determine how to anticipate and manage their emotions, and to anticipate and workwith the emotions of others. Specific competencies that are targeted include: self-awareness,personal development, empathy, constructive discontent, conflict resolution, resilience, andgrowth. Through focused attention and effort, students strive to make incremental changes intheir EI competencies. Students work both individually and in teams, and use activities,discussion and reflection to attain the course objectives.At the end of the course, students have written and revised a Personal Mission Statement and aPersonal Development Plan, which will serve as roadmaps for their continuing emotionalintelligence development
% error off of the measured value while the remaining groups average a 36% error. Asimilar trend is seen with those groups that include an atmospheric condition state in their model,with a 15% error in those that do and a 41% error with those that do not. This provides insight intothe successful methods of solving this MEA and what possible concepts the students are missing.Another method of assessing the MEA is a long reflection tool that allows the students to thinkabout what they learned and record the troubles and successes that they experienced. From thespring to the summer the students indicated in the reflection that they learned very similarconcepts; 63% of the students indicated that they learned about modeling a polytropic process
deliverables reflecting a partial recognition or incompletehandling of ethical dimensions, and those that submitted deliverables reflecting thorough navigationof ethical dimensions. These performance observations were possible because the activity involvedmaking resource choices linked to ethical implications, resulting in certain materials’ use (orabsence) evident in teams’ physical deliverables. Students’ post-activity reflections, submitted afterthey participated in an activity debrief, included indications of intended learning in a majority ofcases (83% of submittals) based upon a rubric. Drawing from activity observations and reflections,we discuss how teams’ ethical decision making appears to have been strained by various intendedpressures
whencompared to the monotonous progression of well-structured chapters in the textbook. In the portfolio,students are required to employ the Feynman technique where they explain fundamental concepts usingsimple words. They are also required to make connections between the different aspects of the classes.Through the process of integration of these multiple entities of a course, students learn to critique, realize,synthesize and reflect on the subject they learn thereby achieving all the stages of Bloom’s taxonomy.“Reflecting on this semester, there are many things I have learned and will stick with me because of theway this class was arranged. I believe passion projects and portfolios were beneficial to my understandingof the subject and the questions
learners to managetensions inherent in their environment. Because most students already live in such environmentsteaching definable or enumerable outcomes makes less sense than helping student to bemetacognitive and reflective how they manage and relate with technology.IntroductionThis paper uses technological literacy as a foil, to reflect back a vision of technology andengineering education that can lay claim to be better than what currently exists. Making a claimto be better sets up several conditions on the claimant – to identify what needs to be improvedand why; to craft a credible plan explaining why the situation will be improved in some specificway; and that any change will not have unpredicted negative consequences, particularly forgroups
survey, after being introduced to principles of design methodologies andhuman factors, and then were required to provide the questionnaire to two other non-engineeringstudents or professionals. The first-year engineering students collected the completed surveys oftheir non-engineering peers and responded to three open-ended questions related to commonalitiesand differences in understanding the ambiguous interfaces.In three cohorts’ reflections (99), nearly half attributed the variation of responses to differences inexperiences and shared understandings. Other explanations for the observed variation in responseswere disciplinary differences (23), difference of interpretation of instruction (30), and commonsense (20). The series of ambiguous
, engineering doctoral students werefound to be the most difficult to attract in terms of willingness to work with writing centers[16].Discipline-Specific Writing-Intensive CourseSituated within a complex sociocultural context, each discipline under engineering enjoys aspecialized epistemology and rhetorical convention that are co-constructed and practiced byits members [17]. As newcomers to the discipline, graduate students are waiting to beapprenticed into their respective domain, sometimes through a discipline-specific writingcourse. According to research in disciplinary writing education, analyzing discipline-specifictexts is an excellent starting point for writing instruction, allowing students to reflect ondisciplinary norms and incorporate these
spirit, we contend that in design, build, and test courses studentslearn when they are required to reflect on their experiences and identify theirlearning explicitly. Further, we posit that utilization of an assessment instrument,the learning statement (LS), can be used to both enable and assess studentlearning. In our course, AME4163: Principles of Engineering Design, a senior-level,pre-capstone, engineering design course, students learn by reflecting on doing bywriting statements anchored in Kolb’s experiential learning cycle. In Fall 2016we collected over 11,000 learning statements from over 150 students. To addressthe challenge of analyzing and gleaning knowledge from the large number oflearning statements we resorted to text mining
; 5) visual glossaries to foster spatial-visualconceptual definition and understanding; 5) open-ended, end-of-class reflection questions thatqueried student on their most interesting, muddiest, and takeaway points; and 6) homework withequation problems, graphing problems, sort-and-match worksheets and concept questions.Multiple assessments showed significant gains in conceptual knowledge and support of studentlearning. Details of results, analysis, conclusions and implications are presented and discussed inthe full paper.IntroductionMisconception research on atomic bonding has been done primarily from a physical scienceperspective. Traditionally taught in chemistry, students learn the nature of atomic bonds and howthey can be represented
]. Subsequently, this pedagogical PDprogram was adapted for engineering GTAs, with an aim to enhance and support theirprofessional learning. For clarity, we use “PD program” throughout to refer to the programoffered to engineering GTAs that engaged them in professional learning about postsecondaryengineering pedagogy.This study was structured to investigate the GTA participants’ experiences and development inthe PD program intended to provide GTA opportunities to actively learn and reflect onpedagogical concepts and approaches as a community. This study was structured to investigatethe participants’ experiences in this program. The specific research questions that guided thisstudy were: ● What features and content of the program did GTA participants
, gender and sexuality studies(WGSS) or ethnic studies empowers minoritized engineering students to develop criticalconsciousness relative to the culture of engineering. Our work investigates the influence of twosuch courses on student attitudes and motivation by gathering both qualitative and quantitativedata from students in two STEM-themed courses in WGSS and ethnic studies, “Gender andSTEM” and “Race and Technology.” We argue that in these courses students acquire skills thatenable them to critically reflect on both the socially constructed nature of STEM and on thehistorical patterns within engineering culture that exacerbate existing inequities and injusticedespite claims of “neutral” objectivity. In preliminary data, students report that
epistemology, teamwork and equity). While seminar goals aligned with the goals ofLA programs nationally, our seminar design team also articulated several values which guidedthe design of our seminar: a) helping LAs reframe their role as supporting growth rather thanevaluation, b) valuing a broad set of metrics of success from day one, c) celebrating that differentstudents bring in different expertise, and disrupting overly simplistic expertise/novicedichotomies, d) acknowledging that we all have different starting points and valuing a pluralityof goals, e) helping our students track their own progress through reflecting on concreterepresentations of their thinking, and f) supporting LAs in developing deep disciplinaryknowledge of design thinking. This
employedparticipant interviews to identify the components of the “Como, Italy Technical Presentation andCross-Cultural Engagement” faculty-led study abroad program that were most relevant todeveloping global competencies in engineering students. In addition, the factors that helped andhindered the acquisition of this skillset were explored utilizing Critical Incident Technique(CIT).Local student interactions, an academic preparation and culture class, free time/personalexploration, guided excursions, and reflection were found to be significant as both programcomponents and helping factors in the development of global competencies. Cultural immersion,interactions with locals, and faculty encouragement were important as program components butnot explicitly
intersection of science and/or technology in society, and the theme for our work is “what is good engineering and science.”This is an excerpt from an email that two authors of this paper, Elizabeth Reddy and MarieStettler Kleine, sent out in the summer of 2022. We were excited for the opportunity to invite ourcolleagues to join us in the project of interdisciplinary engineering education, informed byScience and Technology Studies (or STS). This project was an opportunity to stage playfulworkshops and facilitate conversations we did not often get to have, all designed to stimulateinterdisciplinary reflections on what we do and why we do it. We were informed by theories of“trading zones” from STS and theories of the classroom drawn from
findingsshow how an engineering instructor orchestrated a culture-aligned adoption and adaptation of aninstructional innovation. Using reflective practice, the research participant adapted theimplemented innovative instruction to their hands-on institution culture, such as adjustingexpectations in content, adapting resources to students’ individual needs, adjusting uncertainty ofproblem solving, and adapting to a hands-on institution culture. This research highlights theimportant role of institutional culture in local adaptations of educational innovations, and itprovides the community with an expanded way to think about innovation propagation.Improving teaching and learning has been an important issue in undergraduate science,technology, engineering
. Exam scores were improved when measuring studentsability to create use cases, especially clarity and completeness. Student performance was greatlyimproved when writing use cases, especially clarity and completeness which was reflected inimproved projects. Quantitatively, the same mindset objectives were assessed in other coursemodules as part a larger curriculum wide effort in Engineering. The numerical results indicatethat the modules in this course outperformed other modules in the curriculum for most of themindset objectives. Ultimately, the results indicate these types of modules may play an importantrole in entrepreneurial mindset development for computer science students.IntroductionThis paper describes a set of modules designed to
. Turns, University of Washington Jennifer Turns is a Professor in the Department of Human Centered Design & Engineering at the Univer- sity of Washington. She is interested in all aspects of engineering education, including how to support engineering students in reflecting on experience, how to help engineering educators make effective teach- ing decisions, and the application of ideas from complexity science to the challenges of engineering education. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Engineering with Engineers: Fostering Engineering IdentityIntroductionThe Mechanical Engineering Department at Seattle University was awarded
department is always looking to improve how material relevant to major explorationis incorporated into its introductory course as it can have a significant impact on individualstudents as well as the retention and persistence statistics in the engineering majors.Over the years, the General Engineering department has implemented a variety of methods toencourage and/or require students to learn about the different engineering majors offered atClemson. For several years, students were required to complete a series of assignments as part ofan “Individual Reflection Portfolio.” These assignments required students to researchinformation about the different engineering disciplines then write reflections related toengineering ethics and future engineering
, 2016). We use themetaphor of the soul to narrate our experiences in the field, a majority of which includeexperiences we shared being in the same engineering education PhD program. The metaphor ofthe soul serves as a vehicle to communicate our experiences, conceptions, hopes, fears, andaspirations. The soul is as much an idea felt, as it is a scholarship known through inquiry. Weexperienced this essence as it moved across individuals in our department, and believe it is feltfurther in the engineering education community. The soul fuels continuous evolution by creatingtension and using it as energy to find purpose in our work.IntentionOur intention is to share our experiences and prompt reflection from the engineering educationcommunity so that
abilityto transfer the closed-ended skills used on a typical math problem to an open-ended problem.The Reflective Practitioner. A study by Valkenberg and Dorst discussed the use of descriptive andreflective practices in design [6]. This paper drew heavily on Schön’s paradigm of reflective practice [7].Schön contends that every design problem is necessarily a unique challenge. Teaching students the skillsto reflect on their design while innovating, in order to advance the design, is essential to teaching design.This also can lead to problems, since if every problem is unique, and the students want a single concreteroadmap for how a project should go, there is bound to be conflict. Valkenberg and Dorst discussed fourdifferent design activities
with asingle hand, in order to provide an in-class example. (a) (b)Figure 1. a) Solid Model constructed by student showing the exploded view of child’s cornpopper and b) picture of actual product.The second assignment required students to investigate ongoing engineering work at ourcampus’s startup/business incubator (Rose-Hulman Ventures), producing ethnographic insightsby observing as comprehensively as possible actions, statements, and activities that occurred.They were to note how decisions were made, conclusions reached, and problems solvedincluding what kinds of evidence, reasoning, and persuasion that were used to communicate toothers. In addition, the students were to reflect
learners to apply new knowledge to ISIEnvision credit ratings, 2. student motivation metrics which are linked to students’ ability toemploy learning strategies and 3. student reflective observation and conceptualization on theirown ability to apply new knowledge. Findings of this study are preliminary and includequalitative measures but point to potential teaching/learning mechanisms which may be furtherexplored in successive studies.IntroductionThe civil engineering profession faces an increasing range of demands including preparingstudents for evolving challenges including design and maintenance of aging infrastructure,development of sustainable infrastructure and resilient design. The shift from an industrializedeconomy to the knowledge economy
, andsociety. The institution (the school) bears ethical and chartered obligations to society to graduatequalified individuals technically-ready and ethically-primed to enter into professional life. Theinstitution must choose to confer a degree based on course grades (and GPA in relevantcoursework). Course grades in turn should reflect individual student mastery of course material.How, then, should an assessment model be structured to selectively promote collaboration andstill maintain the integrity of the individual educational assessment process? We seek to answertwo questions in this assessment. How do we adjust the course assessment model (types ofassignments used/points allocated) to best teach a classroom of digital natives with varyingdegrees
faculty and student beliefs aboutteaching and learning related to faculty pedagogical activities and actions? Very little prior workintegrates student-side and instructor-side preferences and actions, and this paper extends ourunderstanding of this alignment. We expect that a clearer understanding of the alignmentbetween faculty and students may help explain student academic performance. This paperfocuses on characterizing the alignment, while our future research explores its relationship tostudent outcomes.Our data analysis reveals the following key insights about our research question. Faculty-studentlearning styles misalignment is largest along the active-reflective dimension of the ILS. In turn,faculty who are more misaligned with their
knowledgeparticipants (middle school students) brought to a two-week STEM summer enrichmentprogram. The study, which is a small piece of a much larger research endeavor, primarily reliedon data collected from interviews with eight individual pod leaders. The results of this studyindicated that elicitation strategies are sometimes hindered by programmatic features–primarilythe time constraints and subsequent lack of time for reflection–of summer enrichment programs.IntroductionThe renewed focus in STEM education has led to the increased number of summer enrichmentprograms across the United States. These programs and other out of school experiences areintended to increase student awareness about and interest in STEM while bringing more studentsinto STEM fields
-unit course taught in collaboration with SJSU's Department ofHistory. All these changes culminated into making the program the success it is today.Due to these innovations and constant evolution, the 2014 cohort was unlike any other. SJSUstudents were given first-hand experience about technology's global role, entrepreneurship, andcross-cultural collaboration when they participated in the International Innovation &Entrepreneur Leadership Experience (IIELE) at Chung Yuan Christian University (CYCU) inJungli, Taiwan. Beginning with the 2014 cohort, we renamed the GTI program to reflect thechange in focus. The new name is the Global Technology Institute (GTI*). In three weeks,students created innovative business propositions, toured
reflection to enrich the learning experience, teach civicresponsibility, and strengthen communities. Students in a technical elective robotics class in theMechanical Engineering Department at the University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) optedfor either a final project or service learning for 25% of their grade. For SL, the students had towork with elementary and middle-school children in San Antonio over a period of 10 weeks tomentor them on building and programming robots with LEGO® Mindstorms® for the FIRST®LEGO® League tournament. In parallel, the undergraduates also learnt LEGO® Mindstorms inthe class by creating robots for assigned labs. This way they were able to apply concepts taughtin the class towards community service. As part of the
retirement age within the U.S. government.2 In addition, students who do pursueengineering degrees do not reflect the diversity of students in the United States, a pattern ofenrollment that is likely to have a number of negative consequences, both for the successfulpractice of engineering and for the resolution of broader societal issues. Concerns about the lackof engineering exposure for all children and ensuring a larger, more reliable supply of futureengineers have been accompanied by the realization that we have not yet determined the bestway to inform children of engineering skills and concepts.3 There is also continued debate on whether national standards should be developed andimplemented for K-12 engineering education. A 2010 report
cognitive, behavioral,and attitudinal domains of global competency.10Overview of Service-LearningService-learning is the intentional integration of service experiences into academic courses toenhance the learning of the core content and to give students broader learning opportunitiesabout themselves and society at large. Service-learning has been defined “a credit-bearingeducational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity that meetsidentified community needs and reflect on the service activity in such a way as to gain furtherunderstanding of the course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced
approaches they used. For instance, the instructors faced aninteraction barrier—sources of resistance to initiating a student-instructor interaction, such as alack of instructor self-confidence or student reticence. We illustrate challenges instructors facedand their approaches to resolve them through reflective episodes from the instructors. Ouraudience is twofold: Education researchers will find new lines of investigation for future work onstudios, while early instructors will learn how to get started with teaching in studios.IntroductionStudio instruction is a useful active learning alternative to passive approaches, such as purelecture. Drawing on a tradition from architecture and the fine arts [1], studio instructionde-emphasizes the instructor