; Kotla, B. (2019). Competency-Based education: A framework for aviation management programs. Collegiate Aviation Review International, 37(1). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.22488/okstate.19.100211[6] Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218.John H. Mott is an Associate Professor in the School of Aviation and Transportation Technology at PurdueUniversity. Dr. Mott serves as the Director of the Advanced Aviation Analytics Center of ResearchExcellence (A3IR-CORE) at Purdue. His research is focused on the modeling of distributed transportationdata and the development of related tools to facilitate improvements to the safety and efficiency oftransportation systems.Mary E. Johnson
for that module.Course grades were determined using specifications (or specs) grading, a relatively new gradingmethod structured around the completion of pre-determined “bundles” of assignments instead ofusing points or weighted averages [19]. Students are given detailed requirements orspecifications for a successfully completed assignment, and student work is graded pass/failbased on whether the requirements were met. Letter grade requirements for this course areshown in Table 2. The outcomes associated with the core quizzes are indicated in Appendix A.“Plus” or “minus” modifications to letter grades, such as “B+”, were determined based on thenumber of smaller assignments completed. The instructor’s previous implementation of specsgrading in
goal of tracking student progressfor future research. Percentages in Figure 3 for the first two learning community sessionsindicated similar outcomes: fall 2018 = A (14% of students); B (72% of students); C (14% ofstudents); fall 2019 = A (7% of students); B (77% of students); C (16% of students); withdiffering outcomes fall 2020: A (63% of students; B (37% of students); C (0%). Course gradeoutcomes for non-learning community students remaining in the program were the same for fall2018 and 2019: A (57% of students); B (36% of students); C (7% of students). Fall 2020 non-learning community course grade outcomes were similar to TLC 2020: A (64% of students); B(27% of students); C (9% of students). © American Society for
Conference Proceedings | Paper ID 35347 Where’s the Math in Engineering? Susan C. Brooks Blair J. McDonald* Western Illinois University - Quad Cities Western Illinois University - Quad Cities sc-brooks@wiu.edu b-mcdonald2@wiu.eduAbstractEngineering analysis depends on modeling the physical world mathematically. In engineeringpractice, the models are often already developed, the solutions derived, and a computer programwritten to carry out the calculations. Practicing engineers are engaged in applying the answers;model development and the computer programming required to generate the answers is literallybought and
of 30) b)Figure 5. Number of students scoring in each bin range on both the PSVT:R test before and after the visualizationtraining course. The data from the entire class is shown in a), and in b) only the data for the students who startedwith scores less than or equal to 18 are shown.A further analysis of the data from the students who scored less than or equal to 18 on the pretest identifieda concerning trend associated with gender. Figure 6 shows the improvement on the PSVT:R from beforeand after the training class divided by gender. The bins in this figure were set to include a single value ofimprovement in order to illustrate the observed trend. The average improvement is not