differences in thetarget audience for the undergraduate teaching portfolio program influenced our curriculumdesign decisions.The original ETPP curriculum for graduate students consisted of 8 peer-led, peer-facilitatedsessions in which engineering graduate students and post-docs met for 1½ hours each week toget and give peer feedback about their portfolio elements while discussing their teaching.Participants in the graduate student program were asked to write a teaching philosophy statement,diversity statement, and to provide 2-5 annotated artifacts of their teaching that supported their Page 10.700.4teaching philosophy and diversity statements. The
atmospheric electricity, radio wave propagation, and digital signal processing. He and his students are currently conducting research in both geophysics (e.g., fusion of lightning and satellite data) and computer engineering (e.g., human interface devices and handheld gaming consoles). He has authored more than 20 peer-reviewed publications, including some with DigiPen students.Christopher Theriault, DigiPen Institute of TechnologyProf. Charles Duba, DigiPen Institute of TechnologyDr. Lukas P van Ginneken, Digipen Institute of Technology Lukas van Ginneken is a professor of computer engineering at Digipen Institute of Technology. His interests are digital logic, field programmable gate arrays, computer architecture, hardware
. The relationship between self-efficacy andachievement has also been studied in mathematics14,15 and writing16. For example, Pajares andMiller (1994)14 studied self-efficacy in the context of mathematical problem solving. They foundthat math self-efficacy was the most powerful predictor of math problem solving compared toother predictors including prior mathematics experience. Schunk and Swartz (1993)17 studied therelationship between writing self-efficacy and writing skills of fifth grade students. They found astrong correlation between self-efficacy, writing skills and strategy use. Students that receivedspecific progress feedback performed better than the control group that received only generalfeedback. One of our research goals is to
, solarradiation, refrigeration system, internal combustion engines, flue gas analysis, pump operation,and turbo machinery.At the time of the semester conversion, the University also adopted a policy of implementing amuch stronger version of general education requirements, whose merits and effectiveness [2] weredebated vigorously by the faculty from all segments of the University during the previous twoyears [3]. Recognizing the importance of good communication as an essential part of professionaldevelopment, the new GER required that students take two writing and one oral communicationcourses, along with other traditional GER courses such as mathematics, natural sciences,literature, humanity, and social science courses. In addition to expanded coursework
areCS faculty advisors of the group and two of the authors are external engineering educationresearchers who did an initial study on the student experience. Our strategies create asupportive student research team that propagates the recruitment and retention of a diverseset of students in an area of computer science that traditionally lacks such representation ofwomen, black students, and students with disabilities.Table 1: Effective High Impact Practices Identifies by The Association of American Collegesand Universities (AAC&U) [3] High Impact Practices 1 High-performance expectations 2 Students investing a significant amount of time and effort 3 Faculty and peer interaction 4 Integration with
ensure alignment with general expectations within the researchcommunity.Author Positionalities The following positionality statements are informed by recent research from Secules etal. [26] and recognition that we, as the primary researchers on this paper, understand the context,methods, and data through a lens of our own experiences and identities. Given the context inwhich this work was written (i.e. after the end of the formal partnership during COVID-19), onlyour (the two authors of this paper) positionality statements are provided. We recognize that theperspectives of all of the collaborators are critical to the work of VT PEERS, though we did notformally ask for their involvement in this writing due to the constraints of COVID-19
breakdown of women and men responses in the above data(in Table 6). Figure 3 shows that despite women feeling very strongly (over 80%) about feelingbonded with classmates and peers, women strongly agree only 52% that they will have betterpeer support in classes upon return. However, the male students had higher percentage (75%) ofstrongly agreeing about expecting better peer support in classes upon return. Overall, 92% ofwomen (strongly agree and agree) left feeling they will have better peer support whereby the87.5% of males (strongly agree and agree). Figure 3: Women vs. Men Responses: bonding with classmates and impact on their networkingThe post-survey prompted students to enter free form response to the questions: “Write asummary of your
place students on a higher performance leveland can lead to fading or scaffolded achievement [7].Recent research raises concerns about over-scaffolding learners; while they sometimes performbetter on short-term knowledge gains than peers who are not scaffolded, they also reportedlydevelop negative attitudes toward the subject matter [8]. Instead, providing goals, such as adesign challenge, can better organize their learning. Other forms of scaffolds can also providebenefit. For instance, scaffolds that organize student work on ill-structured problems can supportthem to think about the problem and learn as they do so [9].The design process spans definition of problem, navigation of the scientific literature forbackground, brainstorming multiple
majors than peers who identify as men [6], [16]. This sectionhighlights three barriers to sense of belonging: negative faculty interactions, negative peerinteractions, and stereotype threat. Though it has clearly been established that sense of belonging is an important factor inretaining women undergraduate engineering students, there are some potential barriers that havebeen documented to prevent students from experiencing belongingness. Blair et al. found thatfaculty have the ability to positively or negatively impact women STEM majors’ success [17].Upon studying faculty in a variety of STEM programs, researchers identified three-primarypositions related to how faculty members approach the idea of gender equity: gender blindness,gender
and reliable evaluation of student performance on open-ended problems is a challenge given that numerous reasonable responses are likely to exist for agiven problem and multiple instructors and peers may be evaluating student work. In previouswork, evaluation tools for open-ended problems, specifically Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs),were rigorously developed to ensure that the evaluation tools evolved with fidelity tocharacteristics of high performance and with increased reliability. As part of an on-goingprocess of tool development, this study presents an expert evaluation of student work using theSpring 2009 version of assessment tools. The Just-in-Time Manufacturing MEA wasimplemented in Spring 2009 in a large first-year engineering
’ development, achievement, and persistence through encouraging the integration of social and academic lives within a college or university and its programs, and through quality interaction with peers, faculty members, and the campus environment5. (pp. 49–50)Learning communities help students to make friends right away so that they can then settle inand focus on academics. Johnson et al8, wrote about how using cooperative learning in learningteam environments helps to reduce anxiety, helps to increase motivation, and promotesemotional bonding. In the learning teams, the first year seminar course, and the academicstrategies course students are asked to reflect and write about their experiences. Research asshown the importance of
successfully meet academic standards, and become active and independent learners. Learning strategists can help students manage the physiological arousal (e.g., stress) that is common during the first year, as well as be an important source of positive social persuasions.3. Peer-Mentoring Program: As freshmen, students are assigned a mentor to help them navigate college. Interactions with mentors serve as vicarious experiences for underclassmen, although mentors may also provide positive social persuasions and advice for managing physiological arousal.Table 1. Alignment of student support services with S-STEM objectives (blue activities are prior,successful ExCEL initiatives, while green activities are newly-included for the current
Session 1360 Language Skills for International Engineering: A Study of English-Japanese Bilingual Engineers Michio Tsutsui University of Washington1. IntroductionIn today’s global economy, the work environments of engineers and scientists have becomeincreasingly international. More frequently than ever, these engineers and scientists interactwith foreign peers and customers, travel abroad on business, work in foreign countries for anextended period, and face situations in which they must obtain information from foreignsources. Most companies in
expected to know or be able to do by the time theygraduate. Criterion G, an ability to communicate effectively, has often been met by anintroductory technical writing course and a speech class. We know that our students will have topresent information orally throughout their careers. We also know that the accurate presentationof complex technical data is difficult. The set of skills required is not the same as the oneaddressed in a typical speech class. It is therefore important to develop a curriculum specific tothe needs of engineers and scientists. Audience analysis, research, organization of material, the Page 10.829.1selection of
Honors Ability, which is more about deliberate action.Part of the origins of the Immersion Experience lay in international experiences. The honorsprogram developed out of several experiential, interdisciplinary programs using high-impactpractices. The Pavlis Institute for Global Leadership explicitly drew on international projectwork, conducted in student-led teams. As we broadened the specific international program into acustomizable honors program, we decided to let students select experiences that aligned with thecomponents (Academic Enhancement, Immersion Experience, Honors Project, andLeadership/Mentorship). At the time of writing, the Immersion Experience must consist of atleast 50 hours, spread out over a several-week period, typically 5
section of institution types to enablesimilar observations.The pivotal Bowers study that spanned 99 institutions found that half of the students admitted tocommitting some sort of academic integrity violation while attending college, but only a smallpercent of cheaters was caught and punished. Bowers argued that most students morallydisapproved of cheating and believed their peers to disapprove as well, but they continued tocheat due to academic survival outweighing moral decision-making [6]. Thirty years afterBowers’ article, in 1994, McCabe and Bowers compared the results of McCabe’s research in1991 to the results of Bowers’ study in 1964 [7]. A portion of the survey instrument used in thecurrent work asks students to self-report the number of
, but the studies were based only on studentperspectives, whereas, student final grades were not included in the analysis to confirm studentsreport. Student classroom engagement greatly involves peer-to-peer interaction and not student-to-machine interaction. Nevertheless, student classroom engagement is complex and broad to behandled in one direction. Some researchers classified student behavior as a predictor of classroomengagement [11]. Likewise, Appleton, Christenson, and Furlong [12] classified factors thataffected student classroom engagement into two categories namely; the indicators and thefacilitators. The author further divided indicator factor into three categories namely: affective,behavioral, and cognitive and the facilitator
from classmates in a collegial atmosphere. The reviewers gain agreater understanding of the specific details and clarity required in a proposal. The reviewersoften identify problems in a proposal that are also present in the proposal written by thereviewers themselves. The ability of the reviewers to see their own mistakes critically and edittheir own proposal is greatly improved.The students have 3-4 weeks to finish writing their proposal after the peer review. Each groupgives a 10 minute oral presentation followed by 5 minutes of questions during the last week ofclass. Every group member is required to speak during the presentation and be prepared toanswer questions. The students and instructors ask questions after each presentation.In
their non-ELC peers.BackgroundPrior research has suggested several potential contributing factors to lower rates of academicsuccess and retention within undergraduate engineering. These include lack of support andrecognition [2], inadequate advising [3], and feelings of disconnection to peers and faculty [4]–[6]. In addition to these factors linked with negative student outcomes, research has alsoidentified a host of best practices linked to positive student outcomes. Called high-impactpractices, these include learning communities, first-year seminars, writing-intensive courses,problem-based learning, collaborative assignments, and research and service opportunities [7].Specific to engineering, the use of hands-on collaborative design projects
, promotes collaboration, inspires generosity, and encourages life-longlearning.In this paper, we present the framework of the program focusing on the structure of the summerworkshop (MadE Leadership Mentoring Program) and the introductory course (EngineeringLeadership I: Theory and Practice). The MadE Leadership Mentoring Program is a summerworkshop that allowed students to conduct individual introspection while developing the coreidentity of the program and the leader peer group. Engineering Leadership I permitted theexploration into how leadership theory can inform and direct the way leadership is practiced anda platform for feedback during the semester as matters pertain to leading first-year students. Thecourse is constructed to advance our
: Engineering, Arts and SciencesNumber of students: 16 students, 5 yearsInitiatives: 1. Two, one-credit courses 2. Peer mentoring of seniors to freshmenResults: 1. Beneficial to the retention of the freshmen 2. New study habits and the importance of time management 3. Experience in research, report writing, and poster presentations were also found to be very beneficial to the freshmen 4) NSF S-STEM Scholarship [20] University: University of Maryland Baltimore County Discipline: Mechanical engineering Number of students: 45 students, 5 years Initiatives: 1. Proactive recruitment 2. Selected high impact practices such as orientation, one-to one faculty mentoring, peer
a presentation; (3) review feedback and revise slides; and (4) write and post areflection. This assignment enables students to • Demonstrate their understanding of a specific fluid mechanics concept; • Apply a specific fluid mechanics concept to a real-world situation; • Communicate their application in a clear, concise manner to their peers; • Design visuals to accurately demonstrate a concept; • Provide and accept constructive criticism; and • Reflect on their learning.The App was introduced in fall 2010 to improve both instructor teaching and student learningand to connect learning outcomes more explicitly with engineering practice. The App integratedthe core principles of effective teaching and learning with
college is bothnormal and surmountable. The ecological approach attempts to instill the same message, not justwithin individual students, but within the social ecology of the classroom. Namely, rather thanbeing delivered in a lab setting as in prior work, the ecological-approach targets carefully selectedpopulations—classrooms with specific, known demographic disparities in performance. Theintervention is adapted to these classrooms via focus groups. Rather than being delivered by anexperimenter, course instructors or TAs are trained to deliver the intervention and to engage theirstudents in peer discussion around the intervention. These peers are not random strangers but ratherclassmates with whom they will work together over the term. The
participants usingTDC methods that guide and motivate student teams through each phase of project development.The program accomplishes this by providing resources that are directly tied to the successfulcompletion of required milestones called “Levels” and optional opportunities called “OptionAreas.” Guidelines and awards attached to milestone deliverables provide schedule structure,motivation, instruction, and funding to the team as design projects mature from the preliminaryidea-stage to a sound design solution. Graduate student peer reviews complement academic andtechnical guidance provided by both faculty and project mentors/customers. The semesterculminates with a professional-style conference, called the Design Challenge Showcase, whichprovides
themselves.Students were encouraged to post articles of interest. Instructors also prompteddiscussions on topics relevant to the course, such as writing case studies, providingStrength, Improvement, Insight11 (SII) feedback to peers, and interviewing for a job. Thejob interview discussion, for example, happened during a week of on-campus interviewsand two groups contributed to an article on the topic that week.InstrumentsThree instruments were used to collect data: (1) Industry/Advisory Board survey,questionnaire and interview; (2) student focus group discussion; and (3) an online wikiarchive. These instruments were selected based on best-practice methodologies ineducation assessment8 and best fit for the scope of the study.Three College Advisory Board
., 2010, “Measuring engineering design self-efficacy,” Journal ofEngineering Education, 99, pp. 71-79. Page 26.1074.11 AppendixThe rubric used for peer evaluation to determine individual contributions is shown below. Peer Rating of Team Members: ENGR 350 In the table below, write down the names of the individual members of the group in which you worked for the project as part of ENGR 350 this semester. Rate your participation and the participation of each group member. You have to rate the degree to which each member fulfilled his
report on the benchmarks and outcomes serving as key indicators of success.MethodsAll relevant literature about PFF programs was searched; beginning with the implementation ofthe first PFF Program initiatives as sponsored by the AAC&U and CGS. Four databases (ISIWeb of Science, Engineering Index, ERIC—Education Resources Information Center, andAcademic Search Complete) were searched using a combination of search terms, including“preparing future faculty,” “engineering,” “faculty development,” “teacher education,” “faculty,”and “program effectiveness” for publications appearing from 1993 to present. Searches usingGoogle and Google Scholar were also considered for those publications not included in oursearch engines or not submitted for peer
asfrequent interactions with faculty and peers and more participation in academic activities, is mostimportant for student persistence. Townsend and Wilson [4] concurred, identifying that theseinteractions contribute to a student sense of belonging at the institution. Rendón [18] found thatthe more students perceive an interaction as being positive, the more they view themselves as anintegral and valued member of their college, critical for an overall positive experience. A number of studies have identified academic integration in college as more importantthan social integration for transfer student persistence. For instance, Townsend and Wilson [4]found that community college transfers make their social connection in the classroom, and
with varied backgrounds and diverse learning styles Eileen Haase and Harry Goldberg Johns Hopkins University Department of Biomedical EngineeringAbstractStudents in “Molecules and Cells” completed a survey to assess their learning preferences.Almost two-thirds of the students were multimodal, learning through a combination of visual,aural, read/write, or kinesthetic modes. This supported our view that a diverse learningenvironment with a variety of learning modalities would make a significant contribution to thestudents’ understanding and retention of the material. These methods included: lectures withclass demonstrations, team based learning, formative assessments through “clicker questions
Milliken, MA., MLIS is Liaison Librarian for the Humanities and Social Sciences at Drexel Uni- versity. Prior to becoming a librarian, he earned a Masters Degree in Medieval Studies and was a doctoral student in Medieval European History. He is particularly interested in partnerships between librarians and historians, especially in digital humanities projects.Lloyd Ackert, Drexel University I am an assistant teaching professor in the Department of History & Politics, and specialize in the history of science. My research focuses on Russian and European ecology and microbiology in the 19th-20th century, and am writing two books: a biography of Sergei Winogradsky, and a history of the concept of the ’cycle of life.’ I