development to come together moreregularly, to form more cross-program and cross-discipline collaborations and be increasinglyreflective of the work that we do with local and global partners. We have noticed that thisthoughtful reflection has begun to transform our mindset as we have prioritized the importanceof sustainable benefit to communities. That mindset change is exemplified in our vocabulary –the words we use to honestly describe our efforts to others or ourselves. Specifically, the wordsthat describe the attitudes we bring, the relationships we form, how we work together, theoutcomes we experience and finally, the resultant feelings of the community, have allexperienced a shift from left to right in Figure 1.When the focus of service
way to let students knowabout upcoming activities and offer a way to get in touch with us, the mentors. This site is knownas the BSC CyberCenter, and has been entirely designed and developed by the mentors.At this point, the site has grown to include all of these functionalities and more. We continuallyupdate the site to reflect the activities that are coming up soon, and we also use the site as a wayfor students to register for our events. The CyberCenter includes registration/accountfunctionality, so that students who register for the site can receive regular email updates aboutupcoming events and activities. Additionally, members of the site are allowed to register for allof our events before the general registration is opened.In addition
the uncertainty of divergent problems byconstructing multiple problem spaces and then engaging in reflective practice or reflectiveconversation as they interpret and evaluate alternatives. These metacognitive strategies enableengineers to deal with uncertainty by continuously engaging in acts of self-evaluation, self-monitoring and reflection as they work through the engineering design process.10, 13 The use of acollaborative environment has been found to help engineers reduce and manage uncertainty.10, 14Shin and his colleagues14 explain that working in teams allows engineers to reduce ambiguity bydistributing the knowledge and skills and collectively making decisions. The ability to logicallyand persuasively argue for or against a decision
a responsive teaching approach looks like in engineering and how teachers might enter intothis approach. Our study is also intended to highlight some of the challenges that teachers face inresponsive teaching in engineering.In this research study we analyze interviews with six elementary teachers who had at least twoyears of experience with Novel Engineering, an approach to teaching engineering designdeveloped at Tufts University that uses narrative texts as the basis for design problems.14 In thesesemi-structured interviews we discussed the implementation of Novel Engineering in theirclassroom and showed them a short video of some of their students working on the project. Weasked teachers to reflect on these students’ work, drawing on the
theoryduring the special session to support their reflection of their experience towards earning a PhD. Identity-trajectory was also used to help frame the analogy for the special session to support the analysis of theparticipant maps as well. Academic identity-trajectory consists of three major strands: intellectual,network, and institutional3,4. The intellectual strand refers to how a student becomes part of andcontributes to their overall academic field3. In this study, the intellectual element explores the role of theoverall disciplinary field with respect to the PhD process. The institutional strand refers to the morespecific elements of the student’s department or university3. In this study, the institutional elements willbe represented by
reflect the recommended timeframefor curriculum delivery.Data screening was conducted based on recommendations from Tabachnick and Fidell45 formultivariate statistics including: inspecting univariate descriptive statistics, evaluating anddealing with missing data, considering linearity and homoscedasticity, identifying and dealingwith multivariate outliers, and evaluating for multicollinearity. In dealing with missing data,cases were retained for listwise completion at the subscale level because each survey waspresented as its own page. This led to a greater number of students having completed theEngineering Design Self-Efficacy instrument (see Table 1) and a varying number of studentsbeing included in each statistical test. (We have taken care
Conceptualization) and two transforming experiences (ReflectiveObservation and Active Experimentation). In this model, these four experiences produce a four-stage cycle of learning where concrete experiences are reflected upon, and these reflections areintegrated and distilled into abstract concepts which provide the foundation for actions that canbe actively tested and which, in turn, create new concrete experiences. David Kolb’s work onexperiential learning has shown that “experiential learning is a process of constructingknowledge that involves a creative tension among the four learning modes” (10, p. 298).As Sakofs notes: Broadly defined, experiential education is a philosophical orientation toward teaching and learning that values and
University, an HBCU, where participating studentsexperienced higher scores and more positive experiences. In another engineering study at Memphis State University, Drouin (1992) suggested thatundergraduate engineering programs have been criticized for not producing engineers who canthink critically23. Rote memorization, perhaps useful in some educational environments, can beharmful in many work environments, particularly technical fields where skills such asunderstanding, comprehension, and application are critical to the success of the organization(Drouin, 1992). Unfortunately, the lecture-homework routine in an engineering curriculumleaves little to no time for reflection, critical and creative thinking, and association. While the
Paper ID #12366Student Reflection, Self-Assessment and Categorization of Errors on ExamQuestions as a Tool to Guide Self-Repair and Profile Student Strengths andWeaknesses in a CourseDr. David Benson, Arizona State University Dr. David Benson is a Senior Lecturer with the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University. Dr. Benson develops and teaches classes in ”Introduction to Engineering” and project-based classes such as EPICS and Global Engineering.Dr. Haolin Zhu, Arizona State University Haolin Zhu is a faculty lecturer in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State Univer- sity. She
Paper ID #28593Experiences, Issues and Reflections of School-Enterprise Joint Trainingin Chinese Mainland under the Vision of PETOE Strategy: An EmpiricalStudy Based on Small-N CasesDr. Hang Zhang, Beihang University Hang Zhang is a Ph.D. student in Beihang University, Beijing, China. Hang Zhang also works as a lecturer in University For Science & Technology Beijing. She received her B.S. in English Linguistics from Tian- jin Foreign Studies University in 2002, and M.S. in Higher Education from Guangxi Normal University in 2009. She studied as a visiting scholar in School of Education, Indiana University Bloomington,USA
Session 1330 Bringing First-year Engineering Students to Reflect on their Learning Strategies Noël Boutin, Richard Thibault, André Clavet, Brahim Hadjou, Jean-Marie Dirand, François Michaud, Daniel Dalle, Gérard Lachiver, Département de génie électrique et de génie informatique Faculté de génie Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada J1K 2R1AbstractThis paper reports on a qualitative appraisal of the ability of first-year engineering students toengage
models. Thispaper addresses the process followed by the NCEES to make these modifications. It describesthe history, the lessons learned as perceived by the authors, and the next steps forimplementation of the new educational standards. It also includes the experiences, observations,reflections, and opinions of the authors: four individuals who participated in the process ofchanging the NCEES models.IntroductionThe practice of engineering is regulated through licensure in all 50 states, the District ofColumbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Each of these 54 jurisdictions has itsown statutes and rules that establish licensure requirements to practice engineering(qualifications) and how that practice is conducted (procedures and
proposed change and its features. The second “H” is for heart in that some ofthose who understand will commit to supporting the change. The second “A” represents actionmeaning that some of the committed will act to effect the proposed change.Test-Drive TerminologyThe strategy and tactics employed to achieve a goal or vision should include sensitivity to howthe various stakeholders might respond to the language used to describe the change. Words thatseem appropriate to change leaders may be misunderstood or even viewed negatively by others.This is exactly what happened early in Raise the Bar effort and the subsequent desire to findacceptable terminology led to increased emphasis on using the term BOK. Reflect on MarkTwain’s thought, “The difference
. civil engineering community: faculty development, integration of the civil engineering curriculum, practitioner involvement in education, and the professional degree.1The fourth of these issue areas—the professional degree—reflected a growing consensus that thetraditional four-year baccalaureate degree was becoming increasingly inadequate as formalacademic preparation for the professional practice of civil engineering. In October 1998, the callfor action issued at the CEEC ’95 resulted in the passage of ASCE Policy Statement 465—Academic Prerequisites for Licensure and Professional Practice. The initial version of thispolicy stated that the Society “supports the concept of the master’s degree as the FirstProfessional Degree
) publication of several strategic vision documents thatcalled for future engineers to develop certain knowledge, skills, and attitudes that had not beenincluded in BOK1. As a result, a second edition of the Civil Engineering BOK was initiated inOctober 2005 and published in February 2008. The Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge for the Page 25.1330.721st Century, Second Edition,10 (abbreviated BOK2) incorporates two particularly substantivechanges from the first edition: • The number of outcomes was increased from 15 to 24. To some extent, this increase reflects the BOK2 authors’ attempt to enhance clarity and specificity, rather than to
experience should demonstrate to thelicensing jurisdiction or other reviewing authorities the capacity of the engineering intern toreview the applications of engineering principles by others and to assume responsibility forengineering work of a professional character at a level that will protect the public health, safetyand welfare. The EI’s experience in attaining a particular experiential outcome may not, in itself,reflect progressive experience. However, attainment of the ensemble of fifteen experientialoutcomes must demonstrate progressive experience.Responsibilities of the Engineer InternThe fulfillment and demonstration of attainment of the experiential outcomes is the responsibilityof the EI. Throughout various work environments and project
accredited since 1936) and an MS in EnvironmentalEngineering (accredited since 2003). The BSCE will be the focus of this paper.Historically the program outcomes for the BSCE reproduced (verbatim) ABET criterion 3a-k. In2002 the outcomes were restated with increased specificity to civil engineering; three additionaloutcomes were added to reflect then-current civil engineering basic level program criteria. Alloutcomes were written in the style of ABET “EC 2000.” In 2010, following the release of theBOK2 report in 2008, a comprehensive review of the BSCE curriculum was conducted—with aparticular emphasis on establishing student learning outcomes throughout the curriculum.Course-by-course student learning outcomes were developed and stated in a format
traditional four-year baccalaureate degree.4 Consequently,Policy 465 specifies that the prerequisites for licensure should be (1) a baccalaureate degree incivil engineering, (2) a master’s degree or approximately 30 graduate or upper-levelundergraduate credits, and (3) appropriate progressive, structured engineering experience.ASCE is currently attempting to influence state laws to reflect the increased educationalrequirement for licensure. In 2006, with ASCE’s strong support, the National Council ofExaminers for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) modified its Model Law and Model Rulespertaining to engineering licensure.5 The revised Model Law and Rules state that admission tothe engineering licensing exam will require an accredited bachelor’s degree
students’perception of engineering as especially important in biomedical engineering because it is both heavilyinterdisciplinary and heavily human focused [9,10]. In biomedical engineering, content traditionallyseen as mechanical, electrical, and chemical engineering is merged into novel curricula that are human-focused, creating conditions where biomedical engineering students may develop a differentunderstanding than students from other engineering majors.The purpose of this paper is a preliminary analysis of students’ reflections on the epistemologicalboundaries of engineering. We want to understand the boundaries that students establish regardingengineering and the way in which they articulate those boundaries. As an initial step towards that goal
develop a reflexiveapproach to their work. This has been done in the context of project-based, design courses,involving both individual and group work in the disciplines of mechanical and chemicalengineering. We conclude that student attitudes clearly evidenced the need for engineering staffto model reflective practice and place regular emphasis on its value as a professional learningtool. Exercises in reflective thinking are most effective if integrated into other more ‘traditional’engineering tasks rather than being set as ‘stand alone’ tasks. We argue that the best way tomake expert knowledge accessible to non-experts is through getting the experts to reflect on theirsuccesses and failures.IntroductionEngineers and engineering students have
integrate entrepreneurial minded learning within theundergraduate curriculum. With funding from the Kern Family Foundation, the goals of thiswork are not only to better equip students to meet the demands of the modern marketplace butalso to empower students to tell the story of their growth into entrepreneurially mindedengineers. In order to tell this story, students engage in a portfolio process grounded in evidenceand reflection. The structure of this story-centric curricular framework consists of a first-yearlauncher course where foundational topics such as design thinking, reflection, folio thinking, andentrepreneurial mindset are introduced. At the other end of the framework is a unique coursecalled The Art of Telling Your Story. In this upper
sources included files ofstudent designs with embedded analysis and electronic notes taken by the students. The presenceof explanatory behaviors was used to evaluate alignment of students’ decisions in selecting anidea for further design and testing. Data from 44 high school students and 132 design solutionswere analyzed. Results show that students became increasingly more reflective with eachsubsequent design. In addition, students were more likely to cite data in their reflectiveexplanations. Implications from these results are discussed as they pertain to educationalsuggestions.Keywords: engineering design, high school, tradeoffs, experimentation, computer-aided design.IntroductionOur understanding of what K-12 students learn from engineering
contribute to engineering education?” This is an important practical question to address. In order to have a better understanding of the related issues, we tried an experiment. During Fall 2013, with collaboration between our engineering college and a European Page 24.679.3university, a set of seminars with the title of “Critical Reflections on Engineering, Engineering Pedagogy and Philosophy” were conducted. Engineering faculty, graduate, and undergraduate students attended the seminars. In addition, faculty from Physics
Self Awareness Jasmine Smith, David J. Therriault, Jeremy A. M. Waisome Department of Engineering Education, University of Florida School of Human development and Organizational Studies in Education, University of FloridaPurpose: Self-awareness is an umbrella term that encompasses concepts including self-reflection, introspection, insight, self-regulation, and self-efficacy, among others. These termsare independent of each other but work together to contribute to the overall self-awareness of anindividual. For a graduate student researcher, their self-awareness level can influence how theyengage with their discipline and research
Paper ID #23608Developing Self-awareness in Learning Practices: Designing and Implement-ing a Survival Tool for Freshmen in EngineeringNeelam Prabhu Gaunkar, Iowa State UniversityDr. Mani Mina, Iowa State University Mani Mina is with the department of Industrial Design and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Iowa State University. He has been working on better understanding of students’ learning and aspects of tech- nological and engineering philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the
learning, the overall educative environment should not only includeguidance through specific material or actions/experiences to own the material, but additionallystudents should immerse into self-knowledge. Metacognition has been described as reflection aboutactions1. It has also been defined by connection prior knowledge with the learning of a new task andwhat are the skills required to do so2. Reflection exercises include introspection on your ownknowledge, ability, motivation by answering specific questions3. The idea of “writing to learn” hasbeen investigated in education courses4, and preliminary findings suggest that there may be nochange in student success in the course in which it is implemented, but that students develop anappreciation
student with tools that will foster the development of global engineers.Students were required to not only prepare traditional designs and write reflections inessay format about the impact of their designs. The reflections provided rich data for thisstudy. The data gathered offers a glimpse of the characteristics of a global engineer andprovides an insight into the role that engineering educators can play in creating engineerswho are flexible, adaptable, resilient and ultimately lifelong learners. A proposedmethod that provides an opportunity to reflect on integration of liberal arts courses isoffered. This method can be utilized in the classroom to ensure that engineeringeducators are molding a global engineer