsibility to students through self-directed learning. In the course, students identify relevant societal problems, form diverse multidisciplinary, multi- institutional teams, and work collaboratively towards innovative solutions. IBL uses an online learning management system (LMS) that was designed and
Educational Resources (OER) are freely accessible, open licensed materials that can includetext, media, or other digital formats and are created for teaching, learning, and supporting research[1–4]. OER and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are changing the ways in which peoplelearn all over the world [5, 6]. These new approaches to education are a response to the lack ofaccess to and the increasing cost of education throughout the developing and developed world.Overcoming the disparity in educational access worldwide, and even just within the United States,is a long-term goal of OER and MOOCs, but to be successful will require the support of gov-ernments and agencies that regulate education [7]. Another benefit to OER is a reduced cost tostudents
[11] addressed various Faculty questions as it relates to SCL andhave documented several examples and practices that help the Faculty. They addressed facultyquestions like, ‘Can the content in the syllabus be covered using SCL learning approaches? Canthis approach be used for small and large classes?’ Their research also suggested solutions andresources to address them: ‘how to respond to those students who might resist this approach andhow to help better team work’, etc. Again, implementing many of these for both online and onsiteclasses would need to be tailored for each type of course offering.It was observed during this initial implementation that generally students expect to be passivewhen they come to an onsite class. It is a challenge
students and advisors. Like a course syllabus, it is a sort ofcontract and spells out the roles and responsibilities of both advisor and student. It is meant to beupdated each semester and contains practical information such as resources, deadlines, andrelevant campus offices. It also should contain learning objectives or outcomes. Such a syllabuscan then provide a basis for assessment of an advising program or individual advisors.If the ideas of Lowenstein24 are applied to the syllabus, i.e. that the advisor’s job is to inculcatethe student with the entire curriculum, both formal and informal, then the advising syllabuswould be expected to differ for liberal arts degrees and professional degrees. In the case ofengineering degrees, we propose that
∃# !(∗(26 2− #∃1∀0(!∃ 2∋∃ 1.∃∀(%(∀ 2(−,1 ,# −.∃0 2(−, −% +∃ 130(,& ∃/3(.+∃,2How are such maps created? While there is no one best method, a reasonable approach beginswith course syllabi. Every course should have a syllabus and as part of that syllabus, courseobjectives. Many of these objectives can be directly related to the performance criteria set up ascomponents of the student learning outcomes. A first pass at mapping performance criteria intoclasses can be done by a faculty committee, such as the curriculum or assessment committee,based upon available syllabi. After preliminary maps for coverage and tracking
host a“Fishbowl” activity [1],[6], where they discussed the results with the engineering faculty andgained more detailed information on what the baseline course content should be. Mathsubsequently cut a few sections from the syllabus and they meet with the partner disciplinesevery semester to discuss progress, further specify the emphasis on applications and what thatmeans in the context of a math course aimed at students who have not had substantive training inengineering yet.Math-Engineering Summit, Fall 2017: In the fall of 2017, the Math department hosted ameeting with engineering, where all engineering faculty were invited to attend informationsessions as well as observe the first implementation of discipline-specific applications in
is satisfactory, andwhere additional focus is needed. Finally, we also found that there are manychallenges to using a single concept inventory to assess student understanding in agiven class or course. The most important challenge arises because of thepractical limit on the number of questions in a given inventory. This limits thenumber of questions for any specific topic, which means that it may be impossibleto accurately assess student understanding for all topics in a typical engineeringcourse using a single inventory assessment.As a result of this past work, we have been engaged in the development of a morecomprehensive system for assessment of student learning. Similar to the conceptinventories, individual multiple-choice items are the
Although class attendance is not the only ingredientfor academic success, class attendance is important for the success of most students. Goldingwrites that some professors are worried about including a class attendance policy, because it mayaffect a professor’s course evaluation.19 Macfarlance states that an attendance policy affectsstudents’ academic freedom and choices; however, an attendance policy may aide with preparingstudents for professional employment.20 A professor must also decide what constitutes anexcused absence with regard to university policy. With consideration for virtual schools, theimpact of online mandatory attendance still needs to be researched.In this paper, the authors capture and present the perceptions of students and
like projects, lab courses, online homework, recitation, quizzes, andsupporting resources, this “good fairy” interested (interessed) the faculty and administrators ofthe course. Now that these curricular additions have been implemented in the curriculum foryears and enshrined in the syllabus as small contributors to the final course grade, they havebecome enrolled as part of the course, durably incorporated into the system. The mobilizationhere is the ongoing efforts of students, faculty, and graduate student TAs to keep the “wholemachine” running, and the wealth of resources like classrooms, worksheets, graders, websites,software packages, salaries, textbooks, etc. that are playing important parts in keeping the courserunning smoothly.The
includes experiences as both a middle school and high school science teacher, teaching science at elementary through graduate level, developing formative as- sessment instruments, teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in science and science education, working with high-risk youth in alternative education centers, working in science museums, designing and facilitating online courses, multimedia curriculum development, and leading and researching profes- sional learning for educators. The Association for the Education of Teachers of Science (AETS) honored Dr. Spiegel for his efforts in teacher education with the Innovation in Teaching Science Teachers award (1997). Dr. Spiegel’s current efforts focus on
students’ MKT and engagement in SRA). We willgather evidence from variety of sources like self-reports (e.g., interview), students’ thinking (i.e.,Think aloud protocol or TAP) while solving problems, observations of classroom environmentwhen class is in session, and documents/artifacts such as course syllabus, problem descriptionsand solutions.To answer the research questions, we will analyze the transcripts from the interviews and thinkaloud protocols using constant comparative analysis (CCA) methods [46], [47]. An approach foranalyzing qualitative datasets through coding, CCA was initially developed in conjunction withwell-known grounded theory methods [48], [49]. CCA was developed to provide systematicstrategies for iteratively comparing
science education includes experiences as both a middle school and high school science teacher, teaching science at elementary through graduate level, developing formative as- sessment instruments, teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in science and science education, working with high-risk youth in alternative education centers, working in science museums, designing and facilitating online courses, multimedia curriculum development, and leading and researching profes- sional learning for educators. The Association for the Education of Teachers of Science (AETS) honored Dr. Spiegel for his efforts in teacher education with the Innovation in Teaching Science Teachers award (1997). Dr. Spiegel’s current