of Colorado in Denver and a Fellow at the International Design Center which is the largest design research center in the world. This center is located at both the Singapore University of Technology and Design and at MIT. He also runs an engineering consulting company (Creo Consulting) which specializes in training in innovation enhancements for engineering design. Dr Jensen regularly teaches courses in “Innovation in Product/Systems Design”. He has trained hundreds of design teams in “Innovation in Design of Products, Processes and Services” and has overseen the creation of dozens of patents. He has written over 135 peer-reviewed publications and has secured foundation, research and consulting grants for approximately
Electromagnetic Induction Problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(1), 215.Borrego, M., Foster, M. J., & Froyd, J. E. (2014). Systematic Literature Reviews in Engineering Education and Other Developing Interdisciplinary Fields. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(1), 45-76. doi:10.1002/jee.20038Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N. S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 694.Gainsburg, J., Fox, J., & Solan, L. M. (2016). Argumentation and decision making in professional practice. Theory Into Practice, 55(4
designed problems and activities. However, in the summer of 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the program had to be transitioned into a virtual research experience. In this study, we reflecton our experiences as supervising faculty, and the results of pre- and post-experience surveys completedby four groups of undergraduate researchers. In contrast to previous years’ REUs, team interactions werenot possible in the virtual environment, and activities were mainly training programs. Students were ableto work with previously collected real data and write code. The participants’ final presentations weretechnically better than those in the previous two years. Regarding the development of so-called soft skills,student engagement, team working skills
. Because of the large number of concentrations withinMDE, it is difficult and perhaps impossible to write a single performance objective for the MDEprogram. Thus, objective II is phrased as meeting “one or more of the following milestones.”For objectives II.2 and II.5 we will count degrees, certificates, and so forth. For objectives II.1,II.3 and II.4 we have carefully defined terms and will use them to determine if the objectiveshave been satisfied. The performance target is that 75% of graduates will satisfy Objective II. Aplan was developed to determine if graduates are meeting the program objectives listed in Table4. Because MDE had only one graduate at the time of the ABET visit and will not have a largenumber of graduates before the next
college3.Improving post-secondary student retention and success has been the subject of many studies.For example, Kuh’s multi-phased study identified high-impact practices including first-yearseminars and experiences, common intellectual experiences, learning communities, writing-intensive courses, collaborative assignments and projects, undergraduate research,diversity/global learning, service learning/community-based learning, internships, and capstonecourses and projects.4 Another study published by the California State University Chancellor'sOffice shows that "Participation in high-impact practices has been shown to improve bothlearning and persistence for all students, but especially for the historically underserved."5 Thisstudy also
the civiland environmental engineering (CEE) project, and were the only Canadian universities to do so.Nine institutions from the United States also participated. Librarians from each institutionattended training provided by Ithaka S+R at the University of Delaware in Newark, Delaware inOctober 2017. As all institutions would be following the same protocol, the training included anintroduction to the project methodology, a lecture and hands-on exercises on interviewtechniques, tips on recruitment strategies, instructions and practice for coding interviewtranscripts, and guidance on writing the final report that each institution was expected to do. TheAmerican Society for Civil Engineering (ASCE) was also a project sponsor, as they have
membersafter-school and weekends during the school year. The veteran team members were individualswho have experience competing on VEX high school and college teams and were able to act ascoaches and mentors. The participating students were divided into teams of 10 members for thehigh school division and 12 members for the middle school division. During summer and winterbreak, students were given intensive training three days per week, which provided the necessaryknowledge and skills to increase their capability in both VEX Robotics and robotics engineering.The training course incorporated the working principles of mobile robots, engineering design,computer aided design (CAD) software, mathematics, physics, computer programming, andtechnical writing
AC 2007-139: A STUDENT-CENTERED APPROACH TO THE STOICHIOMETRYCOURSELisa Bullard, North Carolina State University Dr. Lisa G. Bullard received her BS in ChE from NC State and her Ph.D. in ChE from Carnegie Mellon. She served in engineering and management positions within Eastman Chemical Company from 1991-2000. At N.C. State, she is currently the Director of Undergraduate Studies in Chemical Engineering. Her research interests include curriculum development, information literacy, and the integration of teaming, writing, and speaking into the undergraduate curriculum.Richard Felder, North Carolina State University Dr. Richard M. Felder is the Hoechst Celanese Professor Emeritus of Chemical
of the experience.A new trend in education is to implement a peer-to-peer learning network wherein informationand lecture materials are distributed in real-time to each participant during the lecture. Mostoften, this format is tailored to the use of presentations created in PowerPoint or similarpackages. The primary difference between this technology and those mentioned previously isthat there is no need for the students to transcribe the information being presented as it isautomatically saved on their PCs. One of these packages is Silicon Chalk.3. Silicon Chalk:Silicon Chalk is a software package that allows real-time streaming of lecture materials from theinstructor’s PC to students’ computers. Although it was obviously created with
, andContemporary Materials Technologies, an intermediate level arts, humanities and social scienceselective course, and (iii) Foundation Project III, a hands-on project course intended to integratetechnical and non-technical content. Although Professor Stolk nominally taught the first andthird portions of the course and Professor Martello officially ran the second part, in reality bothprofessors sat in on each others’ courses and collaborated on the writing and assessment of allassignments. Twenty-two enrolled students earned 10 credits in the course block (120 requiredfor graduation) and were expected to spend approximately 30 hours per week on course-relatedactivities, including in-class time.Although Paul Revere’s metallurgical work served as a
course presentations were scheduled every 3-4weeks in which the teams received feedback on the current development of their game from theirfellow students, instructors, and mentors. All final projects were presented in a final session heldat the Digital Media Center (DMC), the campus student multimedia lab, in which the class andinvited guests had the opportunity to play the games.The Course Project: Student Peer EvaluationStudents completed a peer evaluation form for each of their teammates at the end of thesemester. The faculty considered these when converting the team grade to an individual grade –assigning a higher or lower grade as needed. Students wrote a self-assessment to communicate
walk. During this activity, students walk around the classroom and read their classmates’project results. For each assignment, they leave a comment – either an affirmation or asuggestion for improvement – on a sticky note. After this gallery walk concludes, students thentake turns presenting their homework results to the class. The instructional period shouldconclude with enough time left for students to write a brief reflection on how they mightincorporate feedback from their peers to improve their presentations. These reflections will beturned in as the final exit ticket of this mini-unit.ConclusionThe “Cool It!” mini-unit described above has been conceptualized following theories ofculturally-responsive and sustaining pedagogies, community
hypothesis, design experiments, and analyze data and 2) knowledge on the broader healthimplications of diabetes and its relevance to basic research. Students also prepare and submit anabstract on their work to the Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES) annual meeting. This, and Page 22.251.5publication in peer-reviewed journals serves as an outside source of feedback. Beginning in 2009 we developed and implemented an extensive prospective survey onundergraduate research experiences designed to identify the qualities of a research experiencethat leads to success. The survey was given to students on the first day of the program (prior tobeginning
their Prelab responses and workedcollaboratively through additional case studies and example problems related to the topicsintroduced. In Week 7, students gave short presentations (5 min) to their peers to practicecommunicating important gaps in scientific and engineering knowledge and receive feedback.Table 2 shows the list of discussion topics and associated RDC learning outcomes. Principles ofbackwards course design were used to map the RDC learning outcomes to discussion topics andPrelabs [12]. Table 2: MatSci 160 discussion topics and associated RDC learning outcomes Expected RDC Week Discussion Topics
, • Basic skills – reading, writing, arithmetic andteachers, mentors, and peers, and by enabling personalizeddelivery of educational content. Other types of technology based mathematical skills, listening ability, and speaking skills.learning experiences – such as robotics clubs – are used to engage Beyond these skills, the following five (5) attributes arestudents in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and identified as essential competencies:Mathematics) disciplines and to encourage exploration of • Resource Utilization – identifies, organizes, plans, andchallenging subject matter while developing critical workforce allocates time, money
survey, after being introduced to principles of design methodologies andhuman factors, and then were required to provide the questionnaire to two other non-engineeringstudents or professionals. The first-year engineering students collected the completed surveys oftheir non-engineering peers and responded to three open-ended questions related to commonalitiesand differences in understanding the ambiguous interfaces.In three cohorts’ reflections (99), nearly half attributed the variation of responses to differences inexperiences and shared understandings. Other explanations for the observed variation in responseswere disciplinary differences (23), difference of interpretation of instruction (30), and commonsense (20). The series of ambiguous
experiencein a face-to-face (FTF) instructional setting. Inspired by well-established FYE curricula [4], [8]–[10], the learning objectives for the course focused on the engineering design process [11], [12],interdependency of the engineering disciplines through NAE’s Grand Challenges of Engineering[13], cross-cutting theoretical concepts such as mathematical modeling and conservation ofenergy, and durable professional skills like teamwork and technical writing. Delivered in a large-enrollment section format (ca. 350 students per section), the course was co-taught by 2-3 facultyinstructors and leveraged a cadre of undergraduate teaching assistants (25:1 student-to-TA ratio)to provide personalized coaching to student teams as they worked through the two
items from the survey. Due to page limitsin this work-in-progress study, we opted to include strategies used by women by engineering role(faculty, student, employer, etc.) in future work. Thus, we only present strategies womenengineers communicated in their writing when they were asked to expand upon a situational HCthey had to overcome in engineering.Demographics Out of the participants who shared a strategy (n = 154), the majority were 18-29-years-old (n = 121, 79%) (Table 1: Demographic characteristics of participants). Because weintentionally oversampled at some institutions, minoritized groups (n = 69, 45%) were morerepresented in this sample than is typical in engineering. Most of the participants did not considerthemselves to be
at Urbana- Champaign and a PhD from the University of Texas at Austin.Mr. Michael Alley, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Michael Alley is a professor of teaching for engineering communications at Pennsylvania State Univer- sity. He is the author of The Craft of Scientific Writing (Springer, 2018) and The Craft of Scientific Presentations (Springer-Verlag, 2013). He is also founder of the popular websites Writing as an Engineer or Scientist (www.craftofscientificwriting.com) and the Assertion-Evidence Approach (www.assertion- evidence.com). American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020Work In Progress (WIP): A Systematic Review of
students’support in performing preliminary research to generate experimentally validated data for theproposal. This approach produced a contagious excitement and ownership because manystudents in sections following earlier introductory sections knew what to expect; their peers fromearlier sections had shared the idea outside of class. Furthermore, hands-on interactionsembedded in PBL4 allowed students to “do something” to “learn about something,” instead ofthe usual classroom teaching with singular focus on “learn about something.” At the start of theMUAV lesson, students drew names out of a hat to choose between four possible roles: pilotingthe MUAV, timing MUAV flight to measure its ground speed over a set number of parkingspaces located behind the
checking, discus-sions, debates, and various tasks involving application, analysis or problem-solving, student-centeredapproaches require students to learn course materials prior to a class meeting (McCallum et al., 2015),typically through assigned readings or lecture videos along with quick quizzes or short write-ups. Be-cause students in student-centered courses interact with course materials in a timely manner to preparebetter for class meetings, they tend to avoid the cramming style of study for summative assessmentscompared with students in lecture-based courses (Gross et al., 2015; Hutchings & Quinney, 2015). Research in student-centered instructional approaches has reported positive outcomes in studentlearning (e.g., Freeman et al
poster session to promote formativefeedback from peers and project advisors [7]. The consortium is unfortunately no longer active.The Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) project developshigh-quality assessment tools for teamwork, and eases data collection and analysis through aweb-based interface [8]. It would be beneficial if a consortium similar to TIDEE could be formedto develop ways to assess each ABET student outcome; by involving experts in educationalmeasurement, and by automating the data collection process, such a consortium could makeassessment more valid and less arduous.In this paper, we refer to the Engineering Accreditation Commission of ABET simply as ABET.We work from the premise that the seven ABET
, we discuss the adoption of a rubric for non-technical skillsassessment called the self-evaluation rubric6 in an undergraduate junior-level chemical reactionengineering course at a large, public state university through a series of essays called the self-reflection assignments. The assignments are designed to promote self-awareness of studentsthrough evaluation of their current non-technical skill levels and goal setting for futuredevelopment followed by instructor feedback and periodic updates on progress foraccountability.Reflection through writing has been used as a learning and assessment tool for setting goals,defining strategies to reach the goals, and detailing progress toward goals7. Some have usedreflection as a way to have students
course he describes where students are gradedon their individual outcomes. These concepts have been expanded through the rubric used in thecourse described here, which is presented in Appendix A. All technical writing and oralpresentation assignments in the course were ranked using this scale.In addition to this rubric, students provided written critiques for peers during oral presentations,which contributed to student outcome (g). This form, shown in Appendix B, tasked students toindicate what they thought were positive during the presentation (I like…) and then what theythought could be improved (I wish…). This appendix shows a sample critique from a student,with all names and identifying information redacted. Through the course requirement
more willing to meet with instructorsoutside of class [22]. Krause writes that engagement does not guarantee learning is taking place,but learning can be enhanced if it provides students with opportunities to reflect on their learning 3activities [23].Several best practices have been identified for making using of active learning. Prince reportsthat students retain knowledge better when lectures are interspersed with brief periods ofactivity [15]. Simply adding the use of clickers during lecture classes is not perceived as activelearning by students [24]. Butler says that using active learning breaks during lectures can helpstudents retain the concepts being studied [25]. Prince [8] also suggests
environmental science. Field trips are established in each of these courses withthe now peer leaders demonstrating field collection methods and aiding students to create their own research projectsand posters for the course. The peer leaders may continue to work for the program all the way through to theirgraduation. As of the writing of this paper, four students from the first year of the grant have graduated and twohave moved on to graduate school at this university and two have entered their careers in environmental science andengineering.Other activities that the former summer bridge student interns carry out during the spring and fall semesters includeresearch in the university labs, internships in other research programs, more community outreach
Underlying Educational InterventionsThe Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education (CASEE) at theNational Academy of Engineering has developed a web-based database that summarizes theavailable research on educational interventions designed to enhance student learning, retention,and professional success (see www.PR2OVE-IT.org -- Peer Reviewed Research OfferingValidation of Effective and Innovative Teaching). The website is similar to the U.S. Departmentof Education’s What Works Clearinghouse (http://www.whatworks.ed.gov/>), except thatPR2OVE-IT does not engage in extensive pre-screening of papers for rigor. Rather, we leavejudgments of rigor up to individual users of the system and focus instead on summarizing theresults of
and reflection upon the incident. While the primary intent of the CIAin the context of the IGERT program was to build cultural competence through reflective criticalthinking, the tool supported the building of trust, respect and understanding among the group,which is often the result of peer-supported CISD. [15]Background Information on Sustainability CIACIA-Sustainability Framework: Within the IGERT program, this technique was adopted in orderto help the students understand the complex, intersectional challenges associated with theelectronics life cycle during their trip abroad to India. The structure of the CIA that was utilizedfor this can be found in the Supplemental Information to this document. They include: Section1) Account of the
the terms equity and equality. The students then engage in adata interpretation activity—we give them a packet of graphs that show representation in STEMalong various dimensions (race, gender, LGBTQ+ identification), and ask them to first considerwhat information they can gather from the graph and then what it means. They work together insmall groups on this activity, and then report out to the whole class about interesting things theydiscovered. Next, we conduct a notecard activity where every student writes an answer to thequestion, “(Why) does representation in STEM matter?” on a 3x5 index card. They trade cardstwice with random peers such that they end up with an anonymous student’s notecard. We thenuse this to facilitate a class-wide
professional career”, using a scale of: Very Important = 5 Somewhat important = 4 Average importance = 3 Below average importance = 2 Page 23.462.6 Not at all important = 1Instrument #3, a self-assessment essay used the following wording (from Davis14). Qualitativeanalysis was done on the essays, as described later. Pre-course essay: Please write a short essay (a minimum of 2 paragraphs long, with each paragraph with a minimum of 6 sentences) describing how your previous work experience and program coursework has prepared you to undertake your Senior Capstone project.Instrument #4 was a peer