Paper ID #12382Reflecting on reflection: How educators experience the opportunity to talkabout supporting student reflectionDr. Jennifer A Turns, University of WashingtonDr. Brook Sattler, University of Washington Dr. Sattler is a Research Scientist for the Center for Engineering Learning & Teaching (CELT) and a Multi-Campus Coordinator for the Consortium to Promote Reflection in Engineering Education (CPREE) at the University of Washington. Her research interests include understanding and promoting self-authoring engineers.Dr. Lauren D. Thomas, University of WashingtonDr. Cynthia J. Atman, University of Washington
learning, and engineering communi- cation. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 I Wish I Would Have Known Engineering Student's Reflections on Challenges and Support Experienced in Graduate ProgramsAbstractThe purpose of this research paper is to characterize the experiences of engineering doctoralstudents as they reflect upon what they wish they had known before beginning their program.Engineering graduate enrollment rates have been declining over the past few years, while studentwell-being issues are rising. This work is part of an overarching investigation examining thephenomenon of
•Understand and Respect Other Professionals •Research Information Information and •Identify Relevant Information Communication Literacy •Express and Receive Ideas Clearly •Write Concisely •Generate New Ideas Critical Thinking •Think Critically •Think and Act Independently •Organize Things Effectively •Self-Reflection Self-Management Skills •Manage Time and Meet Deadlines •Be Punctual to Class or MeetingsFigure 1. Generic Skills Perception Questionnaire Factors
Paper ID #33572”You Could Take ’Social’ Out of Engineering and Be Just Fine”: AnExploration of Engineering Students’ Beliefs About the Social Aspects ofEngineering WorkMr. Robert P. Loweth, University of Michigan Robert P. Loweth is a PhD candidate in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Michigan. His research explores how engineers engage and include diverse perspectives in their engineer- ing work. His findings have informed the development of tools and pedagogy that support engineering students in investigating and reflecting on the broader societal contexts and impacts of engineering ac
into circuits and communication links. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Measurement of the Effect of Interactive Questions in Lab Manuals on LearningAbstract -- This research paper will describe the results of an experiment in which two groups ofstudents in a laboratory class received different web-based lab manuals featuring interactivequestions, the treatment with many more interactive questions than the control. The hypothesiswas that asking students more questions would cause the students to reflect on the task at hand,which would in turn increase learning. This study was motivated by work on experientiallearning, particularly Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle, which suggests that
teachingnetwork will make initial small changes in their teaching, which will lead to increasingly largerchanges over time. For the second method, the principal investigators (PIs) applied self-study,2 aqualitative research method, to examine and reflect on their design-based decisions,implementation, and outcomes. Results indicated that the structures and practices supportedmediating processes. Mediating processes became proximal outcomes. Medial and distaloutcomes for faculty change may likely be a multi-year trajectory. Conjecture mapping and self-study proved to be useful methods in evaluating a process grant focusing on faculty change.KeywordsFaculty Development, Design-based Research, Conjecture Mapping, Self-Study Methods,Engineering
the ASEE ECE Division, served as an as- sociate editor for the ASEE Journal of Engineering Education, and served on the IEEE Committee on Engineering Accreditation Activities, the IEEE Education Society Board of Governors, the ABET EAC (2009-2014), and EAC Executive Committee (2015-2018). Dr. Rover is a Fellow of the IEEE and of ASEE.Dr. Mani Mina, Iowa State University Mani Mina is with the department of Industrial Design and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Iowa State University. He has been working on better understanding of students’ learning and aspects of tech- nological and engineering philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student
interested in all aspects of engineering education, including how to support engineering students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teach- ing decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineering education.Dr. David P. Crismond, City College of New York David P. Crismond is an Associate Professor in the School of Education at City College, City University of New York, 138th St. & Convent Ave. NAC 6/207b, New York, NY 10031; dcrismond@ccny.cuny.edu. His research interests relate to engineering design cognition and instruction, and helping teachers build their own design pedagogical content knowledge, create their own video-based
Sustainable Infrastructure (RISE-UP). Both projects are funded by NSF. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Work In Progress: Combining Strategies for Leadership Development of Engineering StudentsAbstractThis work in progress reports an intervention to develop leadership skills in engineeringundergraduate students. A methodology based on a cognitive apprentice framework wasimplemented, where coaching, Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL), cooperative learning,reflection, and self-assessment are combined to train peer leaders from different engineeringprograms. Students in the PLTL Peer Leaders initiative are low-income academically talentedstudents (LIATS) from a Hispanic
instrumentation is to drive ongoing cycles of continuousimprovement in teaching with a focus on transforming student learning. Owing to theongoing, dynamic practices of reflective educators, pedagogy and plans iterativelyevolve. These changes in practice exist in a complex environment that has the potential toprofoundly impact students’ ability to engage with and internalize content. Given thisenvironment, instrumentation is deployed to collect data in a process of developmentalevaluation while proactively responding to student learning and development throughdisaggregated data. This work equips educators with information to support thedevelopment of prototypes and innovations that strive toward providing undergraduatestudents with authentic, deep, and
. Interviewparticipants were selected using a cross-case matching methodology based on their globalpreparedness measure scores (i.e., high vs low scorers). Twenty-five undergraduate engineeringstudents enrolled at the three collaborating universities were interviewed. Interview data wereholistically reviewed with an a priori coding schema based on the research objectives and thenre-coded according to the final coding schema by multiple research team members for inter-raterreliability purposes, and arbitrated where necessary.Differences in students’ reflections emerged based on the depth of their engagement with theculture and community in the host country in which they had participated in an internationalexperience. The results from this study broaden the
the various preferences and styles bywhich students learn. As such, the purpose of this paper is to present evidence on the effect offormative assessment design on student performance, and whether this effect varies by studentlearning style. The results from this study can be used by engineering educators to eitherdiversify or personalize their assessment style.This work is grounded in the Felder-Soloman learning style model, a model that was developedwithin engineering education and has been validated and widely used within the field. Thismodel categorizes learning styles along four distinct dimensions: perception (sensing versusintuitive), input (visual versus verbal), processing (active versus reflective), and understanding(sequential
class activities found in the scholarly literature. Thesepractices were grounded in experiential and cooperative learning such as visits from experts,round-table discussions, reflections, but still included traditional learning activities such asassigned readings and lectures. Outside the classroom, students actively worked with communitypartners to improve thriving in the community.Gratitude - Gratitude consists of feelings of appreciation for someone in response to receivingintentional benefits, especially at some cost to the benefactor [2], [3]. There are both interpersonaland intrapersonal benefits of gratitude. Gratitude is one of the strongest correlates to emotionalwellbeing [4], life satisfaction, optimism, and reduced anxiety [5]. In
applied, transformative, purposive knowledge and growth.51, 52Because professionalization is also an important goal in engineering education, our listculminates with several goals that build from affective, ethical, and cognitive foundations to themore specific abilities we expect of graduating engineering students. Each student and program instructor will be able to 1. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their rights and responsibilities to themselves, others, society, and the natural world 2. recognize in context, discuss, and demonstrate attitudes, behaviors and personal reflection about their habits and growth, as well as others’, and the implications of
generation processes. For example, an interview question may be wordedin such a way that it reflects the experiences and worldview of somebody who speaksAppalachian English versus African American English. To offset this possibility, the researchteam should consult with people who are familiar with the language and culture of the researchparticipants and ask them to evaluate data generation protocols as well as early collected data. Insummary, researchers can enact several validation procedures to increase the likelihood that theirdata generation methods are culturally responsive and result in a fit between a social reality andthe research report, rather than a deficit view. These steps include: • Recognize subtle (or non-subtle) linguistic
situated learning perspective has been deemed to offera theoretical rationale for ‘inquiry-based’ and ‘problem solving’ approaches to science teachingand learning, where scaffolding and other forms of social support serve a prominent role in students’learning process.26 A model of instruction employing situated learning theory has been proposedand proven to yield a practical framework for classroom practice.25,27 Ref. 25 suggested that thekey components of this model include: (1) cognitive apprenticeship and coaching; (2)opportunities for multiple practices; (3) collaboration; (4) reflection; and (5) technology. Cognitiveapprenticeship methods allow students to enculturate into authentic practices through socialinteraction. Cognitive
of criticalthinking (Chinn et al. 2014). Both the broad term of critical thinking and the more niche term ofsystems thinking share similar meanings of thoughtful analysis or analytical reasoning, and callto mind King & Kitchener’s Reflective Judgement Model (King & Kitchener, 1994, 2001, 2004),a stepping stone between the cognitive development research started in the 1970s and morerecent epistemological research. This researcher argues that discovering the epistemic beliefs offaculty and the ideas being disseminated to students in their chemical engineering classroomswill prove useful in the field of chemical engineering education as well as related academicfields concerned with systems and critical thinking.TheoryResearch preceding
Paper ID #12492Exploring Ethical Validation as a Key Consideration in Interpretive ResearchQualityDr. Joachim Walther, University of Georgia Dr. Walther is an assistant professor of engineering education research at the University of Georgia (UGA). He is a director of the Collaborative Lounge for Understanding Society and Technology through Educational Research (CLUSTER), an interdisciplinary research group with members from engineering, art, educational psychology and social work. His research interests range from the role of empathy in engineering students’ professional formation, the role of reflection in
recognize the existing efforts of educators and fostertheir curricula and scholarship ideas. A series of three workshops were conducted in 2018 byvisiting educators engaged in engineering education at both two and four-year HSIs. Before,during, and after the workshop series, attendees were asked to reflect on three guidingeducational philosophies: intrinsic motivation, students as empowered agents, and designthinking. Thirty-six engineering educators from thirteen HSIs from across the Southern UnitedStates participated in one of two, two-day workshops where attendees prototyped examples ofhow they would implement these philosophies at their home institution. Using these prototypes,participants identified the assets they already had and resources
science teaching methods course and volunteered for a follow-up engineeringprofessional development institute, which was the context for this study. Data sources includedvideos of the teachers solving design problems, teachers’ written and oral reflections onengineering teaching experiences, and researcher field notes from the after-school week. Wegenerated thick descriptions of the cases of Ana and Ben and used these to develop conjecturesabout their engineering epistemologies. Following microethnographic methodology andstrategies from discourse analysis, we re-examined transcripts and other data artifacts forconfirming and disconfirming evidence of these conjectures.We found that Ana and Ben framed engineering learning as building knowledge
asked to voluntarily share their experiences in the form of writtenreflections as a part of an open-response survey at the end of each semester. To understand studentexperiences, we conducted a thematic analysis of student reflections after they completed theirfirst semester. We analyzed reflections and we discussed our findings through the lens of thesituated learning theory, specifically addressing its three key tenets: authentic context, socialinteraction, and authentic learning.IntroductionNumerous future jobs will involve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)knowledge. As such, it is important to attract students into STEM fields and to retain them asSTEM majors. Residential Learning Communities (RLCs) can help with both
, and advocate for a holistic consciousnessof the factors that many underrepresented students face in engineering.Critical TheoriesAccording to Horkheimer21, there is a distinction between traditional and critical theory.Traditional theory seeks to only understand or describe society, while critical theory seeks tocritique and change society as a whole. Critical theory recognizes the complexity of socialprocesses and its main task is “to reflect upon the structures from which social realities and thetheories that seek to explain it are constructed” (p. 139).22 Although critical theory originated inthe Frankfurt School with a focus on a criticism of modern social structures,22 critical theoryprevails in other fields such as sociology and
and equipping faculty with the knowledge and skills necessary to create such opportunities. One of the founding faculty at Olin College, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from sci- ence to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creating curricular and pedagogical structures as well as academic cultures that facilitate students’ interests, moti- vation, and desire to persist in engineering. Through this work, outreach, and involvement in the commu- nity, Dr. Zastavker continues to focus
educational design study results in journals or presented ateducational conferences. The essence of the transformation faculty went through was the“reflection” they did [10], as they interacted with their colleagues at the conferences or duringthe peer-review phases of their manuscripts. The authors noted that the participating faculty’s iterative design efforts were the mostcritical [11]. In the second round implementing their instructional designs, the faculty were morelikely to fully engage in metacognitive and self-reflective thinking regarding their approaches toteaching and understanding of student learning. When university faculty actively engaged ineducational research and became the agents of transforming the culture of STEM
are learning about how the brain works, we will assign weeklyreflection papers so that students express how the lecture, the classic experiment, and the smallgroup discussion have influenced the way they view learning through provided prompts. Theprompts will probe students on the following experiential processes: self-reevaluation, socialliberation, dramatic relief, and environmental reevaluations.In addition to weekly reflection papers, we will assign reading and watching assignments forhomework. For example, students will read book excerpts and watch videos of TED Talksrelated to how the brain works. These readings and videos will be accompanied by short writtenassignments called reaction papers. These reaction papers will have prompts
, soteaching staff are dealing with larger workload [6], [8]. Consequently, they spend less timereflecting about curriculum and teaching practices [9], [10], and they resist to fulfillingadditional assessment requirements at a program level [4]. Besides lacking opportunities to reflect, most faculty lack opportunities to collectand analyze meaningful learning data due to the complexity of assessing student learningoutcomes on a program level [11]. To deal with this challenging but essential task,teaching staff rely on both quantitative (e.g., quiz results, test scores, mid-term students’satisfaction and end-of term evaluations) and qualitative data (e.g., open-ended responsesto end of term comments from students and colleagues) to identify
others would also consider your recovery successful/unsuccessful? Why or why not? g. Has your event affected your future behavior? Based on their class section, participants were either given the “unsuccessful” recovery or“successful” recovery first, followed by the other option. This difference was implemented tomitigate the potential effects of the first failure type reflection on the answers for the other (i.e. anegative reflection could influence the next positive reflection). How an individual responds tofailure can give a good amount of information pertaining to the general trends of saidindividual’s motivation. For analysis of this qualitative data we used emergent thematic analysisto code and subsequently identify thematic
of user-centereddesign (UCD) and human-computer interaction (HCI) during the mid to late 1990s. Unlikesimple descriptions of real people, personas are fictional, “hypothetical archetypes” [1]constructed from purposeful research about product users. Personas help to communicate thegoals, values, needs, and actions of targeted users and to develop empathy and interest for usersduring early stage design. Scenarios are narrative descriptions (i.e., “stories”) of “typical andsignificant” user activities that help designers define specific product features that reflect a userfocus [2]. Today, use of both personas and scenarios are widely recognized; designers mayimplement personas and/or scenarios in the context of product usage models that enable