ASEE PEER - Search Results

Displaying results 91 - 120 of 8750 in total

← Previous
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
…
291
292
Next →

Writing Techniques For Implementing Project Directed Mathematics

Conference Session: Innovative Instructional Strategies
Collection: 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: John Schmeelk, Virginia Commonwealth University Qatar Branch; Jean Hodges, Virginia Commonwealth University Qatar Branch
Tagged Divisions: Mathematics

AC 2009-115: WRITING TECHNIQUES FOR IMPLEMENTINGPROJECT-DIRECTED MATHEMATICSJohn Schmeelk, Virginia Commonwealth University Qatar Branch John Schmeelk, Virginia Commonwealth University, Qatar Branch Campus Dr. John Schmeelk is a Professor of Mathematics at Virginia Commonwealth University, Doha Qatar Branch, where he is engaged in applied mathematics, generalized functions, image processing and educational pedagogy. He received his PhD from George Washington University in Washington, D.C. He was awarded many summer faculty grants to go to Fort Rucker, Alabama implementing procedures utilizing generalized functions. He has been an invited speaker to conferences in Australia

Relevance Score: 2.0568569

Writing Effective Evaluation and Dissemination/Diffusion Plans

Conference Session: NSF Grantees Poster Session
Collection: 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Thomas A. Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Sarah E. Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Maura J. Borrego, Virginia Tech; Jefferey E. Froyd, Texas A&M University; Wendy Newstetter, Georgia Institute of Technology; Karen L. Tonso, Wayne State University; Peggy Noel Van Meter, Pennsylvania State University
Tagged Topics: NSF Grantees

AC 2011-1781: WRITING EFFECTIVE EVALUATION AND DISSEMINA-TION/DIFFUSION PLANSThomas A. Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Thomas A. Litzinger is Director of the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Edu- cation and a Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Penn State, where he has been on the faculty since 1985. His work in engineering education involves curricular reform, teaching and learning innovations, faculty development, and assessment. He teaches and conducts research in the areas of combustion and thermal sciences. He is an Associate Editor of Advances in Engineering Education and a Fellow of ASEE.Sarah E Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Sarah

Relevance Score: 2.0560007

Computer-Mediated Peer Review: A Comparison of Calibrated Peer Review and Moodle’s Workshop

Conference Session: Computing Technology Session 1
Collection: 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Ryan Smith, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Tagged Divisions: Computers in Education

compositionprocess in the context of the writing-as-a-way-of-learning movement.2. Evolution of Computer-Mediated Peer Review (CMPR) SystemsDespite proven benefits, integrating effective peer-review into a course requires much effort.Using computers to facilitate the process of peer-review was a logical progression. Early peerresponse systems made use of email exchanges among student reviewers. With digital advancesin the 1990s, CMPR systems – such as MUCH (Many Using and Creating Hypermedia, 1994) –automated allocation of files for review, stored responses, calculated results, and gave access topeer feedback.9 Also, Eschenbach exploited web-enabled software to integrate e-assessment inan engineering design course.10In the 2000s, increasing use of computers

Relevance Score: 2.0539672

Incorporating Peer Review Into The Che Laboratory

Conference Session: Innovations in the ChE Laboratory
Collection: 2004 Annual Conference
Authors: David Miller; Julia Williams

lives of his students; he also found further supportfor this view in Sageev and Romanowski.1 He began to consult additional sources on thesubject to develop an effective set of strategies to address the problem.Consideration of references on this topic indicated other faculty who were trying toresolve a similar set of root causes.2, 3 The problem lay in finding sources that providedgood models for use in the classroom. Effective models were available from bothLudlow and Newell.4, 5 Both authors, working in the context of chemical engineeringdepartments, addressed student communication problems through the practice of peerreview of student writing. The instructor then set about adapting models for peer review,as well as other writing techniques

Relevance Score: 2.050768

Mentor Training Program for a Peer-to-Peer Learning Environment: Leadership vs. Curriculum Balance

Conference Session: Assessment Methods and Learning Pedagogy II
Collection: 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Farrokh Attarzadeh, University of Houston; Deniz Gurkan, University of Houston; Mequanint A. Moges, University of Houston; Victor J. Gallardo, University of Houston; Mehrube Mehrubeoglu, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi; Morteza Sameei, Houston Community College Northeast
Tagged Divisions: Engineering Technology

, aconcept mapping activity was used in order to channel the peer-to-peer interaction towards aframework of knowledge and skills transfer. A concept map is a spatial representation ofconcepts and their interrelationships that is intended to visually represent the structuralknowledge that a learner has stored in long-term memory6-7. The process of building a conceptmap engages the learner with the content and is considered an active learning strategy. A numberof concept mapping software applications are readily available that have also been used for thisproject. By incorporating CMaps with the peer-to-peer mentorship program, we sought to createstudents with increased capacity to engage in real world problem solving, increased writing andoral

Relevance Score: 2.0489244

The PEER Collaborative: Supporting Engineering Education Research Faculty with Near-peer Mentoring Unconference Workshops

Conference Session: CPD Technical Session
Collection: 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Alice L. Pawley, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Adam R. Carberry, Arizona State University; Monica E. Cardella, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven; Shanna R. Daly, University of Michigan; Jenna L. Gorlewicz, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville; Geoffrey L. Herman, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Morgan M. Hynes, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Shawn S. Jordan, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus; Nadia N. Kellam, University of Georgia; Micah Lande, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus; Matthew A. Verleger, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ., Daytona Beach; Dazhi Yang, Boise State University
Tagged Divisions: Continuing Professional Development

opportunity for me to deepen these relationships and gain confidence andaccountability in my work. Since the workshop, I have begun swapping articles and proposalswith several other participants of PEER to give and receive feedback on drafts. I have received Page 24.1237.15candid and honest feedback that has been invaluable. I have also been held accountable to meetmy internal paper deadlines so that I keep writing even when other responsibilities are clamoringfor my attention. I now have twice as many papers in submission than I have ever had prior toPEER. I attribute this level of feedback and accountability to the quality of relationships that

Relevance Score: 2.0477533

Peer-to-Peer Assessment in Large Classes: A Study of Several Techniques Used in Design Courses

Conference Session: Research in Assessment
Collection: 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Peter M. Ostafichuk, University of British Columbia; Jim Sibley, University of British Columbia, Vancouver; H.F. Machiel Van der Loos, University of British Columbia
Tagged Divisions: Educational Research and Methods

AC 2012-4547: PEER-TO-PEER ASSESSMENT IN LARGE CLASSES: ASTUDY OF SEVERAL TECHNIQUES USED IN DESIGN COURSESDr. Peter M. Ostafichuk, University of British Columbia Peter Ostafichuk is a Senior Instructor and the Associate Head (yeaching) in the Department of Me- chanical Engineering at the University of British Columbia. He has co-developed and coordinates the multi-award winning integrated Mech 2 program for second-year mechanical engineering. Ostafichuk received a B.A.Sc. in engineering physics in 1997 and a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering in 2004, both from the University of British Columbia.Mr. Jim Sibley, University of British ColumbiaDr. H.F. Machiel Van der Loos, University of British Columbia H.F. Machiel Van

Relevance Score: 2.043934

Classroom Experience Of Peer To Peer Network Technology As Next Generation Television

Conference Session: Innovations in Computer Engineering Technology Curriculum
Collection: 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Veeramuthu Rajaravivarma, SUNY-Farmingdale
Tagged Divisions: Engineering Technology

AC 2008-881: CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE OF PEER-TO-PEER NETWORKTECHNOLOGY AS NEXT GENERATION TELEVISIONVeeramuthu Rajaravivarma, SUNY-Farmingdale V. Rajaravivarma is currently with the Electrical and Computer Engineering Technology at SUNY, Farmingdale State College. Previously, he was with Tennessee State University, Morehead State University, North Carolina A&T State University, and Central Connecticut State University. Dr. Rajaravivarma teaches electronics, communication, and computer networks courses to engineering technology students. His research interest areas are in the applications of computer networking and digital signal processing

Relevance Score: 2.0432062

Social Network Analysis: Peer Support and Peer Management in Multidisciplinary, Vertically Integrated Teams

Conference Session: Multidisciplinary Engineering Programs
Collection: 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: J. Sonnenberg-Klein, Georgia Institute of Technology; Randal T. Abler, Georgia Institute of Technology; Edward J. Coyle, Georgia Institute of Technology
Tagged Topics: Diversity
Tagged Divisions: Multidisciplinary Engineering

Paper ID #22319Social Network Analysis: Peer Support and Peer Management in Multidisci-plinary, Vertically Integrated TeamsJ. Sonnenberg-Klein, Georgia Institute of Technology Assistant Director, Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP) Program, Georgia Institute of Technology; Doc- toral student in Education at Georgia State University, with a concentration in Research, Measurement and Statistics; Master of Education in Education Organization and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Bachelor of Science in Engineering Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign.Dr. Randal T. Abler, Georgia Institute

Relevance Score: 2.0424783

PEER: Professional Development Experiences for Education Researchers

Conference Session: Faculty Track - Technical Session IV
Collection: 2018 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity Conference
Authors: Scott Franklin, Rochester Institute of Technology; Eleanor C. Sayre, Kansas State University; Mary Bridget Kustusch, DePaul University
Tagged Topics: Faculty

research.After they have been accepted, we ask them to write a short statement of research interest, inparticular identifying which of the current PEER working groups they are interested in and why(or proposing a new working group). These initial statements, combined with our experiences ofprevious years, help us to plan for workshops that we think will be needed by the current cohort.For example, in 2017, we had many more new participants joining us with diverse interests thanin previous years, so we placed a stronger emphasis on forming working groups at the beginning.In addition, these statements induct participants into the communicative guiding principle.While we do plan a schedule based on these initial interactions with participants, the

Relevance Score: 2.0418653

A Web Based Tool For Implementing Peer Review

Conference Session: NSF Grantees Poster Session
Collection: 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Frederick Berry, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

been a renewed emphasis on student teams and onstudent-provided formative feedback within an assessment process anchored in learningoutcomes.The authors report on the integration of Calibrated Peer Review™ (CPR™) – a web-deliveredstudent feedback tool – used in three courses at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Sinceacademic year 2002, the authors have developed course activities that highlight writing and peerevaluation as central components of • RH131 (Rhetoric and Composition): An introductory composition course required of all students at this college of engineering. • ECE 361 (Engineering Practice): A sophomore-level course covering project design specifications, team roles, effective conduct of team

Relevance Score: 2.0416958

stEm PEER Academy: the Power of Human Capital

Conference Session: Track 1: Technical Session 6: stEm PEER Academy: the Power of Human Capital
Collection: 2024 Collaborative Network for Engineering & Computing Diversity (CoNECD)
Authors: Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Claire Duggan, Northeastern University; Elizabeth H. Blume, Northeastern University Engineering PLUS Alliance
Tagged Topics: CoNECD Paper Sessions, Diversity

Paper ID #40759stEm PEER Academy: the Power of Human CapitalDr. Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University Dr. Jennifer Love is a full-time faculty member of Northeastern University’s College of Engineering, most recently in the First Year Engineering program. She is currently the Associate Director for the Center for STEM Education. She has a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (1993), a Master of Science in Biomedical Engineering from The University of Iowa (1997) and a Doctorate in Education from Northeastern University (2022) where she recently completed her

Relevance Score: 2.0361764

Assignment And Quality Control Of Peer Reviewers

Collection: 2001 Annual Conference
Authors: Edward Gehringer

Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & ExpositionCopyright  2001, American Society for Engineering Education grades through the peer evaluation process. In addition, in several group writing exercises they compete against other writing teams for extra credit points. Importantly, a component of their grade is based on evaluation by their team members on their performance as a peer reviewer and their performance as a collaborative task contributor.”Let us call peer revision in (non-blind) groups Strategy V. It differs from Strategy G, where thestudents evaluate authors who are not in their own group.In Strategy V, all of the students in a particular group are working on their ownassignment. If we assume instead that

Relevance Score: 2.0359972

Improving Graduate Student Oral Presentations Through Peer Review

Conference Session: Case Studies and Programs to Improve Graduate Students' Skills
Collection: 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Joanne Lax, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Audeen W. Fentiman, Purdue University, West Lafayette
Tagged Divisions: Graduate Studies

.7 Because of the relativelylimited research on peer review of oral presentations as a way of giving graduate engineeringstudents the feedback they need to improve, this paper necessarily draws on some of theliterature on peer review of writing on undergraduate and graduate levels, in engineering andresearch in higher education, and extrapolates some findings to oral presentation peer review.The paper focuses on why peer review is useful, different methods of it, and several classroomexamples.RubricsEffective peer review is only as good as the criteria on which it is based and the instructionprovided. Yet, similar to the process of learning to do oral presentations, engineering graduatestudents often lack formal training in performing peer

Relevance Score: 2.0358162

Keys To Publishing In Peer Reviewed Journals

Conference Session: Launching Successful Academic Careers
Collection: 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Robert Chin, East Carolina University; Nancy Study, Virginia State University
Tagged Divisions: New Engineering Educators

. Page 15.826.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Keys to Publishing in Peer Reviewed JournalsAbstractA plethora of literature exists to which new engineering educators can refer that will assist themsucceed as scholars. Blocking out time to write every day or every week; learning to say “no”;ignoring bad reviews and heeding critical reviews; reading; writing, writing, writing; exhibiting awillingness to change; being flexible; and being reasonable are included among the suggestionsthe literature promotes. The intent of this paper in contrast was to provide new engineeringeducators with a framework for negotiating the journal publication process. In particular, thepaper addresses the procedures for producing a

Relevance Score: 2.0358162

Web Based Forms For Design Team Peer Evaluations

Collection: 1998 Annual Conference
Authors: Marc A. Mesmer; Elizabeth A. Eschenbach

Session 2630 Web Based Forms for Design Team Peer Evaluations Elizabeth A. Eschenbach1 and Marc A. Mesmer2 Humboldt State UniversityAbstractThis paper describes the use of web based forms for a peer review process used in teachingENGR 111: Introduction to Design and is a follow up of work reported at the 1997 ASEEmeeting: Using Peer Evaluations for Design Team Effectiveness. The paper describes thefunctionality of the web based software and provides examples of web based peer evaluationsforms, as well a summary of the training students receive on how to write a good peer

Relevance Score: 2.035246

Helping Students to Provide Effective Peer Feedback

Conference Session: Tips and Tricks for Assessing Student Performance
Collection: 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University
Tagged Divisions: New Engineering Educators

, without having to waituntil all students’ work has been graded. Indeed, peer assessment is one of the fewscalable approaches to assessment: as the amount of work to assess increases, theresources available for assessment increase proportionally.Perhaps the most frequent use of peer assessment is for teaching writing. Writing for anaudience of their peers forces them to explain themselves well enough so that they can be 1understood by non-experts. It also gives them the benefit of seeing and responding totheir peers’ reactions to what they write.Writing is important in engineering, of course. It is a good way for students to grapplewith ethical issues that arise in their professional development [5, 6

Relevance Score: 2.0344594

Building Research Skills through Being a Peer Reviewer

Conference Session: Enhancing Teaching and Research
Collection: 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access
Authors: Lisa Benson, Clemson University; Rebecca A. Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Karin Jensen, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign; Gary Lichtenstein, Arizona State University; Kelsey Watts, Clemson University; Evan Ko, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign; Balsam Albayati
Tagged Topics: Diversity
Tagged Divisions: New Engineering Educators

) as a publication and its review process, and 3) bestpractices in peer reviewing (i.e., organization, quality considerations, tips for writing reviews).Triads then attend a synchronous session together, and after an icebreaker activity and a briefoverview of the program, they conduct a mock review of a short, published manuscript togetheras a triad during the session. The mock review makes use of a Structured Peer Review form,which helps triads organize their reviews (strengths, weaknesses and recommendations) andprovides the team with insights on what participants are taking into consideration as they conducttheir review. (The Structured Peer Review form, which was developed by the project team, isshown in Figure 2.) The session concludes

Relevance Score: 2.0340936

Using Peer Evaluations For Design Team Effectiveness

Collection: 1997 Annual Conference
Authors: Elizabeth A. Eschenbach

project, each student has a 15 minute conference with the class instructor.During the conference, the student presents a team evaluation on a computer disk, discussing thestrengths and weaknesses of the team and all team members (including him or herself). Then thestudent and the instructor discuss ways to improve team productivity. The instructor gives thestudent hints on how to write a more descriptive evaluation.At the end of the semester, each team member turns in a self evaluation and peer evaluation ofall team members on a disk. The evaluations from all team members are combined and then splitinto summary evaluations, one for each team member. A summary evaluation is returned to eachteam member during the final period of the class. The

Relevance Score: 2.0337534

Board 60: PeerLogic: Web Services for Peer Assessment

Conference Session: NSF Grantees Poster Session
Collection: 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Authors: Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University
Tagged Topics: NSF Grantees Poster Session

, the feedback comes more quickly. An author canusually see the feedback as soon as the reviewer provides it, rather than having to wait until theinstructor or TA is finished grading all the students. Finally, peer assessment forces students towrite in a way that their peers can understand. They can’t use shorthand that the instructor, withhis/her superior knowledge, is expected to decipher. They learn to write for an audience of theirpeers, which is exactly the skill they need for later in their careers. Peer assessment has beenshown to improve learning across the curriculum [1].Online peer-assessment systems perform the same basic functions, though they often havefeatures aimed at the types of courses taught by their designers, e.g., art

Relevance Score: 2.0329049

Peer Grading: Sometimes It Should Be Done

Collection: 2010 North Midwest Section
Authors: Douglas F. De Boer

gradingevent.)Also, before the next class Armani will try the new assignment. A diligent Armani will refer tothe textbook and find help as needed and invent ways to check answers. Students like that wouldprobably thrive under any form of instruction. However, maybe Armani will skip the assignedreading in an attempt to save time. Some answers will be correctly found, but many will not. IfArmani does not have enough time or perseverance to finish well, the peer grading rubric willencourage Armani to at least think about and write something down for each problem. Also, Proceedings of the 2010 ASEE North Midwest Sectional Conference

Relevance Score: 2.0308278

Peer Review For Online Learning Objects Via Merlot

Conference Session: ChE Department and Faculty Issues
Collection: 2005 Annual Conference
Authors: Valerie Young

education.It includes both discipline-specific resources (e.g., demonstrations, tutorials, on-line experiments,course notes) and more general resources for educational research and improvement (e.g.,guidelines for writing and assessing student learning outcomes). Although other databases exist,MERLOT is unusual because it includes a system for peer review. Editorial boards assignobjects already in the database to reviewers with relevant technical expertise. Reviewers’comments on technical content, ease of use, and educational potential are then displayed in thedatabase along with the link to the learning object as well as suggestions for how to incorporatethe learning object into a course. The MERLOT engineering editorial board is actively

Relevance Score: 2.0286412

Comparing The Reliability Of Two Peer Evaluation Instruments

Collection: 2000 Annual Conference
Authors: Matthew Ohland; Richard Layton

Session 3530 Comparing the Reliability of Two Peer Evaluation Instruments Matthew W. Ohland, Richard A. Layton University of Florida / North Carolina A&T State UniversityAbstractThis paper presents an analysis of student peer evaluations in project teams to compare thereliability of two different evaluation procedures. The project teams consist of junior-levelstudents in a mechanical engineering design course taught by Layton for five semesters in 1997,1998, and 1999.The peer-evaluation instruments were used by students to evaluate their teammates’contributions to the team’s deliverables—oral and

Relevance Score: 2.0286412

Implementing Peer tutoring in an online course

Collection: 2015 Spring ASEE Middle Atlantic Section Conference
Authors: Colin Neill; Joanna DeFranco; Amanda Neill

Tutoring between pairs in the same point in the course. One person retains role of tutor throughout. Same-year dyadic reciprocal peer tutoring Tutoring between pairs in the same point in the course. Tutor role is reciprocated between pairs. Dyadic cross-year fixed-role peer tutoring Tutor has a higher academic status than tutee. Same-year group tutoring Rotating presentations by individual students to the peer group. Peer assisted writing

Relevance Score: 2.0265825

stEm Peer Academy: Building a Community of Practice

Conference Session: Session 5 - Track 3: stEm PEER Academy
Collection: 2023 Collaborative Network for Computing and Engineering Diversity (CoNECD)
Authors: Jennifer Ocif Love, Northeastern University; Claire Jean Duggan, Northeastern University; Jacqueline A. Isaacs, Northeastern University; Johne' M Parker, University of Kentucky; Keisha Marie Norris, Miami University
Tagged Topics: CoNECD Paper Sessions, Diversity

foundational research in student retention and other evidence-based practices that engage, enroll, and graduate their women and BIPOC engineers.5. Professional Learning a. Provide a toolbox of resources to guide collaboration and partnerships at their respective institutions, with partners, and with each other (broader impact/broadening participation, proposal development, writing research papers, etc.). b. Expand PEERs’ understanding of national funding opportunities aligned with their institutional goals (NSF grants, national education grants, industry grants, etc). 1017

Relevance Score: 2.0256262

A Vertically Integrated Design Program Using Peer Education

Conference Session: Intro to Biomedical Engineering and Vertically Integrated Curriculum (Works in Progress) - June 23rd
Collection: 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access
Authors: Ross Aaron Petrella, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Lianne Cartee, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Devin K. Hubbard, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; Kenneth Donnelly, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; David A. Zaharoff, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering; George T. Ligler, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering
Tagged Divisions: Biomedical Engineering

Paper ID #30221A Vertically Integrated Design Program Using Peer EducationDr. Ross Aaron Petrella, University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Departmentof Biomedical Engineering Dr. Petrella received his B.S. in biomedical engineering from Virginia Commonwealth University in Rich- mond, VA and his Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Old Dominion University in Norfolk, VA. He joined the University of North Carolina and North Carolina State University Joint Department of Biomed- ical Engineering first as a postdoctoral research scholar and is now an assistant teaching professor where he teaches