Conference Session

Systems Engineering Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Kelley E. Dugan, University of Michigan; Erika A. Mosyjowski, University of Michigan; Shanna R. Daly, University of Michigan; Lisa R. Lattuca, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Systems Engineering

assessments that included thecreation of a visual representation and did not presuppose or provide answers. In other words,these were open-ended assessments where the expected structure of the analysis may bespecified (e.g., which visualization should be used) but the content of the analysis is not provided(e.g., no specification of which concepts to include in a concept map).The following research questions guided our analysis of the assessments: RQ1: What visualization forms are used in behavior-based systems thinking assessments? RQ2: What dimensions of systems thinking are included in behavior-based systems thinking assessments? RQ3: What are the affordances of different approaches to assessing systems thinking?Data

Conference Session

Systems Engineering Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Fazleena Badurdeen, University of Kentucky; Dusan Sekulic, University of Kentucky; Bob Gregory, University of Kentucky College of Engineering; Adam Brown, University of Kentucky; Hai Fu, University of Kentucky

Tagged Divisions

Systems Engineering

. During this event, the students presenttheir findings and proposed solutions and their lessons learned from the course.Numerous forms of student evaluations were also conducted. Concept mapping, at the beginningand end of the course, was carried out to assess student learning of concepts related to systemsthinking and sustainability. Pre-concept knowledge (before students being introduced to coursecontents) and post-lecture quizzes were carried out and evaluated using a structured taxonomy toevaluate depth of knowledge on systems thinking and sustainability concepts [see17 for acomparison]. In addition to the teacher course evaluations (discussed in section 5) at the end ofthe course, exit interviews were also conducted with selected students to

Conference Session

Systems Engineering Education and K-12

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Reid Bailey, University of Virginia; Joanne Bechta Dugan, University of Virginia; Alexandra Coso Strong, Georgia Institute of Technology; Matthew E. McFarland, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Management, Industrial Engineering, Systems Engineering

methods for examining programmatic components canbe found in the literature, but there exists a mismatch between the stated student learning Page 25.487.6outcomes (e.g. teamwork) and the evidence that students achieved those outcomes for theseprograms3, 17, 18. For the undergraduate level, research on interdisciplinary engineering programsand courses is particularly limited11, 17. To assess students’ understanding of integration as acomponent of the interdisciplinary process, one study examined the use of concept maps as apotential method19. In a similar study, researchers developed a questionnaire and utilized focusgroups and interviews to

Conference Session

Systems Engineering Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

John Alexander Mendoza-Garcia, University of Florida; Andrea Goncher, University of Florida; Mengyu Li, University of Florida

Tagged Divisions

Systems Engineering

. J. Eng. Educ., 2014.[14] O. Batzri, O. B. Z. Assaraf, C. Cohen, and N. Orion, “Understanding the earth systems: Expressions of dynamic and cyclic thinking among university students,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 761–775, 2015.[15] J. Tripto, O. B.-Z. Assaraf, and M. Amit, “Mapping what they know: Concept maps as an effective tool for assessing students’ systems thinking,” Am. J. Oper. Res., vol. 3, pp. 245–258, 2013.[16] L. Sweeney and J. Sterman, “Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory,” Syst. Dyn. Rev., 2001.[17] M. Hooper and K. Stave, “Assessing the effectiveness of systems thinking interventions in the classroom,” in Proceedings of the 26th International