reflection on their learning accessed their feedback more often thanthose who do not [6]. So it is hypothesized that students who do reflections will score higher onproposed factor 2 (timely review of feedback) than those that do not. Of the 1213 students, 226were enrolled in sections of the course that used structure-reflection [6]; 874 were enrolled insections that did no or minimal (e.g., minute paper) reflection. To test the hypothesis that thescores obtained for factors associated with timely review of feedback were higher for sectionsthat did reflection than those that did no or minimal reflection, a Kruskal-Wallis test and aWilcoxon Rank test were used. These two non-parametric tests were chosen over the parametrict-test due to the Likert
the types of models are explained in terms of duration, incorporation withpromotion and tenure, and what components of educational practice are included in the model.Next, the various characteristics of individual models are documented in terms of content andpracticum components, contexts for implementation, and how the models work within theirvarious contexts. Finally, due to the inherently political and emotional nature of considering theuse of these models with the US, a brief reflection on experiences and lessons learned from thesemodels is presented as relevant to US higher education.1. IntroductionFew would disagree with the idea that educating the next generation of leaders in both academiaand industry is at the heart of what higher
year-long PD experience.Given the exploratory nature of these programs, only a small number of teachers could beselected for participation. The five sites delivered professional development to a total of 115teachers, 24 of whom were female and 17 of whom represented ethnic minorities (6 werefemale, ethnic minorities).In the summer of 2007, a one-week workshop involving professional developmentproviders, exemplary teachers who had experienced one of the NCETE site-specific PDprograms, beginning teachers, high school students and evaluators reflected on theirexperiences in an attempt establish the characteristics of an effective PD program for highschool teachers who are seeking to infuse engineering design concepts into STEMclassroom. This
subject to sustainability criteriawe developed for student projects. All our students are trained in the use of design tools, bothelectronic programs as well as hand tools and power tools. More specifically, following a general introduction to the foundations of cognitiveprocesses found in psychology, and creative process found in two- and three-dimensional artinstruction, we offer developmental instruction in the following areas: Metacognition and thinking processes—students engage in activities that requirethem to plan, reflect upon, and modify their own thinking processes and strategies, as well asadapt these methodologies to meet the needs of a specific design problem. Structured and unstructured thinking
design a curriculum and guides them through the process of developing a course in their field. • ENE 685 Engineering Education Methods (3 credit hours), provides students with a variety of techniques for teaching courses that are both engaging and effective. • ENE 687 Mentored Teaching in Engineering (1 credit hour), enables students to deepen their understanding of teaching and learning through feedback and reflection as they perform their regularly assigned teaching duties. • ENE 695 Succeeding as an Engineering Professor (3 credit hours), covers other skills valuable to faculty members such as writing proposals, selecting and mentoring graduate students, and managing projects.All four courses
paired with a “student ambassador”. For Cohort1 Scholars (recruited for Fall 2018), student ambassadors consisted of academically successfuljuniors and seniors who were also leaders of professional societies. These Cohort 1 Scholars will,in turn, serve as student ambassadors for Cohort 2 Scholars (to be recruited for Fall 2019). Underthe mentorship of student ambassadors, the Scholars take part in a variety of daily activitiesincluding a moderated reflection session at the end of each day.The program is structured as follows: It takes place during the summer prior to entering college. It spans two full weeks, from Sunday through the second Saturday. Each Scholar is paired with a student ambassador throughout the course of the program
electronically using an electronic portfolio system. Both notebooks were completed as part of a 10week communitybased engineering design course in different quarters. An assessment method was developed to quantify the quality and frequency of particular types of artifacts including visuals, steps of the engineering design process, and reflective elements. Overall, the implementation of the electronic portfolio has largely been successful with clearly visible benefits. In this paper, we report on the results of the assessment process from both types of notebooks, the results from a survey on changes in student skills, and our conclusions. Introduction An engineering notebook is simply any notebook an engineer uses to record design thoughts and
years, the MAX scholarship program has engaged in a continuousimprovement process. The students provide feedback at least once per semester through onlinesurveys and, most recently, reflection essays. The faculty mentors and graduate assistant observewhat is working well and where improvement is needed during the weekly seminars. Theydiscuss and reflect on continuous improvement ideas at their weekly planning meetings and anannual reflection and assessment meeting at the end of the year. This process is guided by theorganizational goals and implemented through interventions to the supporting structure of MAX(See Table 1). Some examples of changes include annual retreats, common reads assigned overwinter break, and formally assigning primary
identify distincttypes of incidents. Critical incidents have been sorted into 25 themes and seven categories whichrepresented potential causes of changes in ways of experiencing engineering ethics in the healthproducts industry. Categories included: (1) Cultural Immersion, (2) Acting Ethically, (3) EthicalFailures, (4) Interpersonal Encounters, (5) Mentorship and Management, (6) Reflection andAssociation, and (7) Prior Ethics Training. These findings suggest the importance of workplaceculture in changing or solidifying individuals’ ways of experiencing ethical practice. Thesefindings can inform post-secondary engineering ethics instruction as well as workplace training.BackgroundSince ABET EC 2000, interest in and emphasis on engineering ethics
for and approaching social change and developed frames of reference forqualitative research particularly on ways to interpret interview data. Collaborative inquiry2,3 also Page 23.863.2known as co-operative inquiry4 is a framework that describes how people may set up anopportunity for comprehensive learning and change for themselves. Participants come togetherwith a goal of developing their own capacities while collaboratively addressing a compellingquestion through cycles of reflection and action. There are no hierarchies in these kinds ofcollaboration and so every individual’s view has an equal potential to play a role in theinterdependent
AC 2012-5469: INTERDISCIPLINARY PEDAGOGY FOR PERVASIVE COM-PUTING DESIGN PROCESSES: AN EVALUATIVE ANALYSISDr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa McNair is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech where she serves as Assistant Department Head for Graduate Education and co-directs the Virginia Tech Engi- neering Communication Center. Her research includes interdisciplinary collaboration, communication studies, identity theory, and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include: interdisciplinary pedagogy for pervasive computing design, writing across the curriculum in stat- ics courses, and a CAREER award to explore the use of e-portfolios
Engineering, American Society of Mechanical Engineers PUBLICATIONS (i)Most Closely Related [1] W.J. Stuart ’Problem Based Case Learning - Composite Materials Course De- velopment – Examples and classroom reflections’ NEW Conference, Oct 2011 [2] W.J. Stuart and Bedard R. (EPRI) ’Ocean Renewable Energy Course Evolution and Status’ presented at Energy Ocean Pacific & Oregon Wave Energy Trust Conference, Sept. 2010. [3] W.J. Stuart, Wave energy 101, presented at Ore- gon Wave Energy Symposium, Newport, OR, Sept. 2009. [4] W.J. Stuart, Corrosion considerations when designing with exotic metals and advanced composites, presented at Corrosion Conference of Exotic Met- als, Park City, UT, 2009. [5] W.J. Stuart, Ruth
forimproving both student learning and engineering programs are also briefly discussed.2. Literature ReviewPaulson, et al.1 have defined a portfolio as a ‘purposeful collection of student work that exhibitsthe student’s efforts, progress, and achievements. The collection must include studentparticipation in selecting contents, the criteria for selection, the criteria for judging merit, andevidence of student self-reflection.’ Cambridge, et al.2 observed that portfolios have at least fourfeatures that represent improvements in standard educational practice (see also, Hamp-Lyons andCondon3). These include: (i) opportunity to better represent the work, both in terms ofdemonstrating multiple examples and collecting work samples over time; (ii) development
interviews were conducted to gain additional information regarding their problemsolving experience. To study the role of socio-political context in shaping engineering identity,this study is guided by the following research question: What Discourses shape students’problem solving practices and identities as engineers?MethodsTheoretical perspective guiding this researchThe methodology and data analysis were guided by a constructivist theoretical perspective. Itwas our intention to study engineering students’ individual meaning making processes and howstudents describe their existing and emerging identities as engineers. We viewed individuals asactive agents gaining knowledge about their social context through their reflections andexperiences with
] during the REU. Thefollowing program components were used to develop students’ technical and professionalleadership-enabling competencies: virtual setting, research projects, posters, technicalworkshops, journal club, faculty seminar networks, community hours, and weekly reflection andsurvey. A Virtual SettingDue to restrictions following COVID, the REU site was held virtually. While this meant somestudents and faculty never actually met face-to-face, it allowed students the opportunity to workon projects across various geographic regions and meet and connect with faculty and mentorsaround the world. This virtual site was strategically organized to optimize student engagementand learning opportunities in a remote environment. The REU
work-in-progress paper motivates dispositions within computing disciplines and presents thebackground of this approach. It also discusses the use of reflection exercises and vignettes in un-derstanding, promoting, and fostering behavioral patterns that undergraduate computing studentsidentify as related to dispositions they experience in the course. Preliminary data and results fromthe study are also presented.1 IntroductionA major concern in higher education is to ensure that graduates are “career-ready,” that is, they notonly have learned knowledge and skills that are needed by employers but have also developed theprofessional traits and attitudes necessary for a successful career. This is especially important infields such as engineering
innovative freeform modeling capabilities.The multidisciplinary teams include students, mostly seniors, from systems engineering anddesign, mechanical engineering, bioengineering and industrial design. The design projectsconsist of biomedical products and devices, and each project includes a sponsor from thehealthcare industry. The instructors include faculty from systems engineering and design,industrial design, and bioengineering.Using this testbed, a graduate student conducted research on reflective practice, design thinking,and how students engage in and use digital tools for design and collaboration. The initialresearch was conducted in the fall of 2015. Project results include a five-minute video thatdescribes student impressions of their
students.To understand how students’ initial information-seeking behavior evolved in our first-yearengineering-communications course, we conducted a pedagogical reflective case study of our279 students in thirteen sections of the course. We assessed the students’ initial information-seeking behavior with a pre-research task, a librarian delivered training in source-evaluationstrategies to accommodate students’ uses of diverse source types, students created a final projectin which they investigated a real engineering problem and proposed future design work toaddress that problem, and we evaluated the final projects to determine whether the students hadused credible sources and whether they had improved their use of such sources in the course.Some of
OpportunitiesAbstractLearning through Service (LTS) is an umbrella term that includes, both curricular andextracurricular activities, reflecting that there are many models that exist currently for howfaculty use opportunities for students to learn while providing service to a community. Over thepast decade, Learning through Service has proliferated in higher education as an effectiveteaching and learning method. As the pedagogy continues to gain momentum, and manycolleges and universities in the United States have designed their engineering curriculum andextra-curricular activities to include experiential learning, including service-learning.Nevertheless, despite the curriculum overhaul and increase in the use of LTS in engineering,there have been limited studies to
performance goals, andapproach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable." [2]Teamwork is identified as one of the most important abilities sought by employers of engineers[3-4]. This skill need is reflected in ABET criteria for accrediting engineering programs:Programs must demonstrate that their students have “an ability to function on multidisciplinaryteams.” [5] To enable the success of their graduates and employers of their graduates,engineering programs must prepare and document that their graduates can effectively developand consistently contribute value to multidisciplinary teams.Teaching engineering students teamwork, although vital to success of the student and theprogram, is attempted in many different ways, with varied success
documenting our experience integrating a series ofactivities into existing bioengineering courses.We first considered how to effectively integrate this topic into capstone given constraints such astime, other curriculum requirements, and student expectations for a focus on their own projects.We chose an approach that involved an introductory lecture on disability, accessibility, and UDfrom a local expert, follow-up individual reflection, and a team-based assignment that requiredstudents to apply UD concepts to their capstone projects. Based on the success and feedbackfrom seniors regarding the module, we next added a UD module to an Introduction toBioengineering Problem Solving course. Our multi-faceted approach included an overviewlesson, student
outcomes.This paper will explore successful engineering and design pedagogy case studies, taken from courseworkand curricula at Ohio State University and at Columbus College of Art & Design. These stories andchallenges will be explained to highlight what can emerge from creating curricula around open-endeddesign pedagogy, which serves to mimic real world, often ‘wicked’ scenarios. By describing engineeringand design programs doing similar pedagogical activities, the authors will reflect on their own classroomexperiences, discuss lessons learned, and propose a framework that instructors can call upon to encouragestudents to embrace ambiguity, thus becoming more agile and resilient in the future.Each author has taught the case study courses for
experience also asks the freshmen to consider diverse perspectives as theydesign for the targeted populations. The paper describes the project implementation and presentsresults from student reflections and from a survey. Lessons learned and recommendations forbest practices are also presented.Freshmen Year Context and ObjectivesDuring the 2010-2011 academic year the department of Mechanical Engineering at CaliforniaPolytechnic State University - San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) began a process of redesigning thefreshmen year experience for its incoming Mechanical Engineering students. At Cal Polystudents enter the university with a declared major and begin taking major courses their firstquarter. The department is large, with 180-240 incoming freshmen
deliver content, concepts andskills in light of their reflective knowledge of students' means of understanding and learning thematerial. With JTF web-enabled engagement and feedback pedagogy instructors' attitudes andapproaches to teaching shift toward student-centered learning with resultant change in classroompractice to make instruction more effective. This was evidenced by improvements in studentperformance. The process of shifting beliefs and practice of eight collaborating faculty employedan implementation strategy that utilized a faculty change model and an organizational model ofcharacteristics of sustainable innovation. As such, the research question addressed in this paperis, "What is the effect of JTF engagement and feedback pedagogy
-child dyads, they found that the pairsengaged in problem scoping more frequently than any of the other design activities (i.e., in 30%of the coded segments). They defined problem scoping as “understand the boundaries of theproblem” (p. 6) and operationalized this to look for instances of participants identifyingconstraints or clarifying design goals.In another study, Watkins and her colleagues [8] offer rich insights into the problem scopingbehavior exhibited by fourth graders engaged in design as part of a classroom activity. Watkinsand her colleagues analyzed video-recordings of the fourth graders’ conversations and designwork using a framework based on Donald Schön’s theory of Reflective Practice [22] andValkenburg and Dorst’s [23
practitioners haveshown interest in evidenced-based methods of developing student engineers, such asproject-based learning, experiential learning, peer to peer learning, and game-based learning. Thispaper describes an engineering education program that emphasizes technical, professional,creative design skills in our 3rd and 4th year student engineers. This program is continuouslyimproving. Faculty and staff meet each semester to reflect on the prior semester, address studentfeedback, and make specific changes to improve. Learning science tips are weaved into thedynamic program. Motives are pure, but execution can have some challenges. This program’sphilosophy allows faculty to try, get feedback, and pivot. Faculty exemplify iterative design andthe
of engineers in Australia.The course was developed and analysed using an action learning approach. The mainresearch question was “Can extra teaching and learning activities be developed that willsimulate workplace learning?” The students continually assessed and reflected upon theircurrent competencies, skills and abilities, and planed for the future attainment of specificcompetencies which they identified as important to their future careers. Various evaluationmethods, including surveys before and after the course, were used to evaluate the actionlearning intervention. It was found that the assessment developed for the course was one ofthe most important factors, not only in driving student learning, as is widely accepted, butalso in
benefits, and environmental sustainability.In response to these complex and interrelated challenges, The Sustainability and SocialEntrepreneurship (SSEF), a collaborative effort between the University of Waterloo in Canadaand Harvey Mudd College in the United States, launched its inaugural iteration in the summer of2023. The SSEF aims to foster innovative, human-centered, and sustainable urban designsolutions through interdisciplinary international collaboration. The SSEF reflects anunderstanding of the multifaceted nature of urban problems and seeks to bring together diverseperspectives and expertise to address these issues.The program was structured as a multi-week, multi-institutional pilot that brought together nineexceptional third-year
qualitative means, including surveys, focus groups, interviews,open-ended individual discussion, journaling, reflective essays, and the like.The GCOs are especially relevant to engineering education and practice because modernengineering is a globalized profession. Exposing engineering students to new situations, culturalcontexts, customs and communication practices, and ways of living and doing businesscontributes to their preparation as professionals and their development as people. For instance,GCO 1(a) ("students demonstrate knowledge of interconnectedness/interdependence of political,environmental, social, and economic systems on a global scale and in historical context")arguably targets the essence of engineering practice in a globalized world
paper shares the methodology and findings of a workshop onconflict management that was piloted in three interdisciplinary engineering design courses thatinclude first through fourth-year students. The workshop was designed to collect real-timestudent reflection data through Mentimeter, an instructional technology designed to promoteclass engagement.Background: Emerging literature from Industrial and Organizational (I/O) Psychology hashighlighted the importance of effective conflict management on team performance. Teachingstudents how to effectively manage conflict and establish inclusive, psychologically safe teamenvironments are essential skills for effectively working on teams in preparation for theworkplace, as emphasized by ABET and