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
of knowledge in school andbeyond. Thus, teaching students self-regulatory skills in addition to subject-matter knowledge isone of the major goals of education. However, SRL is not well known and utilized by theEngineering and Technology education community for facilitating student learning.Self-regulated learners are purposive and goal-oriented, incorporating and applying a variety ofstrategies to optimize their academic performances. However, the application of self-regulationto learning is a complicated process involving not only the awareness and application of learningstrategies but also extensive reflection and self awareness. This paper describes the developmentof the instructional strategy and its implementation plan, which integrates
Logistics research projects, and begin communicating with mentors Orientation and Project Participants attend orientation workshop and prepare 1 W Definition research plans with their mentors Research and Library Literature review and library resource workshop with the 2** W Workshop Engineering Librarian Waste management and landfill design/construction 3 Continued Research S seminar with individual reflection
. Page 24.571.5 4Weekly Reflection PapersAll REU fellows submitted weekly reflection papers using VT’s course management software(Scholar) and reflected on their weekly research, social and cultural experiences. These paperswere due by 10:00 p.m. on Thursday every week. The author reviewed these papers beforemeeting with the REU fellows at Friday seminars and answered questions.YouTube VideosREU fellows were divided into teams at the orientation session and were assigned to createYouTube videos (2-3 min) to document their research/social/cultural experiences. A YouTubecompetition was held at the concluding ceremony on the last day of the program. As of summer2013, we have 7 YouTube videos of our
-time and as encountered. Theoreticalinformation is presented to support the understanding of knowledge as students apply inquiry-based learning. These modules are carefully designed to reflect traditional concepts but mademore exciting as students discover the need for the laws and principles. The paper documentssteps and challenges in implementation and presents formative and summative assessment datafor examining the effectiveness of the PBL approach.Introduction Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is teaching/learning approach which promotes criticalthinking utilizing real-life problems as the starting point. The practicality and relevance of theproblems serve as the motivation for solving them utilizing students as authentic investigators
andMechanics. Research expenditures in 2003 exceeded $15,000,000, reflecting the department’score strengths in materials, mechanics and nanotechnologies. The faculty is highlymultidisciplinary with degrees in mathematics, physics, chemistry, engineering science, andaerospace, civil, electrical, materials, and mechanical engineering. Consequently, faculty andstudent collaborations are widespread both within the College of Engineering and across the Page 10.766.1University (including the Colleges of Science, Earth and Mineral Science, Agriculture, andMedicine, the Materials Research Institute and the Huck Life Sciences Institute) – activities that
, identifying, understanding, andworking within the local forces of an institution is not without merit. A well-designed systemmust reflect the culture of the “user” or home institution. If it does not, the system cannot besuccessful over the long term.In this paper, we situate our design program relative to other US senior engineering designprograms, and then describe our experiences of working within departmental, institutional, andbroader dynamics to change the senior design programs at the University of Arizona fromdisciplinary to multidisciplinary and from separate to integrated. We then present somepreliminary data measuring progress towards integration and the effect of integration on thequality of the student educational experience and
Page 9.1013.2 “Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Education”formulate and analyze problems of varying complexity and to work individually or in teams toproduce innovative design solutions that reflect this genius for integration.The Basics of PDIThe PDI program was begun with the incoming class of the Fall 98. The institutional andadministrative infrastructure for the PDI program is a dual-degree program jointly offered by theSchool of Engineering and the School of Humanities and Social Sciences. Students satisfy therequirements for the Bachelor of Science in mechanical engineering and science
PBL are available in the literature. Forexample, Allen et al. [5] point out the need to acquaint the students with the learning resourcesavailable to them ahead of time and explicitly identify attributes for successful teamwork. Woodset al. [6] recommend that students be consciously involved in developing desired process skills.Students need to be made aware of the benefits of the course beyond factual knowledge. Theyneed to be informed about how their learning will occur so that they can develop themetacognitive ability to assess their own progress. Self-assessment results from reflecting onquestions such as, What am I going to do? How do I do it? Did it work? (See additionalrecommendations at the web site http://chemeng.mcmaster.ca, as well
the pre-institute. Thus, the teachers and studentswere given a considerable amount of time to work together within their teams to plan anddevelop their lessons. Each morning, the institute began with a group discussion of the previous day's "reflectionquestions." Each day participants were given several questions to ponder after the conclusion ofthe day's events and activities. Participants were asked to go home and keep track of theirreflections in a journal. The reflection questions were typically associated with informationpresented during that day's sessions. The intent of the reflection questions was to give teacherstime to digest information they had received during the day, and to reflect on how thatinformation might have relevance
Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”simulators. However, their approach is rather limited because: a) it requires that the user be quiteproficient in spreadsheet use, and b) it “.. does not allow [users] to study timing problems.”[3]. The above examples are simulations, while MagicBlocks is a gaming environment: thefunctionality that is derived from one or any construction of blocks reflects actual performanceof underlying hardware circuitry. Further, according to the first-hand experience of Singh [4],students who use simulations place too much confidence in the precision of the results, “notrealizing that they are only
done using student reflections recorded after completing MEAs. Students insections of the courses that used MEAs rated their knowledge and understanding of theseprofessional skills significantly higher than students in sections that did not use the MEAs. As aresult we suggest that engineering faculty seriously consider using MEAs as a tool to improveboth student learning and the attainment of a number of ABET outcomes in addition to providinga process for assessing that attainment. By combining pre- and post-concept inventories with theMEA implementation, faculty can better document learning gains, and thus have acomprehensive tool for ABET assessment. This should prove especially helpful in those areaswhere previous assessments may have shown
following objective common to all sectionsof ENGR 1620, Introduction to Engineering, be achieved? Objective #1: Introduce students to the real world of engineering and design Outcome #1: Understand and apply the structured approach used by engineers to solve open-ended design problems11Assessment and evaluation of student abilities to internalize and eventually “own” theengineering design process is done with a mixed methods approach. Improvement in definingproblems and designing solutions is tracked through performance on appropriate sections ofdocumentation deliverables and exam questions; qualitative evaluation of reflections on thechallenge and process in student engineering notebooks is used to validate
Appropriate Technology, Biotechnology, History of Modern Science, Religion &Science in Modern America, Scientific Revolution, Plants & People, Eco-UrbanFootprints and Exploring Electrical Technology (EET). Such variety is afforded by thefreedom instructors have to plan courses reflecting their own interests and expertise,while satisfying a common set of STW objectives. Over the years this author hasdeveloped and taught EET, a typical distribution of student disciplines has emerged asshown in Table 1. The classroom presence of students with certain major disciplines has Page 25.1255.3naturally led to developing particular illustrations, emphases and
such as expectedoutcomes, implementation strategy, assessment methods, and performance criteria. As a resultof that initial effort, six department goals were identified and adopted by the department faculty(Figure 1). The goals were then addressed by goal-based objectives to reflect the intentions of thedepartment and to coordinate the department’s goals with the then existing criteria of the TAC ofABET. The objectives were divided into two groups with problem solving, communications,technical knowledge, computer skills, business knowledge, professional attributes, and timemanagement objectives related to the development of students within the department as one set,and research and publications objectives related to the department’s
participation in postsecondary spaces. We willdefine disability and describe our choice to use both identity- and person-first language. We willdiscuss our choice to prioritize research that highlights disabled student voices.Our literature review will explore: which disabilities have been the focus of research in highereducation; problematic practices that require increased disabled student self-advocacy rather thansystemic changes; the reasons for students’ reluctance to use accommodations; the weaknesses ofthe accommodations approach; and suggestions for moving beyond accommodations. We willconclude by offering recommendations and reflections for researchers who want to researchdisabled students.The purpose of this paper is to provide a place to
shift towards renewable energy sources [1].This policy-driven shift necessitates a workforce adept in renewable energy integration.Consequently, a re-evaluation and subsequent update of engineering curricula and workforcedevelopment programs are imperative to align with these emerging demands [2]. However, anotable misalignment can be identified between current engineering curricula and the practicalneeds of the energy sector [3]. This discrepancy mainly arises from the lag in updatingeducational content to reflect rapidly evolving industry requirements [4]. Educators often findthemselves grappling with unclear guidelines on the factors influencing course redesign,leading to a slow renewal process, ineffective teaching strategies, and outdated
, andalso a component involving the ways the actual work done influences students’ perception oftheir preparation. § RQ1: How does participation in environmental engineering and science experiences outside of the classroom contribute to the ways students construct early career trajectories? § RQ2: How does participation in environmental engineering and science experiences outside of traditional classrooms influence students’ perception of their preparation to construct and participate in professional judgment processes?BackgroundOverview of the STEMcx Environmental Justice ExperienceThis data analyzed in this research reflects the experiences of one intern in the STEMcxEnvironmental Justice Internship. STEMcx is an
toincorporate the IDEO model of innovation, wherein projects were validated according to theirdesirability, feasibility, and viability. Desirability considers the users’ needs, where feasibilityand viability reflect the technical ability to develop a solution and marketability potential,respectively. Teams are expected to propose a single unmet clinical need at the conclusion ofCIP and validate it as a potential project according to IDEO model. Here we report on two yearsof our revised CIP, using data from pre- and post-program surveys. Surveys assessed studentexperience, confidence, and perceived necessity of interdisciplinary teaming, primaryethnographic research, and secondary research. Paired data from 28 students was available (14BME, 14 IMED
not inclusive to people of color, and overt racial incidents. Garcia et al. (2020)revised the model to shift away from a deficit perspective, recognizing the diverse forms ofcultural wealth these minoritized students bring to higher education. The model also emphasizesthe importance of higher education institutions in fostering an inclusive environment thatembraces and amplifies these unique racial and ethnic perspectives.For this study, this framework allowed us to elicit through interviews and explore throughthematic analysis how RDI-supported URM students reflected on various aspects of theirindividual development and their perceptions about the value of the RDI workshop. This studyaims to broaden the applicability of the existing model
diversity and equity, which is reflected in her publications, research, teaching, service, and mentoring. More at http://srl.tamu.edu and http://ieei.tamu.edu.Prof. Pauline Wade, Texas A&M University Pauline Wade was formerly the assistant director for the Craig & Galen Brown Engineering Honors and Grand Challenge Scholars programs. Previously, she was a tenured faculty member at the University of the Philippines, Cebu (UP), in the Department of CompuDr. Shawna Thomas, Texas A&M University Dr. Thomas is an Instructional Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at Texas A&M University. She is a member of the Engineering Education Faculty in the Institute for Engineering
student who may not otherwiseview themselves as an engineer—a curious person, an entrepreneur, a person with great ideasthat society needs, or a part of the university’s ecosystem—may be able to demonstrate theirpotential to themselves and to their community through their lived experiences viastory. Providing time for students to develop and tell their stories is a powerful way to validatethe vast experiences students bring with them to college. Likewise, faculty want to know theirstudents, and students want to know themselves. Our own work with story in this context wasinspired by the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) on Stories project starting in2020 and reflects our interest in instilling an entrepreneurial mindset in our
urban communities within the mid-Vancouver Islandregion.1.2 OverviewThis paper is the first in a series that chronicles the development and honing of the survey instrumentand the preliminary results, analyses and observations leading from it. The primary purpose of thispaper is to summarize the iterative process that was involved in creating the surveys. Subsequentpapers will provide detailed analyses of the survey results.The presentation of the development of the survey mirrors our iterative process, which moved frominitial development of a fourth-year survey, follow-up interviews, a reflection based on the responsesand literature, followed by a first-year survey, and follow-up interviews. While the primary objectivefor both the survey and
because in oursituation we typically had about four working DLMs so with eight teams, each could use theDLM for half of a 50 minute period. Second, the optimal DLM/person ratio is three to five per-sons because that’s how many that can comfortably sit around a DLM and still visualize the car-tridge, controls and digital read-outs. Third, there’s a pedagogical reason as this number giveseach person a task because if a team is to get operating values quickly it takes one person to ad-just flow rates on a rotameter, a second to read values from a display, and a third to record thosevalues. With four and five member teams, one can supervise while another can reflect on theprocess. Team member placements were based on convenience sampling to