visualizations of teams’ design process across several metrics.More specifically, actions were clustered into three categories: construction, optimization, andnumerical analysis. Design teams’ actions were further contextualized in terms their designtimeline and the sites they explored.Results from design team analytics have implications not only for teams’ design process, butmay be re-deployed as reflection tools for students’ or progress indicators for teachers or designmentors.In the next section the paper reviews research in learning analytics and visualization for dataanalysis. Following this, the context of the study and design challenge are outlined. Energy3D isdiscussed briefly before reviewing the data collected and participants for the study
• InterdependenceKey Processes: • Iterative reflection• Developing a shared understanding (transactive memory) • systematic consideration of - who knows what (compilational) team performance & - who does what (compositional) participation in related - how things get done (taskwork) adaptation to team goals & - how interactions occur among the team (teamwork) processes• Conflict Management • Clear understanding of team• Team Learning (e.g., reflection
Definition X X 4: Design X X X 5: Decision Making X X X X X 6: Prototype, Test, X X X X Iterate 7: Results, X X X Conclusions 8: Reflection X X Table 1: Application of Engineering Methods Outcome Curriculum MapExisting core courses were not required to map to a minimum number of proficiencies, orallocate a certain percentage of earned points to assessment of this outcome. Instead, the goalwas to
course in industrial and systems engineering. DTSDcurriculum includes a series of idea generation exercises that the students completed individuallyor in teams. In each divergent thinking exercise, students were asked to generate multiple ideas fora given “problem” under a strict time constraint. After each exercise, a facilitated reflection sessionallowed for students to learn the idea generation approaches that were used by their peers. Weexamined the effectiveness of the DTSD module using two measures: (1) changes in self-perceptions of creative ability and mindsets and (2) reflections on the influence of DTSD training.Questionnaires containing the Short Scale of Creative Self and Creative and Fixed Mindsetmeasures were administered before
so by a chair following poor teaching evaluations; this typicallydoes not make them more ready to change, however. Our setting, because of the five-year effortto engage all faculty in better meeting diverse student needs, provided an opportunity toinvestigate both groups of faculty. Our study reports on the first four years of the project.The departmental change effort included several strategies, guided by an engineering educationresearcher, to bring about change: threading design challenges through core chemicalengineering courses; switching from bleed-all-over-it, long technical reports to cycles of drafts,peer and instructor feedback, and revision and reflection; and developing ways to assess andsupport professional skills like teamwork
by the instructor. The evaluation may, or may not, includeproviding formative feedback on the students’ solutions. Instructor • Creates assessment acitivities and guides • Monitors quality of assessment • Tracks problem-solving competency development of students Assessor Student • Evaluates student work by following the • Takes the tests assessment guide • Self-asesses own solution errors before • communicates errors on student viewing the grade or ideal solution solution formatively • Reviews assessor feedback, reflects and
, resulted in astatewide survey for distribution at all coalition campuses in Fall 2019.Significant issues with deployment of the survey resulted in response rate that was below ouracceptable threshold for inferential statistical analysis, both for overall number of completeresponses (n = 542) and for distribution of responses along demographic characteristics such asinstitutional affiliation, major, and racial/ethnic identity. Descriptive analysis of relevant variablesfrom the survey supports that the themes identified in the focus groups are all reflected in thesurvey responses. The survey will be re-administered in Fall 2020 with new distributionguidelines to obtain the desired response rate.Although we cannot quantify the extent to which the
, promoting bilingualism and biliteracy, grade-level achievement, and multicultural competence for all students [5]. Often teachers findthemselves hitting a barrier in STEM courses when it comes to incorporating dual languagepractices. There are limited opportunities for STEM content teachers and English as a SecondLanguage (ESL) teachers to collaborate, particularly because STEM content teachers may seethemselves providing only STEM content while dismissing any language-related responsibilities[6].In recent years, dual language programs have expanded in the United States reflecting a betterunderstanding of the connection between language and content knowledge [7]. Public schoolshave increasingly begun offering programs that highlight the importance
questions were typically conceptually-based and required some reflection on thematerial presented before. Students read the question and then individually responded to it. Afterresponses were collected the instructor presented the histogram of responses and followed withsome discussion, often getting students to explain their rationale for particular answers. In arelatively small number of cases, students answered individually, then engaged in peerdiscussion, and then answered again before there was any general discussion. In almost allcases, this led to a higher percentage of correct answers. Whatever discussion format was used,the instructor summarized what was right and wrong with each answer in an attempt to leave thecorrect message with the
AC 2008-335: IDENTIFYING ROLES AND BEHAVIORS OF INFORMALLEADERS ON STUDENT DESIGN TEAMSDiane Zemke, Gonzaga University Diane Zemke is a PhD candidate at Gonzaga University in Leadership Studies. Her interests include small group dynamics, reflective practices, learning, and qualitative methods. She has co-authored papers on use of small teams in design engineering.Steven Zemke, Gonzaga University Steven Zemke is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Gonzaga University. His primary responsibilities are Design courses and assessment. His research interests include effective learning environments and design teaching and learning. Prior to teaching he was a design engineer and
Freewritingtechnique, students were instructed to write continuously for five to ten minutes and at the end ofthe allotted time, they were instructed to summarize what they had written so far. McGourty etal.12 point out that at present the outstanding issue is to develop rubrics and other assessmentmeasures that will allow cross-institutional evaluation of reflective portfolios and mention thatinvestigation of approaches to better score the concept maps and improve the understanding ofhow they should be used for outcome assessment is still ongoing.One other method used to measure design knowledge is the video recording of design teams,analyzing the activities performed by the students within the design teams and accordinglyevaluating them based on a
curriculum. Finally, ASCEstudent group activities can also be used to support civil engineering program accreditation,under both current and proposed criteria.IntroductionCivil engineering programs, and the policies and guidelines for their assessment, continue toevolve. The latest activities in these areas are reflected in the American Society of CivilEngineer’s (ASCE) publication Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge for the 21st Century[1], theNational Academy of Engineering (NAE) publication Educating the Engineer of 2020 –Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century[2], and the ABET, Inc. “PROPOSEDCriteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs”[3] . In fact, Bruce Seely writes in the NAE reportthat “Engineering education has been the subject
Learning Attributes of Surface Learning Learners relate ideas to previous Learners treat the course as unrelated bits knowledge and experience. of knowledge. Learners look for patterns and Learners memorize facts and carry out underlying principles. procedures routinely. Learners check evidence and relate it Learners find difficulty in making sense of to conclusions new ideas presented Learners examine logic and Learners see little value or meaning in argument cautiously and critically. either courses or tasks. Learners are aware of the Learners study without reflecting on either understanding that
allows for small group spaces to meet in ad hoc pairs or small groups for exercise and reflection (hotel next to a stream further discussion and bike/walking path) • time scheduled in the middle of the day for assimilation/reflection and unstructured discussion • reception to kick off the event on first evening • daily common meals (breakfast, lunch and dinner
Houston’s Mechanical Engineering department, include a partnership withthe university’s Writing Center in which consultants teach workshops and hold consultationswith teams and individual students in conjunction with specific undergraduate courses.6 Thisprogram reflects the partnership that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) began in1996 between its Aerospace Engineering faculty and communication instructors who taughtcommunication practicum in conjunction with specific courses.7 More recently, the partnershipsbegun in MIT’s ME department in 19908 and in Mississippi State University’s ECE departmentin 20049 have resulted in “multidimensional scoring rubrics” designed to provide comprehensivefeedback and help TA’s grade student lab
balanced between active and reflective learning as well as visualand verbal learning. They have a moderate preference for sensing, and a very strong preferencefor global learning. Prior to this course, they indicated that they agreed with Statement A. Afterthis course, they strongly agreed with this same statement. They agreed with Statement B in bothpre-course and post-course evaluation. Finally, they indicated neutrality on Statement C beforethe course but disagreed with it in post-course evaluation. Student X indicated that they believedpre-course that they would earn a “B” in the course but believed that they would earn a “C”post-course (but before the final exam). They earned a “C+” in the course.Case Study 2: Student Y is also well balanced
of two or three.5. Assignment - section assigns an open-ended activity to be performed by students to furthertheir understanding of the topics and enhance their problem-solving abilities. This activity isideally done during class time, but it can be completed by students outside of class time ifneeded.6. Results and Conclusions - the final section is where students will reflect on their learning byanswering questions and writing a short Conclusions paragraph.Table 1. Modules Developed and Deployed in Academic Year 2011-12Course Module Learning Objectives“Introduction 1. Translational a) Design an experiment to determine the Translational Kineticto Engineering Kinetic Energy Energy of an object moving in
interpersonal skills - Social outcomes, such as a longer-term civic engagement and greater tolerance - Learning outcomes, with higher self-efficacy and better preparation for open-ended questionsEyler and Giles4 present the structuring principles that frame a positive S-L experience. Of highimportance is the need to connect students to their peers, their community partners and theirmentors. Also paramount is the quality of the projects: they must be challenging without beingoverwhelming. Finally, the need for reflection concerning the experience and its context (i.e. anaffirmation that the messiness of community projects offers other paths to learn) must also beaddressed.In the SLICE program, most of the S-L projects, as
and the third room for tomatoes. Because northern climates do not provide sufficient light for plant growth, artificial lighting is also needed. We use high efficiency LED lights that make the rooms glow pink (Figure 3). Plants reflect green light, but they absorb light in the red and blue wavelengths of the visible spectrum. Thus, we can reduce energy use
institutional transformationinvolves multiple interventions which take into account (1) the effects of institutional policiesand practices; (2) campus climate, reflecting attitudes and behaviors that diminish women’sadvancement; and (3) knowledge and skills for success in teaching, research, and leadership.Because men are recognized as vital partners in achieving institutional transformation forgender equity, the ADVANCE FORWARD project deliberately cultivates alliances with menfaculty and administrators. The Campus Climate component of the project focuses upon the institutional andindividual responsibilities for working toward a gender diverse faculty and a supportive,inclusive, collegial environment, and tying institutional rewards to success
society. It consists entirely of closed questions, typically on a 7 point Likert scale.The other survey, known as the Civic Minded Graduate Reflection Prompt, assesses how theSLA experience has influenced students’ learning and development, and their attitudes towardstheir education and service learning. It also consists of closed questions.It should also be noted that the more recent respondents to these surveys have used a new surveymethodology to account for ‘response shift bias’ (Howard & Dailey, 1979)4, which basicallyasks them to take a survey, then immediately afterwards take it again. These surveys have helpedour institution tremendously when assessing the growth of these students with respect to servicelearning and civic
" experience replaced hands-on experience and time spent "tinkering" wasdevoted instead to playing video games. The explosive growth of the Internet in the '90s broughtinstant access to detailed (but not necessarily accurate) information on any topic with little or nocontemplation or reflection to provide broader perspective on its meaning. Taken as a whole, thetrends described above have resulted in a phenomenon referred to by Frand 1 as "the information-age mindset", characterized by broad substitution of "virtual reality" for "reality", unquestioningacceptance of computer-based information, and a preference for "doing" as opposed to"knowing".The traditional lecture/problem teaching approach that evolved in the latter half of the 20thCentury has
what we know today as the National Science Education Standards. Theintent of the Standards was to re-work science literacy principles and practices so they mirroredthe evolution of a technological, rather than an industrial society. The underlying principles thatcome from this collaborative initiative were that: Page 8.534.3 • Science is for all. 4 • Learning science is an active process. • School science reflects the intellectual and cultural traditions that characterize the practice of contemporary science
formation or creation of knowledge through experience. Anexperiential learning model consisting of a four-stage cycle was proposed by Kolb 9 based on thecontributions of the works of Dewey 10 and Piaget. 11 The premise of this model can be stated as:“the process of learning requires the resolution of conflicts between dialectically opposed modesof adaptation to the world.” 9 It can be seen that the experiential learning process is cyclic innature. At closer inspection this model is similar to the scientific method, as follows: concreteexperience = observe behavior or experiment, reflective observation = analysis or problemdefinition, abstract conceptualization = hypothesis, and active experimentation = testing
flexibility in understanding the concept and application of remote access laboratories. If alearning experience can be created in which the learner takes part in an event or events thatconnect with their understanding of relevant information, concepts or ideas (propositions), via anonline or remote interface, this can be seen to constitute a remote access laboratory.Barak11 derives four principles from behavioural, cognitive and social learning theory whichunderpin the effective design and use of ICT-based lab work, i.e.• “learning is contextual• learning is an active process• learning is a social process• reflective practice plays a central role in learning” (pp. 122-123).These principals are not discipline specific and have to
social media in comparisonto other in-person interactions. In response to this shift from the more traditional tendencies ofstudents, educators have been somewhat coerced into implementing Internet-based technologiesinto their course curriculum.Web logs (also known as blogs) are one of the emergent Web 2.0 technologies being used. Thisonline, computer-mediated communication tool (CMC) allows users to publish information inthe form of posts, comments and self-reflection. It is driven by user-generated content and isavailable in several formats. The type of information that may be exchanged in a blog rangesfrom text, pictures, hyperlinks, audio, video, images and other formats2. Although single userblogs seem more common in the past, recent
, manufacturing programs require constantattention by the institution to ensure adequate enrollments. High touch industries and programssuch as health care, tourism, culinary arts and hospitality are readily understood as careerpathways by the general public. Programs that offer the opportunities for creativity, such asarchitecture, graphic design and film studies, are also very popular. These programs often appealto a broad base of students, particularly as life-long career options. Although students areexposed to manufactured goods, comprehending the development of those goods is often elusiveor poorly understood. This is reflected in an impressive lack of understanding of the numerouscareer opportunities available in manufacturing. In addition
utilized throughout theyearlong course. In keeping with the National Research Council’s13synthesis of theresearch on K-12 engineering education research, we chose to focus on STEM-design Page 25.884.4challenges. This decision reflects our commitment both to apply relevant math andscience concepts and to enable students to engage in core engineering practices.By organizing units around STEM-design challenges, we are indicating that allchallenges will require students to design a product and purposefully apply relevant mathand science concepts. The outcome of this design work can vary according to theengineering domain being emphasized in each unit. For
credit hours, or approximately 48 equivalent courses. Conversion of 48 equivalentcourses to a traditional semester system suggests the curriculum is equivalent to 144 semesterhours. The curriculum for the department of civil engineering is depicted in Table 2.Evaluation of Current Curriculum vs BOK2 OutcomesThe current CE curriculum at RHIT was compared to the BOK2 outcomes using severalprocesses: • Qualitative reflection on course and curriculum content by faculty members to identify likely BOK2 compliance • Mapping of RHIT Program Outcomes to BOK2 outcomes and using the results of assessment from the RHIT Program Outcomes to estimate likely BOK2 compliance • Surveying a cross section of students to identify whether they
experimentation in problem solving (Standard 8, 9, 10).2Mathematics Instructional programs from prekindergarten through grade 12 should enable all students to— build new mathematical knowledge through problem solving; solve problems that arise in mathematics and in other contexts; apply and adapt a variety of appropriate strategies to solve problems; monitor and reflect on the process of mathematical problem solving (Standard 6).3Modeling The second commonality among the three areas is modeling. The science standards statethat all science subject matters focus on facts, concepts, principles, theories, and models. Thatmeans, science subjects, such as physical science, life