and Self-Regulated Learning in Young Children: Role of Collaborative and Peer-Assisted Learning. Journal of Cognitive and Educational Psychology, 2007. 6(3): p. 433-455. 9 9. Schraw, G. and D. Moshman, Metacognitive Theories. Educational Psychology Review, 1995. 7(4): p. 351-371.10. Ambrose, S.A., et al., How Learning Works: 7 Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. 2010, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.11. Svinicki, M., Learning and Motivation in the Postsecondary Classroom. 2004, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.12. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: a methods
, “Multiple Case Studies to Enhance Project-based Learning in aComputer Architecture Course”, IEEE Transactions on Education, Vol. 48, No. 3, August, 2005[4] K. Smith, S. Sheppard, D. Johnson, and R. Johnson, “Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices,”Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 87-102.[5] B. A. Karanian, L. G. Chedid, M. Lande, G. Monaghan, “Work in Progress - Behavioral Aspects of StudentEngineering Design Experiences” in Proceedings of the 38th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, NY,October 22 – 25, 2008.[6] A. Stojcevski and D. Fitrio, “Project-based Learning Curriculum in Microelectronics Engineering”, 14th IEEEInternational Conference on Parallel and Distributes Systems, 2008[7] N. Warter
. 3.9* 1.1 3.7 1.2 B. The professor made the subject interesting. 3.8* 1.1 3.5 1.3 C. This subject is a prerequisite to other courses in my major. 4.2* 1.0 4.1 1.1 D. I wanted to get a good grade in the class. 4.6 0.6 4.6 0.7Q2. Opportunities to actively participate in class helped me understand the 4.1* 0.9 3.6 1.2course material.Q3. It is clear to me how this course is related to my other courses. 4.1* 1.0 3.9 1.1NOTE: all questions have the same response options. (1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neither
student success.References[1] R. M. Marra, K. A. Rodgers, D. Shen, B. Bogue, “Leaving Engineering: A Multi-Year Single Institution Study,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 6-27, 2012.[2] T. A. Litzinger, L. R. Lattuca, R. G. Hadgraft, W. C. Newstetter, “Engineering Education and the Development of Expertise,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 123-150, 2011.[3] R. M. Felder, K. D. Forrest, L. Baker-Ward, E. Dietz, P. H. Mohr, “A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention: I. Success and Failure in the Introductory Course,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 15-21, 1993.[4] R. Suresh, “The Relationship Between Barrier Courses and Persistence in Engineering,” Journal of College Student Retention, pp
an umbrella concept, Additive Innovation is a mode of collaboration where participantsin a community are: a) inspired by shared artifacts/ideas, b) openly share (and learn about) technology and processes used to create these, artifacts/ideas, c) design and prototype own modified version of the shared artifact/idea, and d) share their modified artifact/idea back with the community.The community design process in Figure 1 illustrate the mindset of additive innovation. 1. Inspiring Community 2. Sharing 4. Sharing & Learning
. Maldonado, “Retention and persistence of women and minorities along the engineering pathway in the United States,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, A. Johri and B. M. Olds, Eds., New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2014, pp. 311-334.
Timeline Term Phase Activities Participant Recruitment and Instrument Fall 2019 Preparation Development Instructor Surveys, Student Surveys, and Winter/Spring 2020 Pre-Intervention Classroom Observations No Workshop - Control Workshop A- Active Learning Only (AL) Summer 2020 Intervention Workshop B- Active Learning Plus (AL+) Instructor Surveys, Student Surveys, and Fall 2020 Post-Intervention Classroom ObservationsPhase 1- Preparation
solve problems 3.47 .792 Learning how to manage time 3.47 .739 Understanding how to advance in my field 3.43 .786 Developing skills as a leader 3.31 .831 Learning how to work with people of diverse backgrounds 3.30 .860 Applying knowledge learned from class 3.08 .915 Learning how to write better 2.75 .970Note. Includes responses only for those that participated in at least one WREA (N= 495)a 1= not at all helpful, 4= very helpfulShown in Appendix B, a
peer leaders to promotein-class discussion, engage students in problem solving, and provide pre-class worksheets and weeklyquizzes to scaffold learning.Summary and ConclusionsFaculty interviews, surveys, and progress reports in conjunction with student course surveys indicateimportant changes in instructional practices including: (a) Increased use of peer-to-peer learning; (b)Reorganization of large science lectures into smaller, more student-centered sections that favor pre-classworksheets, weekly quizzes, and group problem solving; (c) Decrease in faculty-led lectures toaccommodate student led problem solving and reporting out of their solutions in class. In this context, peerleaders have been a notable strategy found successful during the
) σmaxTeams with perfectly equal number of submissions from all team members would yield anequality score of 1 and a team where one team member makes all submissions would yield anequality score of 0.Figure 4a provides a histogram of the equality score for all teams with more than 2 members fromComputer Architecture. Figure 4b provides a histogram of the equality score for all teams withmore than 2 members from Numerical Methods. A multi-level modeling analysis of these datarevealed that the synchronous offering of the courses yielded significantly higher (p < 0.001)equality in the number of student submissions with a small effect size (g = 0.337). (a) Computer Architecture (b) Numerical MethodsFigure 4
and Industry Leadership Team(BILT) to identify industry needs and develop a curriculum to address them; (b) supports facultyin obtaining training and industry certifications; (c) recruits both high-school graduates,incumbent workers, and college students through newly developed informational materials.Additionally, to enhance diversity within the PRA Technician workforce, the program willcollaborate with the college’s existing initiatives to attract more female and racial and ethnicminorities. Advancements in the comprehension of technical education for service industries aredisseminated through the college website and presented at regional and national conferences [4].Key words: Robotic Automation, Service Industries
framework for authentic learning environments’. Educational technology research and development, 48(3), pp. 23–48.55 Herrington, Jan, Reeves, Thomas C., Oliver, Ron and Woo, Younghee (2004) ‘Designing authentic activities in web-based courses’. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(1), pp. 3–29.56 Oliver, Ron and Herrington, Jan (2000) ‘Using situated learning as a design strategy for Web- based learning’. Instructional and cognitive impacts of Web-based education, pp. 178–191. Page 26.329.1757 Bannan, B (2012) ‘Design research and twice exceptional children: Toward an integration of motivation, emotion and
, 2010.[12] E. Godfrey, A. Johri, and B. Olds, "Understanding disciplinary cultures: The first step to cultural change," Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, pp. 437- 455, 2014.[13] E. A. Cech and T. J. Waidzunas, "Navigating the heteronormativity of engineering: The experiences of lesbian, gay, and bisexual students," Engineering Studies, vol. 3, pp. 1-24, 2011.[14] M. Tremblay, T. Wils, and C. Proulx, "Determinants of career path preferences among Canadian engineers," Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, vol. 19, pp. 1-23, 2002.[15] R. W. Lent, S. D. Brown, and G. Hackett, "Contextual supports and barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis," Journal of
, 2017.[7] C. Stanford, R. Cole, J. Froyd, C. Henderson, D. Friedrichsen, and R. Khatri, “Analysis of Propagation Plans in NSF-Funded Education Development Projects,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 418–437, Aug. 2017.[8] C. Stanford, R. Cole, J. Froyd, D. Friedrichsen, R. Khatri, and C. Henderson, “Supporting sustained adoption of education innovations: The Designing for Sustained Adoption Assessment Instrument,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 1, Dec. 2016.[9] M. B. Miles, H. A. Michaek, and J. Saldaña, Qualitative Data Analysis A Methods Sourcebook Edition 3. 2017.
community. Introduced in thispaper as an umbrella concept, Additive Innovation is a mode of collaboration where participantsin a community are: a) inspired by shared artifacts/ideas, b) openly share (and learn about) technology and processes used to create these, artifacts/ideas, c) design and prototype own modified version of the shared artifact/idea, and d) share their modified artifact/idea back with the community.Learning Attributes of MakingMaking is rooted in constructionism, learning by doing or Making and constructing knowledgethrough that doing 5. Aspects of Making that could appear in the engineering classroom aredescribed in the following sections. Attributes of Making come directly from themes emergingfrom our ongoing
, Mar. 2008.13. Kerry B, Isakson J, Abraham P, Arkatov A, Bailey G, Bingaman J, et al: Report of the Web based Education Commission to the President and Congress of the United States, Dec., 2000. URL: http://www.ed.gov/offices/AC/WBEC/FinalReport/WBECReport.pdf14. Hake R: Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, American Journal of Physics, 6:64-75, 1998.15. Hornak JP: The Basics of MRI (online textbook). URL: http://www.cis.rit.edu/htbooks/mri/16. Howard L. Adaptive learning technologies for biomedical engineering education. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 22:58-65, 2003.17. Huda W, and Slone RM: Review
, and People of Color (BIPOC) in higher ed thrive. Dr. Z. is also a first-generation college graduate, child of immigrants, and a published author. He is a former McNair Scholar, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, & Medicine-Ford Foundation Fellow, Herman B. Wells Graduate Fellow, International Counseling Psychologist, former Assistant Professor at the University of Kentucky, and current Post-Doctoral ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Paper ID #41726 Research Scholar at the University of Pittsburgh. Dr. Z.’s research program focuses on examining the impact of
. (2000). “Attaining self-regulation, A social cognitive perspective.” In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation, San Diego, CA, Academic Press, 13-39.2. Winne, P.H., and Perry, N.E. (2000). “Measuring self-regulated learning.” In P. Pintrich, M. Boekaerts, and M. Seidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation, Orlando, FL, Academic Press, 531-566.3. Perry, N.E., Phillips, L., and Hutchinson, L.R. (2006). “Preparing student teachers to support for self-regulated learning.” Elementary School Journal, 106, 237-254.4. Zimmerman, B. J., and Campillo, M. (2003). “Motivating self-regulated problem solvers.” In J. E. Davidson, and R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), “The nature of problem solving”, New
Future, 2008 Annual Report,National Academy of Engineering, [Online]. Available: https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=43355.[Accessed Apr. 11, 2019].[10] Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., & Thoma, S. (1999). A neo-Kohlbergian approach: TheDIT and schema theory. Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 291-324.[11] Zhu, Q., & Zoltowski, C. B., & Feister, M. K., & Buzzanell, P. M., & Oakes, W. C., & Mead,A. D. (2014, June), The Development of an Instrument for Assessing Individual Ethical DecisionMaking in Project-based Design Teams: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods. Paperpresented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2—23130[12] D. Burkey, R. Cimino, M. Young, K. Dahm
Future, 2008 Annual Report,National Academy of Engineering, [Online]. Available: https://www.nae.edu/File.aspx?id=43355.[Accessed Apr. 11, 2019].[10] Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., & Thoma, S. (1999). A neo-Kohlbergian approach: TheDIT and schema theory. Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 291-324.[11] Zhu, Q., & Zoltowski, C. B., & Feister, M. K., & Buzzanell, P. M., & Oakes, W. C., & Mead,A. D. (2014, June), The Development of an Instrument for Assessing Individual Ethical DecisionMaking in Project-based Design Teams: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Methods. Paperpresented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2—23130[12] D. Burkey, R. Cimino, M. Young, K. Dahm
, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 570-588, 2009.[14] T. C. D. a. N. Dasgupta, "Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering," PNAS, vol. 114, no. 23, pp. 5964- 5969, 2017.[15] A. Miguel, "ECE Scholars: NSF S-STEM Grant," in 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2018.[16] E. Deruy, "At Universities, More Students Are Working Full-Time," 25 October 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/at-universities- more-students-are-working-full-time/433245/. [Accessed 2018].[17] L. S. M. R. S. P. B. Ning Fang, "An S-STEM Project for Improving Undergraduate Engineering Education," in 2018 ASEE Annual
to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability (e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems (k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice.The student outcomes grouped under the professional component address non-technicalcompetencies that are vital to engineering practice. These are
towards this question,indicating that the creative problem solving strategies may help their learning and facilitatethem to find right solutions to homework or exams. Based on students’ response to Question 1, i.e., “what benefits you get from your project”(see Table 1A and Table 1B in Appendix), the average of accounts by both ResearchAssistant A and Research Assistant B indicate that about 14% of the participants believedthat the community service learning with creative problem solving scaffolding can lead tobetter academic performance in their subsequent studies, such as “Helps me build work forthe next semester” (Interviewee 2, 2015 Fall), “learn to study in a better way, be moreaccurate.” (Interviewee 4, 2016 Fall), “Help studies…help
enhances the science and mathematics instruction the secondarystudents already receive. And, it provides the acquisition of technical skills needed to work inbiomanufacturing companies.II. BT ATE Project PlanThe BT-ATE project included three primary components:A. To develop and implement a secondary Biosystems Technology Pathway delivered throughthe state Ag Ed program as part of the Agriculture Food, and Natural Resources Career Cluster;B. To develop and implement a Biosystems Technology Certificate program at GreenvilleTechnical College including an articulation plan with Clemson University; and Page 23.969.3C. To develop and implement a
evaluation of in-field or edge-of-field practices that may reduce them, and • Combinations of land use and management practices to maintain profitability while improving water quality.We anticipate three more cohorts of trainees, with pairs of successive cohorts overlapping ineach of the next three academic years.Table 1. Requirements for the graduate certificate in Data-Driven Food, Energy and Water Decision Making Knowledge Area Requirement Courses Fundamental Core Course A B E 690X: Biosystems for Sustainable Development (2 credits) understanding of interactions in the FEW nexus Communication Core Course GR ST 566: Communications in Science (0.5 credit) Entrepreneurship
., Backer, P. R., 2013, “How Important is the WOW Factor in First Year Engineering Courses?” AC2013-6417, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA.[5] Eris, O., Chachra, D., Chen, H. L., Sheppard, S., Ludlow, L., Rosca, C., Bailey, T., Toye, G., 2010, “Outcomes of a longitudinal administration of the persistence in engineering survey,” Journal of Engineering Education, 99, pp. 371-395.[6] Mena, I. B., Zappe, S. E., Litzinger, T. A., 2013, “Examining the Experiences and Perceptions of First-Year Engineering Students,” AC2013-6270, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA.[7] National Academy of Engineering, 2005, “The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in
Paper ID #13499Nanotechnology Courses for General EducationProf. James E Morris, Portland State University Jim is a Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering at Portland State University, Oregon, USA, with B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in Physics from the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Saskatchewan, Canada. He has served as Department Chair at both SUNY-Binghamton and PSU, and was the founding Director of Binghamton’s Institute for Research in Electronics Packaging. Jim has held multiple visiting faculty positions around the world, notably as a Royal
University Dr. Leanne Petry is a Materials Engineer and Professor in the College of Engineering, Science, Tech- nology, and Agriculture (CESTA) at Central State University (CSU). Her expertise is in analytical and materials characterization techniques, including microscopy, spectroscopy, chromatography, and electro- chemistry. Her research interests include oxidation-reduction reactions at the surface of electrodes for sensor applications, corrosion mechanisms of materials, as well as their electrochemical degradation. She currently serves as the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) – CSU Chapter President, the Director of Faculty Development in the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) as well as Chair
through the Inclusive Professional Framework for Faculty,” Dep. Chair, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 4–5, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1002/dch.30408.[2] R. E. Zambrana, R. Ray, M. M. Espino, C. Castro, B. Douthirt Cohen, and J. Eliason, “‘Don’t Leave Us Behind’: The Importance of Mentoring for Underrepresented Minority Faculty,” Am. Educ. Res. J., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 40–72, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.3102/0002831214563063.[3] S. Hood, R. K. Hopson, and K. Kirkhart, “Culturally Responsive Evaluation: Theory, Practice, and Future Implications,” in Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, Fourth Edition., 2015, pp. 281–317.[4] A. Petrova, “High-Performance Teams in Traditional and Digital Contexts: A Literature Review,” in Selected Papers in the IRIS
Courses," Education, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 56, pp. 393-399, 11/01 2013, doi: 10.1109/TE.2013.2244602.[11] C. Henderson and M. Dancy, "Impact of physics education research on the teaching of introductory quantitative physics in the United States," Physical review special topics. Physics education research, vol. 5, 12/01 2009, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020107.[12] S. E. Shadle, A. Marker, and B. Earl, "Faculty drivers and barriers: laying the groundwork for undergraduate STEM education reform in academic departments," International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 8, 2017/04/13 2017, doi: 10.1186/s40594- 017-0062-7.[13] C. J. Finelli and M. Borrego, "Evidence-Based Strategies to Reduce Student