interventions and b) standing on a set of sustainability-thinkingskills. Data on these two outcomes of interest are gathered through the use of end ofsemester surveys as well as written reflection activities included in student projects.Student survey results are analyzed with descriptive statistics and thematic analysis foropen-ended items. Written reflections are scored with institute-developed rubrics tied toeach system-thinking skill, depending on the nature of a given reflection prompt.Initial results from thematic analysis of open-ended student survey items suggest thatafter experiencing the sustainability intervention, students exhibit an initial understandingof the three key components of sustainability: social, economic, and
students worked with clientsfrom the local community to design a solution to meet their rehabilitation needs. In addition tothe projects, student assignments included reflection prompts, four hours of community service,and several empathy “immersion” experiences (i.e., wearing a blindfold while trying to completebasic tasks). Seven students opted to participate in the study, all in their 4th or 5th year in eitherbiomedical or mechanical engineering. Students completed pre- and post-course surveys aimedto measure changes in self-reported levels of empathy. One student participated in a personalinterview, aimed at understanding the different ways in which the course activities influenced hisdevelopment of empathy. All seven students who participated
. Second, they work regularly with the course instructor as a member ofthe instructional team to better understand the content that they will deliver in class. Third, theyfacilitate active learning in classes of near peers, and reflect on their learning and practice inwriting. LAs have become widely used in science courses at many universities and there isresearch evidence that the programs effectively enhance the success of the students in LA-facilitated courses and of the LAs themselves [6], [7]. To date, the implementation and researchabout engineering LA programs is sparse.At a large public university, we identified specific logistical barriers and educational goals in theCollege of Engineering and adapted the LA Program developed in the
SystemVerilog of their implementation; and abrief reflection on the difficulties experienced during the lab and how they would approach the labdifferently if they were to repeat the design and implementation.Implementation DetailsWe use a Digilent Nexys4 development board as the target platform and SystemVerilog and XilinxVivado to implement the design and configure the board. Students are introduced to the designtools and the development platform through the first lab (see Table 2) and utilize them in all of theother labs. In general, any HDL and target platform should work. The only elements needed, asidefrom the pulse sensor, are four 7-segment displays, two buttons, and a slide switch, which areavailable on almost any contemporary development board
educational design study results in journals or presented ateducational conferences. The essence of the transformation faculty went through was the“reflection” they did [10], as they interacted with their colleagues at the conferences or duringthe peer-review phases of their manuscripts. The authors noted that the participating faculty’s iterative design efforts were the mostcritical [11]. In the second round implementing their instructional designs, the faculty were morelikely to fully engage in metacognitive and self-reflective thinking regarding their approaches toteaching and understanding of student learning. When university faculty actively engaged ineducational research and became the agents of transforming the culture of STEM
. This omission is especially troubling given that the impactof the work, and the resulting responsibility, is arguably larger in cutting-edge research than inthe routine practice of engineering. Yet reflection on the traits and skills necessary for a scientistor engineer to productively engage with the social impact of his or her work reveals anotherreason why relevant training is usually missing: the difficulty in specifying what such trainingmight look like, much less how to provide it.SRR at Notre Dame For these reasons, in 2013 the Reilly Center for Science, Technology and Values at theUniversity of Notre Dame applied for and received an NSF EESE award to research, pilot andassess training in the Social Responsibilities of
Faculty, and Campus Environment. In our work we targeted the theme of AcademicChallenge, which includes four engagement indicators: Higher-Order Learning, Reflective andIntegrative Learning, Learning Strategies, and Quantitative Reasoning. We attempted to improvein our students taking calculus courses the Higher-Order Learning component: Applying facts,theories, or methods to practical problems or new situations, the Reflective and IntegratingLearning component: Combining ideas from different courses when completing assignments,and the Quantitative Reasoning component: Reaching conclusions based on own analysis ofnumerical information.Following the revised Boom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, we targeted levels three –Applying, and four
identity is more thanlearning the technical skills and knowledge required to perform engineering work, it alsoincludes aligning one’s sense of self with the field of engineering. In addition, engineeringidentity has shown to be an important factor for broadening participation in engineering, as theidentity development experience also reflects one’s perceived similarity with others in the field,providing a sense of belonging or “fit” [8]. Previous research has demonstrated engineeringidentity also precedes persistence in engineering degree programs through degree completion [4,6, 9], though these studies were somewhat limited in terms of their generalizability due toreliance on small, localized samples.The purpose of this study then is to test the
put emphasis on the importance of understanding students andfaculty perceptions of engineering education. It also mentions the importance of curriculumorganization and impact of curriculum organization on instructors. Need for student reflection,exposure, and discussion. It also supported the theme of industry cooperation to help professors.In nearby Canada, McGill University, University of Sherbrooke, Hydro-Quebec, ALSTOM havepartnered together to create a joint Institute of Electrical Power Engineering based on theperceived need for more power engineer who are optimally trained.11Finally in recent years there are those who have addressed ways to optimize the introductorypower engineering classes at the university. This can apply not only to
-order thinking skills canbe developed through practice, feedback, and reflection. (Miri, 2007; Sawyer, 2013).In order to build the STEM workforce of tomorrow, faculty must be trained to implementevidence-based pedagogies that foster higher-order thinking skills. Specifically, learningenvironments must foster and support critical and creative thinking skills. While there arecountless examples of institutions focusing faculty development efforts on promoting criticalthinking, very few place an explicit emphasis on the creative aspect of higher-order thinking. Thesingular example we identified that emphasized critical and creative thinking was focused in theliberal arts (Five Colleges of Ohio, 2012). Higher education must shift the paradigm that
novel application. II. Coordinate (3 – 10 days prior to lesson) Students present a lesson outline to the faculty mentor, receive advice on leading an efficient and effective review session, refine the plan, and rehearse the classroom activities.III. Execute (during the class period of the lesson) Students lead an instructional period on the selected topics described above. Student performance is evaluated by the instructor and mentor. Performance expectations can be found in Appendix 2.IV. Reflect (within one week after the lesson) Students review their performance through a written reflection due the following week. Emphasis is placed upon determining how helpful the review period
become experts in complementary areas, for example.—Individual and group accountabilityEveryone takes responsibility for their own work and the overall work of the team.Accountability can be promoted through milestone deliverables, frequent group communication,and a grading scheme that has a shared group element, for example.—Teamwork skillsEach member practices effective communication, decision making, problem solving, conflictmanagement, leadership. Instructors can promote the development of teamwork skills bymodeling and describing conflict management approaches, and guidelines for clear, directcommunication and effective leadership.—Group processingThe team periodically reflects on how well it is working, celebrates, and corrects. Providing
game’s primary mechanism, although a captivatingchallenge for its game mechanics, was not configured to address many of the key pedagogicalgoals associated with the introduction of thermodynamic properties, their inter-dependency, andthe unique features of the properties in the subcooled, two-phase, and superheated regions. Arelatively cool reaction to the game by the students was reflected in all three evaluation methodsand resulted in a significant re-direction of the game’s features.Along with a list of specific pedagogical goals, the game’s re-direction includes a set ofprofessional practice scenarios, and a completely new set of game mechanisms. Additional gamefeatures, including a novel in-game assessment tool that is based on a
Engineering Profession itself is beset by gender inequitiesin terms of the number of women engineers. National statistics, whilst not providing an‘exact’ comparison, do provide insight into the numbers of women within Engineering. Forexample, within the UK the literature suggests that only 9% of Engineering Professionals arewomen, compared with 18% in Spain, 26% in Sweden and 20% in Italy[2]. The low figure inthe UK reflects that of the USA where previous studies indicate that only 11% of Engineersare women[23] and in Australia where 14% of Engineers are women[24]. Page 24.1367.2Explanations in the literature as to why so few women select to become
reflecting the specialized knowledgethat defines the context”. He argued that students should be trained to teach because they alsolearn when they have to explain to “others using such methods as cooperative learning andpeer instruction”. Support for Trevelyan’s thesis is to be found in a review of research onlearning-by-teaching and its implications for engineering education reported by Carberry andOhland [2]. Although it is known that some students are trained and paid to act as tutors forsmall groups in some programmes no information is given in either of these papers about thecontent of that training. It is argued here that substantial prior training may lead to moreeffective learning exchanges and subsequently better teaching in higher
than memorization and copying. Learning how to think, how to self reflect, how to take personal responsibility for learning, and the development of expert problem solving skills are all reasons why this style of teaching is life changing for many students. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 WORK IN PROGRESS Flipping Engineering by DesignAbstractIn a flipped mechanical engineering sophomore design course, students engaged with interactiveonline learning modules and follow-up graded quizzes prior to face-to-face hands-oncollaborative sessions. Analysis of the student post-assessment responses demonstrated highcomfort with the
facilitation of activities (before and while visiting K-12 students), writing skills used when preparing an outreach activity proposal (to includespecific instructions on how to adapt it to fit the needs of the community partners) and withwritten reflections of the experiences from the visits to the K-12 classrooms. The schedule of thecourse included four to six visits to the K-12 selected schools to nurture the development of atrusting learning environment. The EGR 299 S course was also a creative way to engage andimprove retention of CPP engineering students.E-Girl eventIn 2013, when funding was obtained to develop the “Hispanics in Engineering” program, the E-Girl event was created by two CPP female engineering students (Hadasa Reyes, a
proposed tobe widely adopted in engineering education because prior research have suggested its effectivenessin improving students’ problem-solving skills, collaboration skills, and academic achievement [1].By converting lecture-based courses into a project-based learning environment, students learn tocollaboratively solve multidisciplinary, complex problems.Moreover, it has been reported that students’ participation in PBL activities could be beneficial fortheir epistemological development [2]. Personal epistemology refers to students’ reflections on “thelimits of knowledge”, “the certainty of knowledge”, and the “criteria for knowing” [3]. Expertengineers demonstrated higher level of epistemological development than novices [4]. Priorresearch
contextualized curricula, spurring many technical programs to reform,for example by “humanizing” engineering, developing technical literacy in nonengineers, ortrying to produce more integrative socio-technologists.Several initiatives reflect the mid-to-late 1960s interest in educating “socio technologists” tobridge the gap between competing admiring and critical visions of technology; this period wasinformed by both the triumphs and the tragic consequences of WWII and Cold War technology.Wisnioski [7] calls this gap “a rift about the purposes of engineering and the nature oftechnology...sparked by a combination of changes in the organization, content, and scale ofengineering labor, and by a trenchant critique of technology from intellectuals, activists
end, student takes the final challengeassignment, which consists of multiple choice 10 questions. In addition to the 3 self-assessment and onefinal challenge quiz-type assessments, the students complete two reflection essay papers in the 9th an 10thweeks of the semester.Research Survey and Data collectionThe students in the 4th year seminar were asked to complete the online module in the 9th week of the courseduring fall 2018 term and the survey was administered in the last week (Week 10). The online module wasintegrated as a take-home assignment, where students were able to complete the online ethics module onBlackboard (the University’s Learning Management System). A survey consisting of 10 sections with 18questions was given to the
during problem solution in order to analyze, solve, and reflect ona problem. Engineering undergraduates enrolled in physics and thermodynamics reported thefrequency of use of problem-solving strategies, confidence in their ability to solve problems, andanswered demographic questions. Measures of performance included course grades. Factor-analytic methods that were applied to students’ reports of strategy use identified three types ofstrategies, which were labeled Execution, Planning and Looking Back, and Low Confidence inAbility. The three factors were significant predictors of course performance, based on correlationand regression methods that were applied to the data. The study provides evidence that usingproblem-solving strategies improves
dynamics course [4], and student preconceptions in anintroductory transportation engineering course [5], among other applications.In a pilot project [1], students were asked to develop a concept map on the first day of class inresponse to the prompt, “What is engineering” (Figure 1 shows the assignment) and were askedto construct a new map using the same prompt on the last day of class. The authors then used acommon rubric focused on desired student learning outcomes to evaluate changes between theinitial and final concept maps and created radar plots to display the results. Both authors werestruck by differences in what we had expected to see and what students actually reported, as wellas by how strongly students reflected some of what we tried
further the understanding of how educators at HSIsperceive their undergraduate students, including their assets and needs. Thirty-six engineering educatorsfrom 13 HSIs in Arizona, Florida, New Mexico, and Texas attended one of two workshops in the springof 2018. Participants engaged in individual and group activities that helped them reflect on their studentsand actively design an educational innovation for their institution, using information previously gatheredthrough interviews with students. Qualitative analysis of the data across the thirty-six educators at bothworkshops identified differences between how instructors describe characteristics of Latinx engineeringstudents across regions and instructor type. The overall findings provide a set
among others.We analyzed students’ responses using critical discourse analysis to investigate how language, asa form of social practice, is used among engineering students to conceptualize purpose. We arguethat language in text used by students is descriptive of how they create meaning of differentsituations, and that those situations are reflective of the larger dominant discourse created bysociocultural practices in engineering. Preliminary results indicate that engineering Discoursesmay influence the conceptualizations of status, power, and solidarity in relationship to theirvalues and vocations.IntroductionThe concept of vocation is sometimes ignored by engineering students given that its connotationis traditionally related to religious
text-mined competencies in both syllabi and the AM CompetencyModel and compared them to identify: 1) frequently addressed topics; 2) verbs guiding courselearning outcomes versus the skill depth desired by employers; and 3) overall match betweendocuments. Our findings indicate that despite being developed to reflect the same curriculumframework, the five AM programs’ topical and complexity emphases varied widely. Overall,AM Competency Model content reflected higher levels of the Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy ofEducational Objectives, highlighting industry commitments to fostering analysis, evaluation, andcreation. We conclude with implications for educational institutions, AM policymakers, andindustry, outline the need for an AM Body of Knowledge
evenly belong to a single culture;culture #1. The high power index (80 versus 40 for the US) is reflected in a tendency towardscentralized power with hierarchies in organizations. This reflects the importance of thecommitment of the chairman of the department as a key element in the success of the process.The lower individualism index (38 versus 91 for the US) explains a striving for the maintenanceof ‘face’. In fact the ABET committee, unconsciously, used some sort of the fear of shame, toconvince others to achieve the behavior that is desired!The relatively lower masculinity index (53 versus 62 for the US) is translated into some modestyand tenderness. Every one wants to please others, remains ready to do some extra work withoutmaterial
-solvingmodels. The models are expressed in specific terms, with the goal of making theprocesses of problem solving explicit, and thereby allowing educators to reflect on andincorporate the detailed processes of the models into effective instructional practices.The four models presented here are fleshed out in a manner that strives to present theirelements in a uniform terminology and at a comparable level of expression. Formulatingthis level of descriptive consistency across the four models was a necessary step indeveloping a coding table that would allow a consideration of the adequacy of the modelsand meaningful comparisons of the models to students’ problem solving behaviors, whichreflect the goals of this study summarized above. The problem solving
the teachershelp learners to direct their own learning in ways that suit their individual learning styles.This manuscript describes the development and implementation of a Web CT-based coursewhich requires the nuclear engineering technology students at Excelsior College to developonline portfolios reflecting technical competencies acquired by them during their academicstudies and through practical experience. It is a capstone requirement in which studentsdocument their ability to integrate knowledge from technology areas, general education, andpractical experience in order that program outcomes are achieved.The manuscript provides a complete description of the ITA process at Excelsior College. Detailsregarding the use of information
alsomentioned that it is much better when the presentations are made available on-line; the studentsbelieved that this option saved time. It is not clear from the answers whether the time savingsare reflected in the classroom, whether it contributes by increasing the total amount of materialscovered or by saving student time spent writing.(2) What are the goals of teaching engineering and the types of skills and attitudes that need to be learned?The participants reported that one of the main goals of teaching engineering was to develop abasic knowledge (n=4) and that there was a conflict between knowledge and grades (n=2). Onestudent compared the goal of engineering to the process of checking boxes; being prepared forgraduate school and the real
moreaccurately reflect the work of scientists and engineers1,2. However, K-12 science education willalso have to reform and support the work of engineering education if improvements in thescience classroom are to be made.In response to this, A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts,and Core Ideas has been developed by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the NationalResearch Council and represents a new conceptual framework for science education. Theimpetus for this project stems from the growth of knowledge of science, increased understandingof the learning and teaching of science, and the need for scientific and engineering practices tobe represented in the science classroom. The framework is organized within three