motivate theengineering students to actively learn and develop their well-needed self-reflection and self-judgment skills. This approach will help maximize the effectiveness of the homeworkcomponent and empower the students to learn from their own mistakes. In this model, students’grades are based on their ability to clearly identify their misconceptions, make corrections, andprovide a clear justification for how they graded their homework problems. In addition, thismodel is sought to not only discourage plagiarism but also to provide an accurate indicator of theperformance of every student in class. To validate our findings, we conducted both quantitativeand qualitative assessments taking into consideration all the pertinent parameters involved
students who participatedin the survey did not benefit from the help rendered by the video based coaching problems andtutorials.Figure 2, Q5 received 3.6 out of 5 demonstrating that a good portion of our students benefited byusing Mastering Engineering online tool homework assignments and instant feedback. 4.00 Figure 2 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 q3 q4 q5Figure 3, Q6 reflects the students’ view regarding the important question of this study and surveywhether “the mastering engineering helps you to master the electrical circuit concepts ”. Themajority of the students, about 78%, felt that mastering engineering helps them to learn
tool.Presenting the results A discussion of what was found from the literature search and subsequent review ispresented based specifically on how previous work done answers the research questions andwhat future recommendations can be made. The patterns reflected in the data were also discussedto show how the conclusions made from the review are warranted. This paper concludes with adiscussion about gap in the literature that the review uncovered and suggestions for future workor directions.Findings At the first stage of data extraction of the 12 selected studies, eight were found to haveprimarily qualitatively collected data while the other four were quantitative. There were fivecases of the activity being implemented in lecture classes
distinct from sex. Connellnotes that gender is not a supposedly biologically-obvious division between men and women, butinstead the way human society collectively makes relevant these reproductive distinctions Page 26.1007.5between human bodies in a social context. For us, the context is engineering education. In its simplest form, gender reflects the set of characteristics, behaviors, and practices that we think ofas “feminine” or “masculine” – characteristics that any individual biological male or female mayor may not embody.Race, like gender, is not a biological category but a social one. And unlike sex, race has nobiological basis, despite a
0.783 for Section 002.This is likely due to the makeup of students in each section and the time difference betweenwhen the two sections met for class. The lower performing section was the earlier 8 AM classwhen more students were apt to miss class, show up late, and be less engaged during the classlectures. The importance of the difference between the two sections is reflected in the unevendistribution of homework assignments. The section that performed better was assessed twicewith paper homework while the section that performed worse was assessed twice withWeBWorK homework. This would indicate the difference between paper-based homework andWeBWorK-based homework may be larger than directly indicated by the score averages weobtained. If only