surveys are most commonly presented, concept maps(cmaps) and the SOLO taxonomy are emerging tools that may provide a more direct andaccurate snapshot of student sustainability knowledge.Student SurveysStudent perceptions surveys are perhaps the most commonly used tools for examiningsustainability knowledge. Emanuel and Adams35 surveyed 554 undergraduates from institutionsin Alabama and Hawaii and reported that only approximately one-third of respondents indicatedthat they knew “a great deal” about sustainability. Azapagic et al.36 documented thesustainability knowledge of chemical engineering students world-wide to be “not satisfactory,”while only approximately 35% of University of Plymouth students in the United Kingdom were“very familiar” with
time to share curricular designs and toidentify external professionals to act as mentors.Courses are offered in the fall and cover a mixture of standard topics (e.g. mess/concept maps,estimation & metrics, and communication skills) and locally determined content (e.g. socialentrepreneurship, research methods, human-centered design). Over the fall term students work inteams on projects responding to some aspect of the wicked problem. At the end of the term,students present their final deliverable in the format of a design review. The following spring,students may continue to work on the problem if they wish as part of their ESW chapter, orpotentially as part of a second course as an expansion of the WPSE Initative
Paraphrased: Describe the initial cause of composition (usually an an adverse event that caused environmental argument) about a damage. Describe what actually happened, sustainability topic. what the aftermath was, and a positive outcome that came from it9. Concept Maps Students draw descriptive Students constructed concept maps on the linking lines to show focus question: “What is sustainability?” relationships between using CmapTools, a free concept mapping sustainability-related software10
; Learning Lab - MITDr. Lori Breslow, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Page 23.1347.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Using Video to Tie Engineering Themes to Foundational ConceptsIntroductionMultidisciplinary themes in a typical undergraduate engineering curriculum were identifiedthrough a curriculum concept mapping process. The identification of these themes guided thecreation of a set of 24 educational videos with another 24 currently in production. Each 15-minute video highlighted one of these themes by connecting it to a pivotal concept or criticalskill from the first
allow instructors toidentify and rectify the misconceptions (Canham et al., 2003; Clark et al., 2009). Also, known asCyclic Concept Maps, box-and-arrow diagrams are an appropriate tool in representingrelationship between concepts (Safayeni et al., 2005). Box-and-arrow diagrams have been usedin textbooks to explain the geological systems such as water and rock cycles at least since 1930s(Croneis and Krumbein, 1936). They are conceptual models, where boxes represent stocks andarrow represent the relationship between the stocks including flow and feedback. These diagramscan also be used to qualitatively measure how the understanding of an individual on certainsubject matter changes over time. By qualitatively measuring the understanding of
methods in sustainable engineering exist in theliterature: Concept maps have been used to assess student learning gains in the interdisciplinaryintegration of green engineering (Borrego et al. 2009). Envision has been promoted as a usefulset of criteria for a sustainable design rubric in engineering education (Watson 2013), and theUniversity of Utah has used an Envision learning module to reinforce sustainability concepts in acapstone civil engineering course (Burian 2014). Active learning methods involving sustainableinfrastructure have been implemented to “instill a culture of sustainability” and enhance decisionmaking (Pellicer et al. 2015). Problem-based learning approaches with interrelated and mutuallysupportive assignments and projects
examinedwithin the humanities and the sciences, not engineering. While disciplinary borders andinterdisciplinary programs in the humanities and the sciences have been examined for decades,this is not the case for engineering disciplines and programs.7 In other cases, the core elements ofan interdisciplinary curriculum were discussed theoretically8, yet these discussions lacked anexplanation of how such a curriculum could be implemented. Other studies focused on only oneor two of the dimensions of interdisciplinary understanding. In a green engineering program, forinstance, concept maps were used to assess the students’ ability to integrate the differentconcepts.9 Another assessment of interdisciplinary collaborative efforts measured students’awareness
consiidered adequuate.Students’ understand ding of objecct-orient proggramming cooncepts wass assessed byy asking studdentsto create a concept map, m relating concepts lik ke classes, obbject, methoods, instancees, conditionss,and so fo orth. Students were askeed to create a node for eaach concept, link relatedd nodes/concepts,and labell the nature of onship. Studeents’ understtanding of pprocedural prrogrammingg was o the relatioassessed by giving sttudents a pieece of code created c with Alice, and aasking them tto create aflowcharrt (including sequencing,, selection (if/else). and rrepetition coonstructs) thaat representss thecomputerr
learning mathematics, pp. 1-7, 1991.[7] D. Tall, “Intuition and rigour: the role of visualization in the calculus”, Visualization in teaching and learning mathematics, 19, pp. 105-119, 1991.[8] M. Haugwitz, J. C. Nesbit and A. Sandmann, “Cognitive ability and the instructional efficacy of collaborative concept mapping”, Learning and Individual Differences, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 536–543, 2010.[9] M.T. Heath, A.D. Malony and D.T. Rover, “The visual display of parallel performance data”, Computer, 28, pp. 21-28, 1995.[10] Chen, Y. C., Chi, H. L., Hung, W. H., & Kang, S. C. (2011). Use of tangible and augmented reality models in engineering graphics courses. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education & Practice
achievement is a difficult task for faculty. Faculty require students to gather evidence of their learning and to participate in oral examinations, in addition to using other methods of assessments such as practical examinations, concept maps, peer assessment, self-assessment, facilitators/tutor assessment, and written reports.References 1. Barrows, Howard S. "Problem‐based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview." New directions for teaching and learning 1996.68 (1996): 3-12. 2. Gijbels, David, et al. "Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment." Review of educational research 75.1 (2005): 27-61. 3. Evenson, D. H., & Hmelo, C. E. (Eds.). (2000
the application specific customers. applied knowledge and reflections. 50-100 activities. Also, Connections via customer page final report on students planned and Communication. discovery, wrote semester-long client briefly operated a Teamwork. Customer concept maps, project. small retail business. engagement. Validate market assessments, market interest. Build and feasibility plan a team for starting a small
Meuse focused on general teamwork skills in their computer-based “TeamDeveloper.”3 For assessment related to their interdisciplinary certificate in productrealization, the University of Pittsburgh uses The Team Developer, but also uses astudent course evaluation, concept maps, and a project scoring rubric. The rubric is usedby industry and academic judges and has four primary areas and 12 elements, includingproject goals, creativity and innovation, prototype, organization and clarity of the oralpresentation, and ability to answer questions.4 Another rubric was developed at ColoradoSchool of Mines to assess their Engineering Projects in Service (EPICS) final reports.5Others have recommended using pre- and post- student questionnaires as well as
interdisciplinary student projectdesign.AcknowledgementThe authors would like to thank Dr. Charles Perry, Professor and Russell Chair of Manufacturingat MTSU, for supporting the robotic competition.References1 Mehrubeoglu, Mehrube. "A Lego Robot Project Using Concept Maps and Peer-LedTeams for a Freshman Course in Engineering and Engineering Technology." American Societyfor Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2009.2 Rex H. Wong and Sheng-Jen “Tony” Hsieh. “MAKER: An Entry-Level Robotic SystemDesign Project for Undergraduates and K12.” American Society for Engineering Educationannual conference & Exposition. New Orleans, LA, June 26-29, 20163 Korpela, C. M., and W. J. Adams. "Robotics in multidiscipline
learning outside of class occurs through assignments designed fordeep learning. Deep learning exercises employ the multidimensional design elements of an affectivehook (conveys relevance), visualization, writing, justification, and reflection [24-28]. This ensuresstudents have multiple ways of interacting with the material, which leads to deep learning. Thepedagogical element of an affective hook coveys relevance, worth and links to an individual’s personalinterests or experience [24]. Thus, the topic of the assignment must capture the interest of the studentsand be relevant to them. The pedagogical element of visualization means to explain by diagram ordeveloping images of the knowledge (e.g., concept map, flow chart). Drawing engages
target concepts ofthe challenge in a similar way to the example presented next for the Electronicschallenge: Concept Map: following is a categorized list of target concepts in this challenge. à Electronic components ″ Understand and use potentiometer, transistor, amplifier, thermocouple, DC fans, and power supplies ″ Understand units of voltage, temperature, current, power, and energy ″ Understand symbols and schematic diagrams for electronic circuits à Electronic Instruments ″ Understand and use breadboards and DMMs ″ Understand and measure of resistance, voltage, current, and power à On/off controller ″ Understand and use comparator integrated circuits
, to five cognitive processes: generalization, discrimination, logical proportionalreasoning, numerical proportional reasoning, and mathematical reasoning. These concepts weretested with five assessment tasks to identify understandings and difficulties exhibited by 224first-year undergraduate students. The paper identified some difficulties that students had withsize and scale concepts, including greater difficulties in understanding sub-macroscopic objectsand differentiating bigger gaps between objects. Although the FS2C is an established frameworkfor size and scale concepts mapped to Gagne’s taxonomy of learning outcomes,15 the validity of