develop the skills and writing habits to complete doctorate degrees in engineering. Across all of her research avenues, Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 12 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award with her share of funding be ingnearly $2.3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 21 journal publications and more than 70 conference papers. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty, an Outstanding Teacher Award and a Faculty Fellow Award. She holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Cornell University, an M.S. in Materials Science from the University of Connecticut and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University.Dr. Stephanie G
empower them to solve these problems [2- 7]. This paper presents the structure, sequence, and requirements of these team-based design projects as they form a spine across required chemical engineering courses. Participants are undergraduate students studying chemical engineering in the Southwest United States. Variety and Sequence of Design Challenges Design Challenges in the first year course (CBE 101: Introduction to Chemical Engineering and Biological Engineering) have involved a blend of student presentations (pitches), research, writing, and lab work framed within three projects of varying scope and application:1. Students complete an entrepreneurship- and research-based project where they pitch
haveaddressed this problem by adding guided reading assignments to assist students in the researchprocess. The instructor specifies the initial articles, with the students eventually branching outinto their own specific research areas. For each assignment, the student writes a short report thataddresses certain aspects of each article. Using these reports, the instructor provides feedback toguide the student’s research. We have found that these assignments aid the students in theliterature review process and result in more focused research papers. In this paper, we discussthe specific procedure for creating and evaluating these assignments.IntroductionStudents who undertake graduate study in engineering will need to learn how to perform researchand
, and the ‘last-minute’ habits of some of the juniors. - The juniors needed to manage their time more carefully to work with the freshmen, who had different schedules. - The freshmen obtained a sense of belonging that was only starting to develop among their freshmen peers. - The students saw math, writing, programming and other topics in use. We hope this will pro- vide more motivation when they are taking fundamental courses. - Some freshmen worked ahead of the EGR 101 schedule to learn topics such as dimensioning and assembly drawings in order to satisfy the demands of the juniors. - In a few cases the juniors helped the freshmen use materials other than plastic
onmindsets that are discipline-specific, including maker mindset [8] and the entrepreneurialmindset [9]. The extant literature on mindsets is abundant and highlights the need for relevantmindsets toward specific task performance [9] – [11].The term ‘research mindset’ has been used by some researchers [10]–[12], but has yet to beexplicitly defined. A few studies call out the presence of research mindset and the relatedconstruct of researcher identity [13], [14]. Efforts in this space aim to better understand howmindset plays a role as researchers engage in various research tasks like defining researchproblems, conducting literature reviews, designing and conducting experiments, writing upresults, and working on a research team. Research is a task, or
before necessary knowledge was taught instead ofgiving a lecture first for required programming functions. Students were asked to team up withthree to four people in a group. It was an online class setting, thus the breakout rooms from themeeting platform (e.g., ZOOM©) were utilized for group discussion. The first day of the projectwas spent understanding and discussing the problem among the group members. The studentswere asked to write a note of their discussions and ideas. It was recommended to take a role foreach group member to distribute their responsibilities – team leader, programmer, reporter, andpresenter. In the next class, students shared their ideas of how problems could be solved. Thesolution was driven by student inquiries not by
AC 2010-1581: USE OF WIKIS IN CONSTRUCTION EDUCATIONJeong Han Woo, Milwaukee School of Engineeirng Dr. Woo has been an active researcher in the field of Architectural Engineering and Construction Management, especially in BIM, building energy efficiency, and construction information technologies. He presented his research findings numerously at Construction Research Congress, ISARC (International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction), ACADIA (Association of Computer Aided Design in Architecture), ASC (Associated Schools of Construction), and ASEE (American Society of Engineering Education). Dr. Woo’s papers are published in peer-reviewed journals in the field, such as
inquiry group consisted of the authors of this paper as co-researchers and co-subjects and is situated in our shared interest in graduate education andlearning. While we are at different stages of the doctoral program, we have the mutualexperience of completing the first year of the program at the same institution. We engaged in co-operative inquiry sessions, focused on learning within ourselves and with others, to make newmeaning from our experiences. Reflections during the formative first year of doctoral trainingwere explored as well as reflections and memos generated as part of the inquiry process.Through the co-operative inquiry process, this study offers insight into opportunities for peer-to-peer mentorship and learning enrichment in
Associate Professor at the Milwaukee School of Engineering. She has a PhD in English Literature (Science Fiction) from Louisiana State University (2007), an MA in English from Montana State University, and a BA in Creative Writing from the University of Montana. At LSU, Jennifer was part of the Communication Across the Curriculum (CxC) and worked in the Engineering Communication Studio. Jennifer has published articles in The Leading Edge, Carbon, The Journal of Popular Culture, and Foundation.Dr. Alicia Domack, Milwaukee School of Engineering I am associate professor and chair of the Humanities, Social Science, and Communication department at MSOE. I am also the IRB Director at MSOE. My background is in Developmental
]. Self-efficacy beliefs change over thecourse of enrollment with vicarious experience, or comparison of personal performance to that ofothers, becoming more important as students progress through their coursework at the collegelevel [10]. Female engineering students tend to have lower self-efficacy than male peers,reporting that they perceived they were not able to perform as well as their peers [10]. Self-efficacy has been shown to influence engineering students’ self-regulated learning behaviors andGPA [11]. Faculty member’s accessibility can influence self-efficacy, providing opportunitiesfor faculty interaction and feedback to students can reinforce positive experiences and buildstudents’ self-efficacy beliefs across domains [11]. The
the MSLQ were scored and assembled into fifteen groups as per [19], andincluded among other groups: intrinsic goal orientation, extrinsic goal orientation, task value,control of learning beliefs, self-efficacy for learning and performance, test anxiety, rehearsal,organization, critical thinking, time and study environment management, and peer learning forexample. Only the self-efficacy for learning (Pearson correlation = 0.31, n = 42) and time andstudy environment management (Pearson correlation = 0.37, n = 42) rose to the marginalcorrelation level with exam 1. The MSLQ was not selected as a tool for identifying at-riskstudents on two accounts. First of all, for lack of a strong correlation between the MSLQ andexam 1, it does not seem
project, I develop interactive activities at different development stages, including projectproposal, proposal peer review, project interview, preliminary report, and final report. The assessmentof the effectiveness of this new class was conducted by comparing exams and feedback of students bythe end of the semester. This class provides students with sufficient knowledge of both fundamentalstatistics and practical data analytical techniques for engineering fields, comprehensive experience indata analytic workflow, and the opportunity to exercise their data analytical skills in engineeringapplications.Introduction and BackgroundData science is an emerging field based on statistical methods and machine learning techniques toconvert extensive
, the inter-cohort groups work together for approximatelythree weeks to complete a capstone laboratory project. Significant logistical hurdles wereencountered due to the divergent expectations, schedules, and priorities of the two groups.However, effective management methods were developed to address these issues, and mitigateinterpersonal conflicts.Survey results were collected for over 300 students involved in this program. Peer, mentor, andmentee evaluations were also collected, along with faculty evaluations of the senior team’smanagement and use of their freshmen employees. Results reveal significant freshman andsenior satisfaction with this collaborative project, but this satisfaction is greatly dependent uponthe senior team’s use of
crucial CompositionProgram and ABET objectives, we review here the development of the first 2 writingassignments freshman engineering students encounter. The actual E/FEWP writing assignmentsthat all freshman engineering students must complete are available upon request.E/FEWP: Assignment #1Dan Budny has a program in which upperclassmen act as peer mentors to incoming freshmen. Togain a sense of their students’ background, interests and accomplishments, the mentors ask thefreshmen students to write letters of recommendation about themselves for an imaginaryengineering scholarship. As the E/FEWP faculty, directed by Beth Newborg, began developingthe program’s curriculum, they immediately saw the usefulness of this peer mentoring exercise.The E
and design has proven significantly more challenging thanintegrating writing and design. Even when public speaking deliverables are directly tiedto a design project, students often feel that the presentation is an afterthought. Indeed, inmany cases the design is completed (or a significant milestone is reached) before thepresentation is prepared. Thus, public speaking is often associated with design, but not asan integral part of designing. In this course, students give several mid-semesterpresentations as part of an ongoing design project, where they are given feedback byengineering faculty and their peers. As a result of this feedback, many students havecome to realize that this form of communication is an important part of
UTSA.Ms. Stephanie Ann Garcia, University of Texas at San Antonio Stephanie Garcia is a Graduate Research Assistant with a MAED from the University of Texas at San Antonio with a concentration in Curriculum and Instruction. Her work with TRESTLE involves training Peer Assisted Learners (PALs) and supporting engineering faculty in implementing culturally relevant pedagogy and other course transformation projects.Dr. Emily Peterek Bonner, University of Texas, San Antonio Emily Bonner is an Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction specializing in mathematics edu- cation. Her research interests focus on professional development and equity in schools.Dr. Timothy Yuen, University of Texas, San Antonio Timothy T
students on their writing, presenting and communicating skills, building the professional competencies required for leadership roleKelly Scarff, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Virginia Tech, Collegiate Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering DepartmentAngelo Biviano, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityMs. Christine Burgoyne, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityCaroline Finlay Branscome, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityKathleen Carper, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityDr. Sara L Arena, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Sara L. Arena received a B.S. in Engineering Science and Mechanics (2007), M.S. in Biomedical Engineering
with an interest in renewable energy or sustainability but, typically,little previous coursework in math or science. Each cohort had 8 student peer leaders orTAs, who were committed STEM majors and served as mentors and teaching assistants.The emphasis was on hands-on activities within small teams in a daily four hour labsetting. An important component was built-in time for tinkering and creativity aroundcontextualized assignments. Unlike most college experiences, the desired outcome was toprovoke interest rather than to impart a specific body of knowledge. Participation,exploration and fun were valued over the rigidity often found in STEM instruction. A widerange of approaches were used including; demonstrations, games, hands-on activities
Aviation in Cincinnati, Ohio, leading the certification effort for the LEAP-1A/1C HPC airfoil vibratory stress responses. Dr. Cress received his doctoral and master’s degrees from the University of Notre Dame, both in aerospace engineering; and his undergraduate bachelors of mechanical engineering degree from the University of Dayton.Dr. Patrick W. Thomas, University of Dayton Dr. Patrick W. Thomas is Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate Programs in English at the University of Dayton. His research interests include workplace literacy, writing technologies, empirical methodologies, computer-mediated communication, and professional and technical writing instruction. Since 2011, he has taught a variety of
credible Internet sources and the library’s research databases. Strategies forwriting accurate, vivid technical descriptions were presented using a collaborative in-classactivity in which each group examined the validity of a news story (i.e., Is it real or sciencefiction?). The article examination required groups to research the story and describe the sciencebehind it. In Week 3, the writing module focused on avoiding academic dishonesty and includedtime for peer-review of students’ major paper assignment via draft swapping.Engineering Discipline Panel Sessions: The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs coordinatedthe panel sessions. While the engineering modules were general in nature and did not discuss aparticular engineering field per se, they
development in chemical engineering at a large publicuniversity. The topical content which has been developed may also be used “À la carte” forincorporating elements into existing engineering courses if there is not room in the curriculumfor an integrated course of this type. The complete course content, including the syllabus,subject matter presentations, assignments, and relevant links, is available on a public web sitefor use by engineering instructors: (www.courses.ncsu.edu/che395). Course evaluationsindicate that students assign high values to this required seminar.IntroductionEngineering departments employ different strategies for introducing soft skills such as writing,oral presentation, teamwork, information literacy, and ethics. A frequently
, Walden, & Trytten, 2007; Secules, Gupta, Elby, & Turpen, 2018). Our team has been engaged in the iterative redesign of a pedagogy seminar for engineering peer educators working within a college-level introduction to engineering design course. Using tools of discourse analysis, we analyze how technocratic stances are reproduced or challenged in engineering peer educators’ talk during pedagogy seminar discussions. We study peer educators, in particular, because they are in a unique position to do harm if the ideologies of meritocracy and technocracy aren't challenged. Likewise, they are in a unique position to do good if they actively disrupt these ideologies in
-peer interaction is to form social cohesion between the students anddevelop a shared purpose. In addition, the bootcamp provides for engagement between thestudents and the faculty that execute the bootcamp units. The faculty-student engagement hasbeen shown to be a key factor in retention.The expected outcomes from the MDaS Bootcamp include: • Students recognize each other and form long-term peer connections. • Students recognize and become comfortable with project faculty. • Students can explain the types of work data scientists perform and their potential impact. • Students can write scripts within Python that enable them to solve basic problems using data science methods
students” to improve learning within the university.based on the idea of students teaching and learning from each other. Student attitudes aboutteaching and learning from peers are explored, along with the relative importance of factors Background and Motivationhighlighted in the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) of intrinsic motivation- autonomy, masteryand relatedness (i.e., feeling a connection to a larger group). The first approach described is the The work in this paper was motivated by a desire to improve student performance in Aerospaceuse of capstone design projects with explicit educational objectives to enhance the hands-on Engineering (AE) capstone design at a mid-sized southeastern private university. At this school
databases in order to select the most appropriate database and maximize relevancy of search results. 2. Students will be able to develop topic-related vocabulary in order to search databases with maximum flexibility and effectiveness. 3. Students will be able to describe the difference between a peer-reviewed article and a popular article in order to select appropriate resources for use in an academic research project.Once we identified the most important learning outcomes for the session, we identified ways inwhich students could learn those skills, practice them, and then demonstrate (for assessmentpurposes) their proficiency.Constructivist learning theory tells us that starting with what students already know
Seminar in Critical Inquiry ………………… 3 Science elective .......……………………………………………… 4 18 hrs Second Semester BE 1205 Graphic Fundamentals …………………….. 2 ENGL 1312 Research and Critical Writing …………….. 3 MATH 1312 Calculus II ………………………………… 3 HIST 1301 History of U.S. to 1865 …………………… 3
student population, despite decades of supportive research. The present studysought to estimate the educational benefits that accrue to undergraduate engineering studentswho interact with diverse peers and perspectives. Furthermore, differences across gender andrace were explored. Multi-institutional survey data were analyzed for over 100 undergraduateengineering students using a 2007 administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement(NSSE). Findings show that encouraging contact among students from different economic,social, or racial/ethnic backgrounds can produce greater perceived learning gains amongstengineering students.IntroductionIn recent reports, based in part on the Supreme Court’s rulings in affirmative action cases at
teams to work effectively. Other issues that need to be taught are: how to handlesuccesses and failures and how to use peer evaluations to improve teamwork (Vik, 2001)12.What is teamwork?Teamwork is a technique that allows individual team members to work together to achieve acommon goal (Barkley & Saylor, 2001)1. In their gook entitled: Customer –Driven ProjectManagement, Barkley and Saylor spell out teamwork as specifically involving the followingattributes: Trust Effective communication, especially listening A positive “can do “ attitude Motivation to perform and improve “We” mentality “Ownership” of work with pride Respect and consideration
their peers, their management, various internal and external customers, and thegeneral public by corresponding, instructing, analyzing, researching, and presenting. Visuals anddocument design features as well as state-of-the-art hardware and software enhance anengineer’s ability to effectively communicate. Effective use of these tools requires knowledge of(1) what tools are available, (2) how to best integrate these tools, and, most importantly, (3)how the reader and listener best grasp written and orally communicated information.This paper describes a systems approach to integrating technical communication with theengineering curriculum. To introduce this approach, the basic theory behind systemsthinking—including systems methodologies and
experience.Successful programs, projects, and research at premier engineering schools around thecountry are equipping students with the advanced creative and cognitive abilities requiredto succeed as contemporary professionals. This paper is a review of the innovative, multi-disciplinary, educational methodology that is manifest in several types of new efforts,including: 1) Engineering design in a studio atmosphere; 2) Engineering courses forcreative problem-solving; 3) Encouraging creativity and insight through journal writing; 4)The agenda for creativity at the UK Centre for Materials Education; and 5) A focus on thepersonal creative process. Research for this review inspired The Creativity, Innovation,and Design Report, a new national publication dedicated