many seconds) does it become possible to determine if a student will struggle. Asimple neural network is proposed which is used to jointly classify body language and predicttask performance. By modeling the input as both instances and sequences, a peak F Score of0.459 was obtained, after observing a student for just two seconds. Finally, an unsupervisedmethod yielded a model which could determine if a student would struggle after just 1 secondwith 59.9% accuracy.1 IntroductionIn this work, the role of machine learning for planning student intervention is investigated.Specifically, t his w ork a sks t wo q uestions: ( i) C an a s tudent’s s truggles b e p redicted basedon body language? (ii) How soon can these struggles be predicted
UniversitiesWIP: Implementation and Assessment of ProjectAbstract: This paper documents the effects of an additive manufacturing course on two sets ofstudents: (1) the undergraduates who took the course and (2) the middle and high school studentswho visited our labs. At the time of the conference, nine semesters of data (three years at threeschools) will have been collected, as well as data from the middle and high school students whovisited our labs. Overall, our research questions were: (1) what is the effect of this course on thecontent knowledge of (a) enrolled undergraduates and (b) middle and high school students? And(2) what is the effect of this course on the attitudes towards engineering and self-efficacy inengineering for (a) enrolled
community members who participatedin the workshop. Figure 2: (A) Artist and community member, Christy Robinson in the process of blowing a glass bubble. (B) High school art teacher Alicia English displaying her glass bubble.A survey for the A+E workshop was conducted with a key focus to ask the respondents thefollowing question. Q1. Did the A+E event increase your understanding of the science behind the training activity?This question has become a foundational question for the A+E outreach activities to self-assessour interactions with attendees. For the A+E one day workshop all of the respondents selected thattheir scientific knowledge was increased by the event.We recognize that the impact the A+E program
rejected, and only valid onescan be used in the second step (validity is discussedbelow). (a)In the second step, some of the active segments in thetopology are replaced (“populated”) by generic circuitelements (represented as boxes), as shown in Fig.1(b). The number so replaced in this “populatedtopology” is the desired number of nontrivial circuitelements in the circuit (i.e., branches in theterminology of network theory). The genericelements are all later replaced by specific circuit (b)elements, but shorts that remain will stay as shorts.The number of possibilities is now only the numberof active segments raised to the power of two, andthus still
, Coeur d'Alene, ID, October, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://search.proquest.com/docview/2193095035.[5] B. E. Hughes, W. J. Schell, and B. Tallman, "Development of Leadership Self-Efficacy: Comparing Engineers, Other STEM, and Non-STEM Majors," in FIE 2018 Conference Proceedings, San Jose, CA, October 2018.[6] W. J. Schell, E. H. Bryce, P. E. Brett Tallman, A. Emma, M. B. Romy, and B. K. Monika, "Exploring the Relationship Between Students’ Engineering Identity and Leadership Self-Efficacy," presented at the ASEE Annual Conference and Exhibition, Tampa, Florida, 2019/06/15, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/32817.[7] W. J. Schell and B. E. Hughes, "Are Engineers’ Leadership Attitudes
are compared to the theoretically calculatedvalues. This activity is designed to strengthen students’ knowledge through practical applicationof concepts studied during the first quarter of Statics, such as position, unit vectors, free bodydiagrams, and equilibrium of particles.The schematic in Figure 2(b) depicts a 3D rendering of the sample problem with dimensions.The students are tasked with determining a unit vector along the line of action of one of thecords. The potential solutions are chosen such that the answer can be surmised based on somebasic concepts: (1) unit vectors are of a unit length (i.e. u x2 + u y2 + u z2 = 1 ), (2) the positiveorientation of axes changes the sign of vector components, and (3) cords apply force in tension
, vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1207-1220, 2003. Brown, E. R., Smith, J. L., Thoman, D. B., Allen, J. & Muragishi, G. (2015). “From bench to bedside: A communal utility value intervention to enhance students’ science motivation,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 107, no. 4, pp. 1116-1135, Nov. 1, 2015. Cech, E.A. (2014). “Culture of Disengagement in Engineering Education?,” Science Technology Human Values. vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 42-72. 2014. Cheryan, S., Plaut, V. C., Handron, C. & Hudson, L. (2013). “The Stereotypical Computer Scientist: Gendered Media Representations as a Barrier to Inclusion for Women”, Sex Roles, vol. 69, pp. 58-71, June 22, 2013. Cheryan, S., Master, A. & Meltzoff, A. N. (2015
]. In this way, the materials designers work with—as well asthose we offer learners—might be (a) unalterable; (b) used functionally but unchanged; or (c)modified dramatically in use [9]. This post-humanist stance brings attentions to the relationshipsbetween humans and non-human artifacts [10]. This approach decenters humans inforegrounding the agency imbued in materials by their creation and form [11, 12]. Decenteringhumans may seem a strange approach to take, especially in a study that aims to understandhuman learning. This decentering is intentional and in service of developing keener focus oninteractional relationships themselves, not just between humans as is common in such studies,but also between materials (or other nonhumans) and
below 3 implies a negative attitude and above3 implies a positive attitude.The survey includes 20 questions regarding the usability of VOLTA software. The 20 questionscovered seven broad categories: A. Did students think the VOLTA is useful for their learning? (Learning environment) B. Did students find the software motivating? (Motivational value) C. Did students find the VOLTA easy to use? (Ease of use) D. Did students perceive the usefulness of various features of the VOLTA? (Perception of usefulness) E. Did students “buy into” the virtual laboratory environment? (Authenticity of virtual learning) F. What was the perceived quality of the VOLTA? (Quality assurance) G. What additional features or learning
undergraduate education and graduate research," in ASEE Annual Conf. and Expo., Chicago, IL, USA, June 18-21, 2006, pp. 11.1336.1- 11.1336.16.[4] M. Baxter, B. Byun, E. J. Coyle, T. Dang, T. Dwyer, I. Kim, C. H. Lee, R. Llewallyn, and N. Sephus, "On project-based learning through the vertically-integrated projects program," in Proceedings of the 41st Annual ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conf., Rapid City, SD, USA, Oct. 12-15, 2011.[5] E. J. Coyle, J. V. Krogmeier, R. T. Abler, A. Johnson, S. Marshall, and B. E. Gilchrist, "The vertically integrated projects (VIP) program: Leveraging faculty research interests to transform undergraduate STEM education," in Transforming Institutions: Undergraduate
IP core is developed for each component. The core is created from scratch. Itsconstruction follows the layered model in Figure 1(a) and is completed in a bottom-up fashion.In the gate layer, the circuits are constructed with small and medium sized logic components. Inthe RTL layer, the circuits are assembled to form a larger module. In the processor layer, themodule is augmented with additional decoding circuit and buffering registers to interface withthe system bus and to communicate with the processor. The three layers and their correspondingparts are depicted in Figure 1(b). In the OS layer, the software driver routines are derived toaccess the core. There are two basic architectures. The block diagram of an I/O IP core is shown in the
and the highly competitive nature of the application process we have attempted tocreate opportunities at the college as well. Mentors work with students to help shape andidentify project goals and to offer guidance and support in the students’ execution of the project.While not a requirement by any means, students are encouraged to choose projects that aremeaningful to them and that serve a purpose in their communities. It is probably not surprisingthen that projects have often involved utilizing renewable energy like the solar boat projects,building autonomous robots meant to disinfect a room, and utilizing sensors to gauge airpollution (Figure 1). (a) (b)Figure 1 – (a) Student
, Aug 2018.[10] R. Elliott, “Do students like the flipped classroom? an investigation of student reaction to a flipped undergraduate it course,” in IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2014, pp. 1–7.[11] Y. Hao, “Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 59, pp. 82–92, 2016.[12] B. Aydin and V. Demirer, “Are flipped classrooms less stressful and more successful? an experimental study on college students,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 19, Nov 2022.[13] V. C. H. Tong, Shaping higher education pedagogy with students in a consortium setting. UCL Press, 2018, pp. 3–14.[14] R. Romero Reveron
attended the Python seminars have been involved in quantum computingand AI research and using Python in daily basis. The majority of scholars maintained goodacademic performance demonstrated by a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Some students whose majors werenot CS also benefited from these efforts.We will keep conducting the activities to achieve the objectives. We will hold first-year CSseminars and Introduction to Python seminars with S-STEM scholar instructors in the fall semesterof this year, advise scholars involved in quantum computing and AI research, make impact to localhigh school students, support scholars in their personal, leadership and career development.References[1] C. Riegle-Crumb, B. King, and Y. Irizarry, “Does STEM stand out? Examining
throughout theprogram to enhance the knowledge and skills required for the teachers to fully benefit from theexperience. This includes but is not limited to refresher courses in math and science content,pedagogical workshops, engineering design activities, lab work, and curriculum writing. Inaddition to the summer experience, four workshops throughout the year provide continuoussupport and follow-up to ensure successful transformation of classroom practices. Theanticipated outcomes of the RET site program are as follows:1. Teacher Outcomes a. Greater knowledge of content aligned with research activities in their field b. Transformation of classroom practices resulting in more frequent STEM and engineering education teaching
and 5PM and staffed by 5 university staff and over sixty student staff.Methods and AnalysisParticipants in this study were recruited through purposive sampling at both sites. Participantswere incentives through a $25 virtual gift card upon completing an interview. At University A,participants were recruited throughout the 2021-22 academic year by researchers. After theinterviews, researchers asked participants if they recommended anyone else to interview wandsnow-ball sampling was also used as a recruitment technique. A total of eight student staff andtwo university staff were interviewed at university A with interviews ranging from 21 minutes tosixty minutes. At University B, students were also recruited through purposive and
trained to perform the tasks ofdistinguishing images along such abstract lines, so an initial “proof of concept” experiment wasrun, n=6. The experiment used novice subjects. All images in this experiment were Von Kármánvortex streets. Images were shown for 2.0 seconds each. The format of this investigation was asfollows: Pre-test Training Post-testGroup A Match Name with Feedback MatchGroup B Match View MatchTable 1: Proof-of-Concept Groups and TasksPre- and Post-tests contained all the images; training was performed with only half of the images.Both groups demonstrated accuracy was better in the post-test than pre-test (50% is chance
%graduated with at least a B- GPA, compared with 86% of the comparison students, and 97% ofthe non-comparison, non-RESP students. A chi-square test approached significance in favor ofmore B- and above GPAs among RESP students than the comparison students. Overall, wefound that high school preparation predicted STEM students’ graduation GPAs. Further,although RESP participation did not predict the cumulative GPAs of STEM majors, the programmay: 1) improve STEM degree persistence and 2) ensure that more of the program’s STEMgraduates achieve at least a B- cumulative graduation GPA. The number of RESP andcomparison students is relatively small, yet these findings nevertheless offer preliminaryevidence that the intervention may be effective at improving
) project. BUILD PODER isfunded by a 10-year grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).The overall mission ofBUILD PODER is to promote best practices in mentoring diverse populations. Faculty integratedthese concepts in mentoring, focused on their specific concerns including stigma and culturalbarriers of assistive technology [3] [4].2) Interdisciplinary curriculum developmentThe interdisciplinary project team created learning modules that cover multiple aspects involvedin developing assistive technology, including a) disability, relevant historical background, frommedical model to social model, policies, ADA; b) the basics of assistive technology, hardware,software, digital accessibility, and how emerging technology such as AI and VR can
proposed face to face faculty development component contained the following information: 1. Levels of Learning 2. Course Design. 3. Course Management. 4. Good Teaching. 5. New Teacher Forum. 6. Mini Learning Workshop. 7. Basics of educational research: a. Finding your hypothesis. b. Designing your experiment. c. Selecting your evaluation process. d. IRB and protection of subjects. e. Carrying out your plans. f. Homework: Identify an educational research topic.8. Activity: Discussion of Homework. Think Pair and Share to tune hypothesis, Large Group Discussion to identify potential next steps.9. How to engage students.10. Basics of accreditation. a. Accreditation
EEC 1752897). Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References 1. Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. International Universities Press: New York. 2. Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. Guilford Press: New York. 3. Scheff, T. J. (2003). Shame in self and society. Symbolic interaction, 26(2), 239-262. 4. Brown, B. (2006). Shame resilience theory: A grounded theory study on women and shame. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 87(1), 43-52. 5. Huff, J. L., Sochacka, N. W., Youngblood, K. M., Wood, K
4.57 4.4 5.4 a a 4.2 5.2 (a) (b) 4.0 5.0 Pre-Camp Pre-Sophomore
, H. C. & Selvester, P. M. Faculty learning communities: Improving teaching in higher education. Educ. Stud. 38, 111–121 (2012).14. Layne, J., Froyd, J., Morgan, J. & Kenimer, A. Faculty learning communities. in Frontiers in Education, 2002. FIE 2002. 32nd Annual 2, F1A–13–F1A–18 vol.2 (2002).15. Furco, A. & Moely, B. E. Using learning communities to build faculty support for pedagogical innovation: A multi-campus study. J. High. Educ. 83, 128–153 (2012).16. Fox, L. A personalized faculty peer support program: Less can be more. J. Fac. Dev. 26, 55–61 (2012).17. Anderson, O. S. & Finelli, C. A faculty learning community to improve teaching practices in large engineering courses: Lasting impacts. in 24.46.1
videos. The five modules are: (i) introduction, (ii) applications, (iii) fuel cellsystems, (iv) cell level, and (v) fuel cell science. There are two important standpoints in thedevelopment of this software: (a) contents, and (b) interconnectedness among software modules. Page 26.1010.4First, the educational content is presented in the form of text, video, and animations with audio.All the material contents are verified by the instructor of the fuel cell courses. The design,sequence and flow or continuity of the animations and videos have been deliberately plannedout. At the same time, the animations/videos are made to keep student’s attention
]. The design problem required a redesign of a motorcycle for useas a taxi in a mountainous tropical island. The problem had been judged to be similar to theopen-ended problems that beginning engineers might be asked to solve on the job [23]. Theproblem consisted of 397 words and had a Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level rating of 10.4. Thesecond design problem was given to students at the end of their program and was developed byour research team (see Appendix B). This problem asked students to redesign a propane-fueledcamp stove for use by the military in a desert combat zone. The problem consisted of 432 wordsand had a Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level rating of 9.4. The two problems were designed to be assimilar as possible. Two professional engineers judged
, part programming, and maintenance environment. Using actual CNC equipment ormachine tools to deliver the hands-on experience that is vital to acquiring and demonstratingcompetence might be too expensive, especially when multiple locations are used for trainingpurposes. Software simulators and hardware emulators can mimic the actual lathes, machiningcenters, and compound applications, while lowering the overall instructional cost, enablingstudents to acquire the required skills in a safe environment. The fundamental challengingproblems in manufacturing education are related to: (a) Improving the student–instructionaltechnologies interface to incorporate the required learning tools; (b) Improving teaching andlearning effectiveness in online
education research, Cambridge University Press, pp. 267–282.[3] B. W. McNeill, L. Bellamy, and V. A. Burrows. 2000. “Team Norms and Communication,” in Introduction to Engineering Design, 9th ed., McGraw Hill Higher Education, pp. 1–13.[4] S. Gorman. 2014. Peering into the Culture of a Civil Engineering Discipline and Finding the White Rabbit, PhD Dissertation, Northern Arizona University. 285 pp.[5] R. Stevens, A. Johri, and K. O’Connor. 2014. “Professional engineering work,” in Cambridge handbook of engineering education research, Cambridge University Press, pp. 119–137.[6] E. Godfrey. 2007. “Cultures within cultures : Welcoming or unwelcoming for women ?,” ASEE, 19 pp.[7] S. J. Spencer, C
study is to evaluate the critical thinking skills of students that begin inengineering with deficiencies in mathematical knowledge. These students tend to struggle incollege and their retention in engineering is low (less than 40% retention rate).The goals of the study are to: a) identify areas of weaknesses in students’ critical thinking skills,and b) evaluate the relationship between critical thinking scores and students’ cumulative gradepoint average (cGPA). Specifically, our interest is to determine if students with high criticalthinking scores perform better in their first semester in college. This study answers the question:Are critical thinking skills a predictor of students’ success in their first semester in college
targeting engineering education researchers with a demonstrated interest and developing expertise in interpretive research methods. - University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, June 21-22, 2013 (n = 9 faculty, n = 8 graduate students) - Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, June 13-14, 2014 (n = 8 faculty, n = 10 graduate students) Stream B: Broad participation workshops targeting a broad and diverse range of participants within the engineering education community. - Australasian Association of Engineering Education (AAEE) Annual Conference, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia, December 2, 2012 (n = 16) - American Society for
. (c) (b) (a) Figure 4: (a) CAD plan view of serpentine channel, (b) 3‐D model of chip, (c) 3‐D printed robotic arm, (d) chip mounted on robot station, (e) control