Seminar course was the engineering entry course for the first-yearengineering students in the first four years of the program. The first iteration of the coursefocused on the student gaining awareness about the multiple disciplines of engineering throughmini-design challenges and providing opportunities for students to meet and speak withprofessionals in field. Assignments ranged from information literacy to reflecting on practicingengineers and upper division students who shared experiences about the discipline and program.In 2012, the seminar course was not offered, leaving only one course in engineering for studentsto take in their first year. Fall 2014 saw the reintroduction of the course under the title,Engineering Opportunities, where the
success,as indicated by parameters like higher course pass rates, higher Grade Point Averages, creditaccumulation, retention, and graduation rates11. Skills can be taught which are consistent acrossprograms, as well as customized to fit individual courses12. E-portfolios can support assessmentby identifying goals and providing a repository for organizing, storing, and sharing records. It isinstructionally valuable in that students can connect their own work with the broader programexpectations, thus self-evaluating their status. Students can engage in reflection, which maydevelop their critical thinking skills.This study is a follow-up to a previous study made by the researchers13 (see Bose & Pakala
understand the appropriate behaviors to observe and questions toask. The process then moves to observing the client’s pain point experience. Observing is not Page 26.1208.2enough, students need to at least talk with the client and, if possible, experience the pain pointthemselves. All through this process students are framing and re-framing their problemstatements as they collect additional information. The Thinktank concludes with a final revisionand refinement of the problem statement that reflects their empathetic understanding of theirclient’s pain point and preparation for the next phase of the process, ideation.Why is an entrepreneurial
honorsstudents. Preliminary analysis show a student population with normal distributions on the active-reflective, sensing-intuitive, and sequential-global Felder Learning Styles scales and anextremely skewed visual-verbal distribution favoring visual learners with less than 5% of thetotal population self-rated as moderate to strong verbal learners. We report on a comparison ofthe Felder Learning Styles scales, assignment preparation time, and course performance. Theseresults provide insights into significant predictors of student success based on learning style andcurriculum type. The ultimate goal is to provide appropriate preparatory course materials to
approach to teaching professional communication, andintroduce our larger research project, which aims to assess the effectiveness of our program.Finally, we shall briefly reflect on whether the small communication class is really as inefficientas some have suggested. The purpose of this study is to develop the theoretical groundwork fora larger study we are just beginning to conduct on the efficacy of our professionalcommunication program. Using the investigative tools of narrative research and discourseanalysis, we hope ultimately to determine the degree to which our program, which maintainssmall classes and focuses on cultivating students’ rhetorical judgment, effectively graftsprofessional communication onto our students’ burgeoning
bent, positioned and held in a frame to reflect the lightat the focal point where the multi-junction cell is fixed. The system follows the celestial path ofthe sun within 1.6 degree.This project was completed as a senior capstone design project utilizing all of the educationgained thus far in the engineering curriculum along with a large amount of self-directed learning.Every stage in the design and development of the project was an educational test that had to beovercome. Discussion on the short comings, challenges, and the use of the education received toresolve these issues are presented.1. IntroductionAccess to power namely, heat, and electricity is ubiquitous in developed nations. Much of thedeveloping world however, still lacks access to
contribution ADHD students can make, they often struggle in traditionaleducational environments. Mainly, how the traditional educational setting functions does notcater to how students with ADHD achieve success, nor do teachers have sufficient training andunderstanding of how ADHD affects learning and academic performance.8 In current educationsystems, students with ADHD are less engaged during instruction, display more off-task anddisruptive behavior, and are less academically motivated. There is a direct association betweenacademic achievement and attention during instruction, indicating that students with ADHD canhave more negative academic outcomes.8 This idea is reflected throughout college. Collegestudents with ADHD maintain lower GPAs
from each other or the world. If students wereencouraged to see their choices in attending college, they might be able to see their ownautonomy of choice in the classroom, but it is often opaque to them as they try to maneuver thedemands of graded daily homework or project progress reports. Students could also see theprogression of their mastery of concepts if they could reflect on what they didn’t know threemonths ago or a year ago, but when they get a poor exam score they are more apt to feeldiscouraged. It is not to say that there haven’t been attempts to enhance intrinsic motivation withgreat success. Particularly pedagogies that allow students to contextualize learning have beensuccessful. This includes project based learning, service
-program aggregate response report to Carnegie Mellon University. The response rate forsummer 2015 respondents from Carnegie Mellon University was 70.7%. Responses reflect self-reported learning gains for each construct andwere measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from very large gain (5) to no gain or very small gain (1).2.2 Efforts to build a communications program for summer undergraduate researchers throughbroad stakeholder collaborationIn 2010, the American Society for Engineering Education issued two reports on the future ofscholarly and systematic innovation in the discipline. Among their recommendations for success,ASEE urged those engaged in new pedagogies to be sure to gain broad, collaborativeparticipation among stakeholders
benefits to working together, as86% preferred working on a simulation with a partner; of these 56 students, 63% said thatdiscussions should be encouraged. However, the nature of their discussions was not analyzed todetermine the depth of conversations that occurred. The interactive mode requires studentsworking together equally, discussing the constructive portion of the activity. Students’reflections could provide information on their discussions, but very few students responded tothese questions on the survey. In the future, conversations should be monitored to ensure thatthey are constructive, possibly revising the discussion prompts as needed.The low number of written responses for the reflection question may indicate that students wererunning
currently working with Dr. Stolk on an NSF-supported project to understand students’ motivational attitudes in a variety of educational environments with the goal of improving learning opportunities for students and equipping faculty with the knowledge and skills necessary to create such opportunities. One of the founding faculty at Olin College, Dr. Zastavker has been engaged in development and implementation of project-based experiences in fields ranging from sci- ence to engineering and design to social sciences (e.g., Critical Reflective Writing; Teaching and Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering, etc.) All of these activities share a common goal of creating curricular and pedagogical structures as well
and focused motivational strategies [10]. These validated instructionaltheories and their assessment techniques offer a means to frame this project in the broadercontext of the student experience in University of Virginia, while delving more deeply into theclassroom setting.2.1 Background: Course Context The course that is the object of study at University of Virginia is a non-technical, introductorycourse, required for graduation by all undergraduate engineers. The course’s learning objectivesinclude, “To be true professionals, engineers need to have a sense of how people design andinvent technology, how intentions reflect the needs and wishes of a society, and how inventionsdiffuse through a culture. Without a thoughtful sense of
various stakeholders’ views of the field’s nature and competencies it requires?2) To what extent do these models reflect Tufte’s principles of effective visual communication?Literature ReviewStakeholders who create competency models choose a means of visual communication overtextual communication. In this section, we will discuss possible reasons for and benefits of thesechoices define and explore visual communication,Visual CommunicationVisual communication models are derived from basic linear communication models posed byAristotle (speaker, message, listener) and Lasswell [4] as shown in Figure 1.Figure 1. Basic communication model [5]Lasswell’s linear model reads as “Who says what in which channel to whom with what effect?”This basic model
mechanisms.”The result, Hatt concludes, has direct implications for diversity and inclusion in that “whitenessand smartness get reproduced” [6, p. 1143].For the aspiring engineer, being classified as intelligent based on achievement scores, or smartbased on informal classroom criteria, affords the label’s recipient certain privileges andopportunities, in the form of things like admission into engineering programs, scholarships,internship opportunities, or potential employment after graduation. Because of this, it is vital thatengineering educators be aware of the idea of smartness as a construct that is distinct from, yetrelated to, intelligence, so that they can begin to 1) reflect on their own beliefs about therelationship between smartness and
faculty or vice versa. We decided that it was mostimportant to have motivated and engaging faculty members for the course; on the other hand, webelieved that every faculty member can relate their area of expertise to the Cyber World. Hence,after forming our instructor-team, we sat down to find overlaps between their areas of expertiseand cyber issues. This resulted in a lecture series of 8 topics developed and delivered by facultyfrom four colleges: the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Business, the TagliatelaCollege of Engineering, and the Henry C. Lee College of Criminal Justice and ForensicScience.Each of the topics is summarized below and reflects the instructor’s expertise under the umbrellaof Cyber World (topics are in order):1
, each section spends two weeks in a particular laboratory,and moves on to the next one. All sections then have a one-week common group meeting for reflection andgeneral exposure to school-wide programs (advising, major declarations, student programs, etc.). In the secondrotation, each section spends one week in a particular laboratory. The semester ends with another commongroup meeting for overall feedback, and interdisciplinary activity involving all programs.The rotation-based course includes a number of targeted modules in each section to address the above goalscollectively. Each module is described below.Computer Science and Information Technology: Mainly based on Code.org’s Computer Science Principles(CSP), and the background story on
corresponding formula: 𝑒𝜋 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑏𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑅𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = (2) 1+𝑒 𝜋This formula is then used to calculate the probability of retention and used to make inferencesabout students in engineering at out University across the entire range of possibilities. Theprobability relationship generated by these models reflects the idea that having a higher GPA atthe end of the first year is associated with having a higher probability of being retained. Itrepresents the affiliation between retention and GPA and is not a direct correlation. The resultsalso reveal that this relationship is enhanced for
thoughts about the newteaching dynamics and all of them only cover the experience of teaching one course. The present exploratory paper proposes to add to the previous team-teaching literature inconstruction higher education by providing reflections and lessons learned from two faculty fromthe School of Construction Management Technology at Purdue University, who have teamtaught together two courses and two modules in another two courses focusing on design andconstruction integration topics during Fall of 2019. Previous studies focused on team teaching ofone module or one course, so the authors will provide a unique point of view by sharingexperiences of teaching team across multiple courses during one semester. The paper uses a
change their beliefs and instructional practices?This paper explores this question and offers practical suggestions for promoting peer learningamong faculty.Theoretical frameworkMuch research has supported the theory that people learn through active participation incommunities of practice [6]. Communities of practice are “groups of people informally boundtogether by shared expertise and passion for a joint enterprise” [7]. In these communities,participants learn new skills socially in a process guided by peers and mentors and situatedwithin the context where the skills are used. The community discusses and reflects together, asbeginners grow into full participants. Faculty, within the same department or across departmentsand institutions
colleagues. The role and importance ofthese complex factors are apparent in panelists responses. Individual responses to each of theseeded questions are provided followed by a summative and reflective discussion edited by allpanelists. 1. Did you encounter a period in your career where you experienced reduced satisfaction with your work situation? What were the strategies you employed to move beyond this period and self-author the next phase of your career?Panelist 1: Yes, I reached a point as a research active faculty who had just achieved fullprofessor where I realized that years of hard work would sometimes net a low number ofcitations of the published work. We motivated the research with ideas of how this knowledgecould impact and
were then asked to reflect on the how well the information was communicated andwhere gaps occurred in their understanding of how to replicate the original experiment. Studentsfrom both groups were assessed based their clarity and ability to reproduce results.Background:This study takes an interdisciplinary and cross institutional approach to achieving learningoutcomes and reinforcing the importance of professional communication in survey styleundergraduate Introduction to Biomaterials courses. The Biomaterials courses each cover a rangeof selected topics including an extended review of polymeric biomaterials starting withfundamental concepts surrounding polymer material properties such as viscoelasticity; a detailedanalysis of metallic alloys
, faculty can encounter difficulty ensuring individualgrades reflect the quantity and value of individual work and not just the collective grade of thegroup. This paper outlines the various steps the mechanical engineering faculty took to provide amore standardized, objective, fair grading process in the capstone course. These steps includeuse of a non-numeric rubric for grading briefings, graded peer reviews, a more objective rubricfor grading written documents, and the use of course directors to standardize the grading process.Introduction The mechanical engineering curriculum at the United States Military Academy (USMA)includes a capstone design project as a culminating experience that draws on fundamentalengineering concepts students have
metacognitive skills by students who engage in anopen-ended team-based design project.This study explores how a group of engineering students exercised their self-management ofcognition, through the way these students planned, evaluated, and regulated their cognitiveactivities, during the design process to build an engineering artifact. Using Paris and Winograd’slens of self-management of cognition, two research questions were constructed to guide thisinstrumental case study. They were: 1. How did individual members of the team execute their meta-cognitive ability as reflected in the way they plan, regulate, and evaluate any task they encounter throughout the project time? 2. How did the way they plan, regulate
learner. ToRogers, experiential learning is equivalent to personal change and growth. Rogers believed thatall human beings have a natural propensity to learn; the role of the teacher is to facilitate suchlearning. Page 11.12.5Both Rogers and Knowles posit that learning is growth or development of self. This type oflearning theory, called humanism is concerned with learner’s self-direction, inner motivation,self-reflection, personal growth, creativity, and autonomy. Other proponents of humanism in-clude Abraham Maslow, John Dewey, and Steven Covey. In addition to humanism, the work-shop also made extensive use of teams and community learning
whichhave a designated laboratory time. Anecdotal evidence of the activities indicates that students wereengaged and enjoyed the active learning activities. Student reflections show that students not onlyachieved individual learning outcomes—such as analyze thermal system components, design andoptimize thermal systems, etc.—but they synthesized them into their project and performed anevaluation, demonstrating they achieved the highest domain in terms of cognitive learning.Background and IntroductionThermal system design courses tend to be senior level mechanical engineering courses—either re-quired or as a technical elective—designed to incorporate several aspects of thermodynamics, heattransfer, and fluid dynamics into a single course having an
that participants would work on developing. Several guest speakers andprofessional coaches helped us during the professional and curriculum development activities.We are currently working on developing follow-up plans during the academic year where pre-service teachers will implement classroom activities under in-service teachers’ supervision andthese activities will be used during high school visits to the campus.In this paper, we will give the details about the RET Site’s management and discuss ourexperiences from lessons learned during the first year. Weekly survey results will be analyzedand interpreted. Reflections from participants, faculty, and undergraduate students will bepresented. External evaluation scheme will be introduced and
students, interviewsare central to providing the context-specific information needed for robust survey development.Therefore, we are using a quasi-longitudinal approach and we are interviewing Appalachian highschools students for a current perspective, Appalachian college students for a recent reflection,and working engineering professionals in Appalachia for a longer-term reflection. This paperfocuses on the development and pilot testing of semi-structured interview protocols for eachparticipant type.Preliminary findings from pilot testing support the protocol’s ability to provide meaningfulinformation across multiple frameworks. Initial findings from a priori coding of the frameworkconstructs suggest that influences specific to Appalachian
majority ofengineering students in the 2000-2002 study were Active, Sensing, Visual, and Sequentiallearners, according to the Felder Learning Styles Model3, 4. The model focuses on aspects oflearning styles significant in engineering education. Its associated psychometric instrument, theIndex of Learning Styles5, assesses four modalities: Processing (Active/Reflective), Perception(Sensing/Intuitive), Input (Visual/Verbal), and Understanding (Sequential/Global). The modelprovides insight into how teaching strategies can be modified to broaden their appeal to a largercross-section of the student population. To increase the support for learners with differentindividual preferences, Felder advocates a multi-style approach to science and
soft skills. There are many forms of experiential learning including co-operative education andinternships, lab experiences, project based coursework, field trips and service-learning. Theconcept of service learning has been interpreted in many different ways ranging from a singlecollege course where the students are required to spend one afternoon doing community service(i.e., picking up trash in the neighborhood, giving blood, etc.) to multi-year, service projects thatare fully integrated into the curriculum and include opportunities for reflection and interactionwith the organization and/or people being served. The former extreme provides limitededucational benefits, but is very easy to implement. The latter extreme has
study’s purpose was to teaseout the values and ethical positioning that engineers apply moment to moment during their work.Engineering, like all professional work, reflects an intricate interplay of social forces, economicforces, legal constraints, technological demands, and organizational cultures1. Any discussionabout ethics on the job is complex, unwieldy, and may resist even the best attempts atcategorization or standardization.As part of our mixed-method, multi-year study of practicing engineers, we collected evidenceregarding how ethics were enacted, enforced, or observed on the job. We asked engineers aboutthe importance of engineering ethics, if ethical issues were encountered on the job, and wherethey learned about engineering ethics