this course transformation might have onundergraduate engineering students, we investigated the following research questions: 1. Does inclusion of a discussion opportunity improve student development in (a) integrative learning and knowledge and (b) lay the groundwork for self-authorship beginnings? 2. At the end of the course, is the student more confident in declaring a major?4.0 Methods Survey Instrument The survey instrument, (integrative learning survey) was developed, using a modified Self-Authorship Survey (SAS)8 and a modified Integrative Knowledge Portfolio Survey self-assessment instrument9, which resulted in a 33-item survey, see Appendix. Integrative learning isdefined by the AAC&U as “an
thehighest risk while still supporting those struggling to make efficient progress through thecurriculum. Our hope is that as the rate of student engagement with the assessment improves, sowill its impact on students.References[1] Tyson, C. (2014, September 10). The 'murky middle.' Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/09/10/maximize-graduation-rates-colleges- should-focus-middle-range-students-research-shows[2] Bloom, J. L., Hutson, B. L., & He, Y. (2008). The appreciative advising revolution. Champaign, IL: Stipes Publishing.[3] Meyer, M., & Marx, S. (2014). Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why undergraduates leave engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(4
examining the relationship between student ratings of faculty andthe teaching assistants within a course. Generally, the research examining ratings of teachingassistants focuses on the attributes of the TA. Our ultimate goal is (a) to determine if there is a relationship between student ratings offaculty and student ratings of TAs and (b) if a relationship is found, then to understand thefactors contributing to the relationship. We could locate no published research on this topic.Research Setting and Procedure CSE 131 is an introduction to the use of computing systems for technical problem solvingin engineering and science course required by most engineering majors in Michigan StateUniversity. Over 85% of the student enrollment in the
: completely prepared, veryprepared, moderately prepared, slightly prepared, not at all prepared). a) Math b) Science c) Technology (use of computers and software packages) d) Engineering (using math and science to solve real-world problems) e) Graphical tools (use of programs such as CAD) f) Graphical communication (understanding engineering drawings and 2-D representations of 3-D objects) g) Writing h) Speaking22. Had you completed a calculus class (not pre-calc) prior to starting coursework in the College of Engineering (yes or no)23. How confident are you about your time-management skills? (Completely confident, very confident, moderately confident, slightly
the three areas outlined inASEE guidelines [2]: a) student inputs, b) student outcomes, and c) the educational environment.As they entered, students were given a baseline assessment upon arrival to measure inputs, andas the program began, topic based assessments were given to students at the conclusion of eachworkshop to measure educational environments (Figure 3).Figure 3: The students’ average confidence levels collected from a daily survey in the selected areas of Applied Math, Computer Science,Engineering, Systems, Robotics, Design Thinking, and Prototyping throughout the program. Assessments included: gathering information onstudents’ exposure to and familiarity with topics prior to the start of the program, self-evaluations of the
Paper ID #14151Implementation of Course-Based Learning Communities and Living Learn-ing Communities along with the Development of a Simple Python Programfor Measuring RetentionDr. Mary E. Goodwin, University of South Florida Dr. Goodwin, who has engineering degrees in industrial and environmental engineering, is the Director of Student Services in the College of Engineering at the University of South Florida. She worked in industry for 9 years and over 20 years in higher education focusing on engineering education.Mr. John Pharo Morgan III, University of South Florida John earned his M.Ed. in 2003 and has worked as an
, innovation and task orientation.”Learning Environ Res., Vol. 15, pp. 171–193, July 2012.4. J. W. Baker. "The ‘classroom flip’: Using web course management tools to become a guide by the side,"presented at the 11th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, Jacksonville, FL, 2000.5. L. W. Anderson, D. R. Krathwohl, B. S. Bloom. “A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing.” Longman,2005.6. M. Mercier-Bonin, K. Ouazzani, P. Schmitz, S. Lorthois. “Study of bioadhesion on a flat plate with a yeast/glassmodel system.” Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 271 (2004) 342-350.7. D. Pines. “Using Computational Fluid Dynamics to Excite Undergraduate Students about Fluid Mechanics.”ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. 2004.8. C. Sert
AC 2012-3816: AN 18-MONTH STUDY OF STUDENT EMBRACEMENTAND USE OF A LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AT AN URBAN,RESEARCH INSTITUTIONJulie M. Little-Wiles M.S.M., Ph.D. (A.B.D.), Purdue University, West Lafayette Julie M. Little-Wiles is a Ph.D. candidate at Purdue University’s College of Technology in the Department of Technology Leadership and Innovation.Dr. Stephen Hundley, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis Stephen Hundley is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Undergraduate Programs and Associate Professor of organizational leadership and supervision in the Purdue School of Engineering and Technol- ogy, IUPUI.Dr. Wanda L. Worley, Indiana University-Purdue University, IndianapolisMr. Erich J. Bauer
attitude, motivation, and time management. Theunit on Habits of Learning featured information processing, selecting main ideas, self-testing,test strategies, and using academic resources. The final unit, Habits of Mind, focused on theanxiety and concentration dimensions. These units were stretched across ten weeks; additionalcourse units included a two week introduction unit and a four week summary unit. Structuredreflections within each of the three primary units prompted students to consider their LASSIscores from those specific categories and create plans to improve them (Appendix B).Accordingly, students completed the first reflection on specific professional/self-regulatorydimensions towards the end of the Habits of Professional unit, the
. Agogino, and B. Hartmann, “Teaching human-centered design innovation across engineering, humanities and social sciences,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 28, no. 2, p. 484, 2012.[5] P. L. Dickrell, L. Virguez, and A. Goncher, “Structure of a Human-Centered and Societal-Based First-Year Maker Space Design Course,” ASEE Conferences, Virtual Online, 2020.[6] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 9241-210: 2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. 2019.[7] S. Webber, M. Carter, W. Smith, and F. Vetere, “Co-Designing with Orangutans: Enhancing the Design of Enrichment for Animals,” in Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive
- 144, Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cpb.pdf[6] National Center for Education Statistics, “Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Groups 2016,” NCES 2016-007. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016007.pdf[7] Mdrc, “Improving College Readiness in the Age of the Common Core,” New York, NY, 2013.[8] J. Larmer, J. Mergendoller, and S. Boss, “Setting the standard for project based learning,” ASCD, 2015.[9] G. T. Doran, "There’s a SMART way to write management’s goals and objectives," Management review, vol. 70, no. 11, 1981, pp. 35-36.[10] R. B. Landis, S. Pueker, and J. Mott, “Studying engineering: A road map to a rewarding career,” 5th ed., Los Angeles, CA: Discovery
, (B and C) Students constructing a dye sensitized solar cell, and (D) students testing their dye sensitized cells. understanding sources of error, performing engineering calculations using the factor labelmethod, and significant figures) while enabling students to move around outside. Students aealso shown the “A Delicious New Solar Technology” video in which a dye sensitized solar cell ismade from powdered sugar doughnuts and Starbuck’s Passion Fruit Tea.20 Students then makeown dye sensitized solar cells from nanoscale titanium dioxide and raspberry juice using asimilar procedure. These cells have lower power output and more variability. Discussion of theactivities focuses on the size and number of solar cells needed for certain
. Table 1. List of Levels and Corresponding Experience Points and Grade Level XP Range Grade Peon 0 – 249 F Grunt 250 – 499 F Coffee Runner 500 – 749 D Intern 750 – 999 C Engineering Apprentice 1000 – 1249 B Engineering Assistant 1250 – 1499 A Engineer 1500 – 1749 A Professional Engineer 1750 – 2499 A CEO 2500 – MAX ACompared to
Teaching Learning, vol. 68, pp. 43–51 (1996).4 Hemenway, M.K., W.J. Straits, R.R. Wilke, and B. Hufnagel, “Educational Research in an IntroductoryAstronomy Course”, Innov Higher Educ, vol. 26, pp.178–269 (2001).5 Wilke, R. Russell, “The Effect Of Active Learning On Student Characteristics In A Human Physiology Course ForNonmajors”, Advan. Physiol. Edu., vol. 27, pp. 207-223 (2003)6 Candy, P., Self-direction for lifelong learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (1991). Page 13.74.157 ABET 2008-2009 Accreditation Policy and Procedures Manual, ABET Inc., Baltimore, MD (2007)8 Frank Pajares, “Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings
., E.M. Wultsch, J. DeWaters, J.C. Moosbrugger, P.R. Turner, M.W. Ramsdell, R.P. Jaspersohn. 2015. Innovating Engineering Curriculum for First-Year Retention. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference & Exposition. Seattle WA, June 14-17, 24 pp.15. Vigeant, M.A.S., S. Butler Velegol, J.W. Baish, R.J. Kozick, R. Zaccone, R.D. Ziemian. 2003. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference & Exposition. Nashville TN, June 22-25, 14 pp.16. Atwood, S.A., B. Read-Daily. 2015. Using a creative fiction assignment to teach ethics in a first-year Introduction to Engineering Course. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference & Exposition. Seattle WA, June 14
AC 2009-538: INNOVATION AND INTEGRATION IN AN IN-HOUSEFIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING PROGRAM: A FAST TRACK TO ENGINEERINGENCULTURATIONElizabeth Godfrey, University of Auckland Dr Elizabeth Godfrey has a Ph.D. in engineering education from Curtin University of Technology, Australia. Her career that has included university lecturing in Chemistry, high school teaching and 10 years as an advocate for Women in Science and Engineering, and most recently completing a 9 year term as the Associate Dean Undergraduate at the School of Engineering at the University of Auckland She has been a contributor to Engineering Education conferences, and an advocate for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning since the
). Work in Progress - Using Videoand Self-Reflection to Enhance Undergraduate Teams. Paper presented at the 40th Annual Frontiers in Education Page 26.241.15Conference, Arlington, VA. 4. Hulsman, R. L., Harmsen, A. B., & Fabriek, M. (2009). Reflective teaching of medical communicationskills with DiViDU: Assessing the level of student reflection on recorded consultations with simulated patients.Patient Education and Counseling, 74(2), 142-149. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.10.009 5. Marita, P., Leena, L., & Tarja, K. (1999). Nurses' self-reflection via videotaping to improve communicationskills in
. A., & Keller, M. W., & White, I. M., & Brummel, B. J., &Daily, J. S., & Cheville, R. A., & Wolk, J. (2012, June). The Wright State Model for EngineeringMathematics Education: Highlights from a CCLI Phase 3 Initiative, Volume 3. Paper presentedat 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas.https://peer.asee.org/22113.[7] Berry, M.S. (2014). The effectiveness of extended orientation first year seminars: asystematic review and meta-analysis. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 105.http://dx.doi.org/10.18297/etd/105[8] Kuep, J.R. (2006). The impact of curricular interventions on intended second year re-enrollment. Journal of College Student Retention, 7 (1-2).[9] Landis, R. B. (2013). Studying
Paper ID #20575Work in Progress: Curriculum Revision and Classroom Environment Re-structuring to Support Blended Project-Based Learning in First-Year Gen-eral Engineering Laboratory CoursesProf. Brandon B. Terranova, Drexel University Dr. Terranova is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the College of Engineering at Drexel University. In his current role, he is the lead instructor for the freshman engineering program, and oversees activities in the Innovation Studio, a large-area academic makerspace. He has taught and developed courses in general engineering and mechanical engineering at Drexel. Prior to Drexel, he has taught
. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529609379048 2. Kecskemety, K.M., Theiss, A.H., and Kajfez, R.L., “Enhancing TA Grading of Technical Writing: A Look Back to Better Understand the Future,” 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 14-17, Seattle, WA, 2015. 3. Kecskemety, K.M., Theiss, A.H., and Kajfez, R.L., “Enhancing TA Grading of Technical Writing: Developing a New Tool Based on Feedback,” First Year Engineering Experience Conference, Aug. 2-4, Roanoke/Blacksburg, VA, 2015. 4. Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983 5. Zimmerman, M. A., Israel, B. A., Schulz, A., &
Course. In 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.[9] Hylton, J.B. and France, T. (2016) A Transition in Progress: Building the Foundation for KEEN Outcomes in First-Year Engineering. 8th Annual First Year Engineering Experience Conference, July 31-August 2, 2016.[10] M.J. Lage, G.J. Platt, and M. Treglia. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1):30–43, 2000.[11] Morin, B., & Kecskemety, K. M., & Harper, K. A., & Clingan, P. A. (2013, June), The Inverted Classroom in a First-Year Engineering Course Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. https://peer.asee.org/22605[12] Prince, M. (2004
2.5 3 2 2 0 <1 1 3 2 0 <1 1 4 5a 2 2.9 0b Notes: a includes one resubmission; b three were partially correctNoticeably fewer women submitted attempts to challenges, and women only submitted attemptsfor the fourth challenge. Women initiated only 12% of submissions even though approximately21% of the Institute’s engineering population is female and at least 25% of the post survey groupconsists of women.The post survey contains five free response questions included to understand participants
: a) the differences in the demands of theengineering curriculum compared to other college majors5; b) the types of students who chooseto study engineering 6,7,8; and c) a belief that factors affect engineering students’ performanceand persistence decisions differently than non-engineering students9. Studies in engineering retention have been influenced by factors from the collegeretention literature. These factors include pre-entry characteristics such as skills and abilities10,11family background12, institutional experiences13,14, and finances15. While research in collegeretention has focused on integration into the university, research in engineering retention hasfocused more on integration into the engineering culture16
semester with reasonable success.While the increases in second year retention are promising, the ultimate goal of the program is toincrease graduation rates at both the college and university levels. We will continue to monitorstudent progression through the math sequence and persistence in the CoE. Future work willinclude an assessment of students’ ability to successfully complete Calculus 2.[1] Klingbeil, N.W. et. al. “Rethinking Engineering Mathematics Education: A Model for Increased Retention,Motivation and Success in Engineering.” Proceedings of the 2004 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, SaltLake City, Utah, June 2004.[2] Klingbeil, N., High, K., Keller, M., White, I., Brummel, B., Daily, J., Cheville, A. and Wolk, J., “The
AC 2010-1502: FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING: A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACHTimothy Hinds, Michigan State University TIMOTHY J. HINDS is an Academic Specialist in the Michigan State University College of Engineering Undergraduate Studies and Department of Mechanical Engineering. He is the lead instructor and coordinator for the Cornerstone Engineering program teaching courses in engineering design and modeling. He has also taught courses in machine design, manufacturing processes, mechanics, computational tools and international product design as well as graduate-level courses in engineering innovation and technology management. He has over 25 years of combined academic and industrial management
Paper ID #30656An Investigation Into How Students Spend Their Time During Study BreaksMr. Christopher Rennick, University of Waterloo Mr. Christopher Rennick received his B.A.Sc., Honours Electrical Engineering in 2007 and his M.A.Sc. in Electrical Engineering in 2009, both from the University of Windsor, in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Chris is currently a PhD student in Management Sciences at the University of Waterloo. Since 2010, he has been employed with the University of Waterloo, in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada as teaching staff.Dr. Carol Hulls P.Eng., University of Waterloo Dr. Carol Hulls, P.Eng. is a Continuing
experiences, including the theatre sketch.Students (n intervention=116, n comparison= 137) took the Valuing Diversity and EnactingInclusion in Engineering Scale [17], which assesses four related constructs. Specifically, thesurvey asked to students to indicate their agreement with why engineers should value diversity inengineering: (a) fulfill a greater purpose (n=4, r = .88) and (b) serve customers better (n = 4, r =.91), and whether the students would (c) promote a healthy team culture (n = 4, r = .87), and (d)challenge discriminatory behavior (n = 5, r = .93). Students took the survey four times during thesemester, approximately after the first week of class, fifth week, tenth week, and thirteenth week.The Larger ContextOf note, this study is
quizzes and complete mini-assignmentsusing these software tools. The final exam includes topics covering all four majors. Overall, thecourse covers – a) Introduction to Engineering, b) Case histories in engineering projects –successes and failures, c) Introduction to CAD tools – AUTOCAD and basic drawing exercises ,d) Virtual implementation tools in engineering – LABVIEW and Collection and utilization ofdata using the tool, e) Introduction to engineering analysis tools – MATLAB and problemsolving, f) Introduction to Computer Engineering, g) Computer Engineering project, g)Introduction to Electrical Engineering, h) Electrical Engineering project, i) Introduction to CivilEngineering, j) Civil Engineering project, k) Introduction to Mechanical
Volume of work produced Attendance Page 26.777.7 Punctuality (a) (b) (c) (d)FIGURE 1: Comparison of Responses for Communication Questions (a) Speaks with Clarity and Confidence, (b) Writes Clearly and Concisely, (c) Makes Effective Presentations, and (d) Exhibits Good Listening and Questioning Skills Page 26.777.8 (a
and measurement in a freshman engineering course Paper presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC. https://peer.asee.org/18720[4] Bringardner, J., & Georgi, G. W., & Bill, V. (2017, August), Examples of Free Choice Open- Ended Design Projects in a First-Year Engineering Course Paper presented at 2017 FYEE Conference, Daytona Beach, Florida. https://peer.asee.org/29409 [5] Freeman, S. F., & Pfluger, C., & Whalen, R., & Schulte Grahame, K., & Hertz, J. L., & Variawa, C., & Love, J. O., & Sivak, M. L., & Maheswaran, B. (2016, June), Cranking Up Cornerstone: Lessons Learned from Implementing a Pilot with First-Year Engineering Students Paper presented at 2016