thesesoft skills are being successfully learned and transferred to the students.6,12 The focus of thiswork is on what is not being learned, what is still lacking as students move through ourprograms.An example of the Unwritten Syllabus can be found in lessons learned by first-year studentsgrappling with course policies and procedures that are different than they have previouslyencountered. Course policies may be listed in the written syllabus or may only be explainedverbally at the start of a semester. An example of a new procedure deals with the oft-repeatedquestion: “When is it due?” High school teachers often take on the role of ‘reminder-in-chief’,posting due dates in the classroom and frequently pointing them out. This does not match theadult
delivery during the pandemic.2. Online Course OrganizationThe online version of the introduction to mechanical engineering class is offered through theeLearning Black Board learning management system similarly to a previously designed onlinecomputer-aided design course [6]. The top of the course’s homepage, shown in Fig. 1, includes alink to the course syllabus. Immediately below that link is a schedule for the entire semester asalso shown in Fig. 1. The schedule is pasted directly on the homepage and “strikethrough” is usedfor the contents of the past weeks as a quick reference for students. The screen print, shown in Fig.1, indicates that it was taken during Week 9 because all entries in the schedule, up to Week 9 havethe “strikethrough
the course content. Details ofcourse content will be discussed in the following section.Finally the course shell was assembled and finalized. The entire course shell was structured intothe following: Course Home; Project Documents (where all project related materials anddocuments are located); and Weeks 1 through 7.5. Under Course Home, course syllabus,instructor introductions, student introduction discussion board, course tour video, coursematerials, course schedule, teams, as well as hallway conversations discussion board (forstudents to ask and answer questions) are included.Course ContentCourse content for this online course will be introduced and described based on the followingcategories: teamwork, engineering design process, basic
for and posting ofassignments was consistent and students were able to navigate the site independently. Tasksinvolving assessment and self-reflection of study skills currently possessed by the participantsresulted in lively discussion and a deeper understanding of what they needed to do differentlyonce they get to college.Summary of Challenges and Opportunities for Delivering an Online Summer Bridge ProgramOne challenge was that the online course needed more preparation time and almost the entirecourse had to be ready before the class began. In a face-to-face course the syllabus is planned inadvance, but instructors can usually develop materials as the course progresses. Now that thepreparation has been done, future iterations of the online
identifying common concepts, student learning objectives and assessmentmethodologies was a search of university websites for courses entitled “Introduction toEngineering”, “Engineering 1”, or courses with similar titles. When such a course wasidentified, a further search for the course syllabus was completed. A team of undergraduateresearch assistants was tasked with executing this internet search and summarizing results incooperation with the principle investigator during the spring semester 2012. Each syllabus foundwas reviewed to ensure that the course was meant to apply as a common engineering courserather than a technically oriented, discipline specific course: for example, delineating between“Introduction to Engineering” and “Introduction to
other courses,preferred sections filling up very quickly, and the overall course schedule) – able to choose theirpreferred sections for multi-section courses. In online learning courses, where students have moreautonomy over their study schedule, there is a strong correlation between chronotypes andstudents’ preferred time to do online learning 18, 20. Since the majority of students in these studiesfell into late chronotypes, students access online learning material and join discussions moreoften later in the day compared to early mornings. That – given the choice to access material laterin the day, students will – additionally suggests that early morning classes are not studentspreferred time of class.II. Research Purpose and
, andprogramming courses to a format that emphasizes early design and realization, collaborativelearning, and highly interactive classroom environments3,4,5,6. Beginning in fall 2002, College ofEngineering (COE) required all engineering freshmen to own laptop computers, which wereimmediately incorporated into the classroom environment. After considerable discussion in2004, an improved ENGE1024 syllabus was designed to include general problem solving,engineering ethics, visualization of 3-D objects and also visualization of information, earlydesign (including realization), graphing and simple analysis of graphs, and introduction toobject-oriented programming (OOP) approaches for problem solving. This new course wasoffered for the first time in fall 2004.7
, more than half switched to a different, non-engineering, STEM major.This paper describes the course. The Background that led to this course is contained atAppendix 1.For the past 5 years I have taught an upper-division undergraduate course in engineering careerskills and ethics at UCLA. (see Appendix 2, Syllabus of ENG185 “The Art of EngineeringEndeavors” .) As part of the class, students write a short, ungraded biography which describestheir reasons and preparation for their engineering studies. In addition, students take a survey(also ungraded) that further illuminates their preparation and interests relative to engineering andan engineering career (Appendix 3.) Based upon the information I collected and the experience Igained talking to and
-basedmodeling course. The measurement and data analysis lab introduces basic engineering andscience concepts, and conducts associated tests and experiments for the purposes of takingmeasurements for data collection. Students demonstrate understanding of statistical concepts andtheory by applying that knowledge to make meaning of the data obtained from the tests andexperiments. Weekly work products include written laboratory reports. Students also make twooral presentations in the course, including one that is the focus of this study, a 5-7 minutepresentation at the end of the course on an independent research effort related to the coursecontent.From the course syllabus, the objectives of EGR 220 indicate that the student should be able to
andtechnical papers which not only inform their research11,12 but provide high quality examples ofvarious types of technical communication13.The first engineering problem solving course that first-year students take at West VirginiaUniversity, a large land-grant university in the mid-Atlantic region, requires students to write atleast two technical reports. Students, typically, have difficulty with the following: (1)understanding the parts of a technical report; (2) defining and avoiding plagiarism; (3) evaluatingtheir online sources; and (4) finding appropriate sources from which to perform a literaturesearch for background information on their assigned topic.To address these issues, engineering faculty collaborated with campus librarians14,15 to: (1
, http://www.sonoma.edu/kinesiology/adapted_pe_web_page/index_sat_sidekicks.html 11. The Center for Community Engagement (CCE), Sonoma State University, http://www.sonoma.edu/aa/ap/cce/ 12. ES110 Course Syllabus is available at http://www.sonoma.edu/users/f/farahman/ 13. Team-Maker and CATME: https://engineering.purdue.edu/CATME Page 15.771.9 Appendix A Pre-Project QuestionsDate: ______________________________Male/Female ___________________________________Semester at SSU ____________________ Team Name ___________________________________How much
broken into lab/discussion sections of 25 students each. A faculty memberoversees each lecture section and supervises 3 graduate student instructors who each lead 3lab/discussion sections. There are generally 3 lecture sections each term, but these are often runlargely independently of each other, other than a shared set of course objectives. The curriculum(syllabus, assignments, exams) is homogeneous within each lecture section and its coupled labsections. While there is variation from lecture section to lecture section, course assignmentsgenerally include 8 to 12 projects whose solution requires the implementation of an algorithm ineither C++ or MATLAB, along with 6 to 8 hours of exams.Faculty in the college of engineering worked carefully on
Policy and Sexual Misconduct Policy were found themost interesting topics from students’ responses. The Mission and Vision of the institution andthe selection of the institution were found least interesting. Figure 1 summarizes the responses tothe use of various tools used in teaching. The students have overwhelmingly found thesupplemental classroom powerpoint presentations helped them in learning. This was followed bylearning from the articles on various topics and audio/video clips. The students alsooverwhelmingly found the online course management tool, Schoology helpful as the referencesource for the class notes, external links to related news media and articles, and assignments.Figure 1. Student responses to the use of educational resources
the coursematerials and explore major themes, comparison of views, applications, and higher-orderthinking skills [2].Chatmon et al. [2] use virtual hands-on laboratory exercises, online cooperative groupdiscussions, think- pair-share activities, student-generated laboratory exercises, and student-ledcurrent event reviews in information assurance courses to advocate the active learning. One ofthe main finding of this study suggests that the active learning activities are welcomed bystudents as they have a sense of being involved in their learning experience.Engineering Technology is one of the popular fields in College of Technology at EasternMichigan University that provides wide range of program of studies for students interested inthis
the role of evidence-based instructional practices in a blendedcourse for a freshman engineering course. The instructor had been teaching this constructionmanagement class combining traditional lecturing and in-class discussions. The instructor soughtto increase students’ engagement with the material, each other, and himself as well as dedicateclass time to active learning activities, higher order thinking skills, and application of concepts.The present research was conducted to explore blended course design in addressing theaforementioned instructional challenges. Blended learning is an instructional mode thatcombines substituting a significant portion of time spent in the classroom with online preparatorycontent and assessments. The online
students in self-paced coursesAbstractNationwide, a surge in students who are under-prepared for collegiate mathematics has left in-stitutions struggling to meet the needs of these learners. Many schools have moved to online orhybrid instructional models for developmental mathematics. These models work very well formany students, but not at all for others. At Clemson University, all STEM majors who are notyet calculus ready take precalculus under a self-paced hybrid course model that includes an asyn-chronous online component using ALEKS R (Assessment and LEarning in Knowledge Spaces)and a face-to-face component with targeted direct instruction in small groups.The ALEKS R software allows students to master objectives at their own pace following an
institution. This begins early on for each J.B. SpeedSchool of Engineering student with the ENGR 110 – ENGR 111 sequence. Preliminaryinstruction and experience in ENGR 110 includes the development of concurrent communicationskills, attributes of a successful team, team role delegation, and conflict resolution. ENGR 111 ispredominantly focused on the team experience, and the vast majority of class activities anddeliverables are team-based. In-class lesson plans, especially those associated with buildingtowards the course’s final project, are scaffolded in a manner such that resolution becomes moredependent on team dynamics as the semester progresses. ENGR 111 teams are created during thefirst week of the course utilizing the CATME online tool [8-10
Paper ID #16406Data-Driven Course Improvements: Using Artifact Analysis to Conquer ABETCriterion 4Mr. Tony Andrew Lowe, Purdue University, West Lafayette Tony Lowe is a PhD candidate in Engineering Education at Purdue University. He has a BSEE from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and a MSIT from Capella. He currently teaches as an adjunct at CTU Online and has been an on-and-off corporate educator and full time software engineer for twenty years.David A. Evenhouse, Purdue University David Evenhouse is a Graduate Student and Research Assistant in the Purdue School of Engineering Education. He graduated from Calvin
. Stated another way, it is the student’s responsibility to learn the technicalaspects of the given domain. During lab, the instructor serves as just another available resource tothe student.2.5 DisclaimerKeep in mind that students resist change.18 Some students may have already taken collegecourses or have family members that have described typical college course experiences. At the Page 13.715.5very least, practicing life-long learning is something they almost assuredly did not encounter inhigh school. To cope with this, an instructor should: • clearly state the objectives and goals of the course on the syllabus, • clearly state the
alumni, GSI, or professor, some helpful starter questions may includethe following: ● What did you study in college? ● How did you choose your major? ● What did you get involved in during your time at University that helped shape your career? ● Where do you work now and what’s your job title? ● What skills do you use from your degree at your job? ● What’s your typical workday like for you? ● What’s the most rewarding aspect of your work?If you want any in-person guidance on this, feel free to meet with anyone on the instructional teamduring his or her office hours, or feel free to email us to set up a time one-on-one. Email addressesand office hour times/locations are on the course syllabus. We look forward to
industry), we are strongly committed to helping themdevelop greater competency in teamwork, as opposed to simply participating in an unguidedteam experience. To facilitate teamwork learning, we historically used two instruments: (1) anintra-quarter peer review and self-review and (2) an end-of-the-quarter reflective memo (benefitsand limitations of this approach have been described elsewhere1,2,3).In the fall of 2011, our first-year program partnered with the university’s Center on Leadership tooffer students more opportunities for teamwork reflection, peer- and self-assessment andteamwork improvement throughout the two courses that comprise the program. Students used acombination of online exercises and team meetings to create a team charter
theuniversity mathematics ACCUPLACERTM placement exams. Having an online math course hashelped facilitate that task by allowing prospective engineering students refresh and improve theirmathematics skills. The use of online courses offers the most flexible and cost-effective way ofreaching out to prospective college students through their respective high school science andmathematics teachers.Fundamentals of Engineering (FOE) Course This course is a part of a seamless approach to learning math related STEM skills startingat the pre freshman level through the use of a FOM/ Fundamentals of Engineering (FOE)/Pre-calculus/calculus course sequence. The Fundamentals of Engineering course features a―dynamic‖ syllabus tailored to meet the individualized
tools withtheir courses? And does this embracement and usage change over time?This study examined both the embracement and usage patterns of a group of freshman studentswith an online learning management system in the School of Engineering and Technology atIndiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) through their first 18 months. Asurvey was administered twice, once following the first semester of the freshman year and oncemidway through the first semester of the sophomore year. The survey questions focused onevaluating the amount of engagement and usage of the learning management system. Severalopen-ended questions concentrated on learning what students found especially difficult innavigating the environment; how they perceive
uniformity across sections, and set ofguidelines was created. This helped faculty to better communicate with students and to handleany occurrences. The following list of strategies was identified based on the literature:Addressing MotiveA common method for addressing motive is the make any gain unworthy of the risk, becausewhen consequences are severe, students are more likely to conclude that it’s not worth the risk tocheat. The syllabus of the first semester engineering course was modified. The AcademicIntegrity section of the syllabus originally had a standard one-paragraph university-widestatement with a link to that part of the university academic catalog. This was maintained in theupdated version, but supplementary information was added to the
College of Engineering and Technology for the Spring Semester 2017. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Work in Progress: The Impact of a Self-Guided Assessment Tool on Success and Retention of At-Risk StudentsAbstractThis work-in-progress paper will describe an online self-guided goal-setting tool designed tohelp students retaking courses without a significant increase in advisor workload. The aim is toreduce the number of students requiring a third attempt of a course, thereby decreasing time tograduation and increasing retention, as emerging research on the “murky middle” has shown thatattrition is driven by the number of failed courses rather than overall decline in GPA [1
strengthen students’ skills asfuture engineering professionals. In an effort to bolster the chances of achieving these goals, theengineering math course outlined below was introduced in Fall 2019.Course content and materialsRatton & Klingbeil’s Introductory Mathematics for Engineering Application [11] and Stephan etal.’s Thinking Like an Engineer [12] are the primary texts used to guide the course. Theoverarching course outcomes listed within the syllabus include preparing students for the rigor offuture engineering and mathematics classes, providing students with a solid foundation of basicengineering skills, and introducing students to the different engineering majors and careeroptions. As seen in these outcomes, the course attempts to draw
into a contract agreement promising that they had read the syllabus and understood thatthey had to:1) complete a pre assessment (ARE) and post assessment (IPT), 2) submit a signedand dated program agreement, 3) attend 80% of onsite classes or make four contacts (emails,calls or texts) with the facilitator for online classes, 4) complete a program evaluation, and 5)complete the homework assignments and tests with an 80% on both.Engineering Analysis I This lecture based course covered the development and use of differentiation andintegration to solve engineering problems, including those involving motion, related rates,optimization, moments and centers of mass and it also includes an introduction to vectormethods. In the approximately 15
20 studentsMeetings/week 2 4 3Meeting spaces Large technology Traditional classroom, conference Traditional classroom lab room, traditional computer lab, and the technology lab and the technology lab Course Flexible, 8 variations on course-wide goals, Strict, centralized structure centralized course- instructors create individual course-wide syllabus wide syllabus custom syllabiEach course comes with a unique programmatic structure. The relatively set, centralized syllabusfor Communication and Technology courses allowed for several
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Changes in Student Perceptions of Their Abilities on the ABET Student Outcomes to Succeed During the First-Year Engineering ProgramAbstractThe purpose of this study is to explore students’ perceptions of the engineering enculturationfactors corresponding to the eleven ABET student outcomes and how their perceptions of theirabilities change over time through the FYE program. During the 2016-2017 school year, 662students, taking two consecutive First Year Engineering (FYE) foundation courses at asouthwestern university, responded to at least one of the three online surveys arranged over timeas either pre or post semester surveys and answered to the questions asking about
is given to about 300students. Two lecturers give the lectures, with each lecturing both streams for about half thesemester. Tutorials are smaller, typically of size 40, and involve several academics. Eachtutorial is managed by one academic and one teaching assistant, normally a postgraduatestudent. In addition to tutorials, informal drop-in clinics are also provided. These take placein a large, open workspace and are staffed by senior students who assist students needing helpin mastering the course. Laboratory exercises provide further learning experiences, as dovarious online resources. While completion of all laboratory exercises is required, there is noattendance requirement for lectures or tutorials. Online assignments2 provide early