) demonstrated – 1 point; or not – 0 points 3 options (levels) fully – 2 points; partially – 1 point; or not demonstrated – 0 points 4 options (levels) fully – 3 points; some – 2 points; less – 1 point; or not demonstrated – 0 pointsIn the development of this rubric, reflection on the previous implementation of a similar problemwere considered – findings discussed by Rodgers et al. [28]. The two biggest changes were: (1)rubric items related to the shareability dimension were incorporated in and (2) some rubric itemshad more levels rather than having as many dichotomous rubric items. The first change was toadd another dimension of analysis in the study. The second change was primarily based on thedifferent context of the problem aligned better with
. Thegoal is to improve students performance in early STEM courses and increase retention rate. Thecourses feature a calculus sequence that has been redesigned to coincide with the physics courses,and the mathematical concepts are introduced in the concept of physics problems with the goalof examining more abstract mathematical ideas once the concrete notions are formulated. Theprogram identifies students’ needs prior to enrollment using the physics and math scores. Thestudents’ high physics intuition may reflect their higher intuitive understanding of the real-worldphysical problems, while needing support in understanding of abstract mathematical modelingand manipulations skills. COMPASS focuses on taking advantages of students’ physics
part of thisprofession. Without many experiences in classes or through co-curricular activities that showhow personal and professional experiences can be integrated, students are likely tocompartmentalize those senses of social responsibility. Those who do have significantopportunities to consider how their personal goals positively impact their work will go throughan evaluative and reflective process, visualized below, to take stock of how they can live theirpersonal social responsibility goals through their profession. Thus, Canney and Bielefeldt argue,the professional connectedness realm of social responsibility development requires engineers toconsider the opportunity costs and benefits of their decisions. For example, working to
librarians now "believe that‘understanding some ethical, legal, economic, and socio-political information issues’ is anelement of IL" [9]. This approach is reflected in the ACRL’s Framework for InformationLiteracy for Higher Education [4].IL instruction for graduate students takes various forms. It can be integrated into a graduatecourse or delivered as a stand-alone workshop. It can also be offered as a one-shot session or as aseries of sessions. The latter offers the opportunity to establish a relationship with students,compared to the one-shot session, and appears to have a much greater impact on studentretention [9, 10]. The course-integrated sessions have the advantage of strengthening the linksbetween librarians and professors and are directly
opportunity for student-driven feedback. The specific questionsare included in Appendix A. The response rate was 57% (19/33 students). Results confirmed thatthe instructions and purpose for the exercises were clear: all students either agreed or stronglyagreed with those statements. Students spent less than 45 minutes on each activity, with themajority (17/19 respondents) spending less than 20 minutes. Open feedback was quite positive.Representative comments include: • “I think the "Creativity!" exercises are a great way to challenge students. They not only get us to think about things in a non-linear fashion but they also allow us to reflect on other parts of life where we go with "the norm" and fail to exercise creativity
engineering curriculum atUniversity of Illinois at Chicago since Fall 2018. In particular, "electrification" of studentprojects and learning outcomes has been front and center in the department's latest strategicplanning. Leveraging recent literature and faculty expertise, an increasingly deeper integration ofArduino has since taken place, while attempting to maintain the core of team-based mechanicaldesign using morphological methods. The focus of this paper is to identify the challenges andpitfalls in such an endeavor by reflecting on the process of change over three semesters ofimplementation, including the deployment of both top-down and bottom-up approaches. Inparticular, this paper will examine course content development, teaching staff
/assignments. Therefore, as part of this study, the participating faculty regularlyengage with two social science research experts in engineering education who serve as mentorsfor survey, focus group, evaluation, and reflection best practices in course design andassessment.In sum, the unique features of the HEPE offer the following features: (i) students working inteams, (ii) students working across disciplines, (iii) students working on an open-ended problem,(iv) students having access to professors from multiple disciplines, and (v) students havingaccess to external expertise and critique. The next section (section 4.2) describes the details ofthe course offering.4.2 Course implementation structureTwenty-one students are enrolled in the initial
and data set as well as the methods used to collect and analyze our data.The third section reviews our key findings for this stage of the research process, drawingextensively on students’ articulations of the role of ethics in their individual lives, theireducational experiences, and the profession. In the fourth section, we identify implications of ourfindings and how they offer insight into both the teaching of ethics to engineering students andthe broader challenges facing engineering educational environments having to do witheducational and disciplinary cultures. Finally, we conclude the paper by reviewing our keyfindings and reflecting on what they portend for the project, and engineering ethics teaching andresearch, moving into the
fellinto the categories of curriculum and pedagogy, developing reflective teachers, and disseminatingpolicy. For example, respondents identified faculty and graduate student seminars as an effectiveway of disseminating policy, new curriculum, and teaching pedagogy. They felt that teachingportfolio programs, or faculty participation in the development of instructional materials wouldincrease teacher introspection. Despite identifying these seminars and portfolio programs as usefulvenues for professional growth, however, only 36.5% of faculty attend a teaching workshop, and19.7% write educational materials/curricula annually. None of the professor, department chair, ordean’s responses were categorized into the “shared vision” category [10].This lack
instructor, administrators, and researchers biases the narrative in favor of the actorswho were empowered and incentivized to bring the WSM to the LPU, side-stepping theexperiences of the students who remained in the course for the duration of the semester as wellas the faculty and departmental entities who were not in favor of creating a WSM course at theLPU. The enrolled-student data is still being collected in the form of qualitative interviews andlongitudinal tracking; hence, we save analysis of that data for future work.We are reflective and aware of the tendency of classical actor-network studies to focus on thedecision-makers and those in charge, rather than those at the network margins or those powerlessto contest the processes of organizing
integrated elements of social justice and CP through differentavenues as part of our goal to establish a DLS. First, we promoted a sense of equity starting fromthe recruitment process until the final presentation. This sense of equity was reflected in ourapproach to reaching out to each student individually without demonstrating privileges to aspecific group of students. We also created a learning environment where tutors and studentscould talk to each other easily throughout the course. This open line of communication seemedto have a strong relationship to the sense of community and collaboration within the classroom.Second, students were able to take decisions in some assignments. Decisions regarding creatingteams, agreeing on due dates, scoping
results to thestatewide symposium in April, showed that her confidence and her delivery has much improved.Her self-reported “Skill in science writing” increased from 2 to 3.5; this is an area that we will beable to analyze after she concludes her research and starts creating the poster. Finally, sheexpressed her resilience to the challenges as reflected in the stable score of 4 for “Clarification ofcareer path.” She still intends to obtain a doctorate degree.Melissa has completed her analysis of Cadmium removal with corn as a bio-sorbent. As a resultof her experiments, she concluded that corn is an effective bio-sorbent for higher concentrationsof Cadmium levels, 25 - 80 µg/L, with removal efficiencies of 46% -51%, respectively.To date, she has
allof the individuals using the modules, it was mentioned as one reason for the effectiveness of themodules. This affordance is reflected in the following quote: Yes. I mean, so first off, the ability to kind of sweeten the pot a little bit by providing some income for faculty, that’s a help, right. Because, okay, we paid you, now you got to produce, right. So as opposed to the past [initiatives], we haven’t had that….Characteristics relating to the people and dynamics working on the project included autonomy andcommunity. The theme of autonomy is related to the theme of flexibility. Many respondents likedthat the modules were there if they wanted them and that the department did not force them on theinstructors. The following
-post survey was the Classroom Practice Strategies Survey (CPSS) where thefaculty listed the types of instructional strategies they used in the classroom. They listed responsessuch as lecture, active learning, and real world examples. This survey showed the changes overtime in the types of strategies that faculty used in their classrooms and indicates trends in changesin their classroom practice.A third survey was developed and used used to measure the motivation of faculty to implementthree key student-centered instruction strategies of contextualization of content (or real-worldexamples), student to student interactions, and student reflection. The survey uses expectancy-value theory and is called VECTERS (Value, Expectancy, and Cost of
post-remediationwith instructional processes and events. Through the leveraging of student achievement data,cyber-enabled adaptive team composition, and real-time monitoring to sustain instantaneousmodeling of the learner, it is likely to realize outcomes that are highly-transportable across awide range of STEM disciplines and levels to transform the efficacy of hands-on learning. Forinstance, Beck [20-22], Heffernan [23, 24], Koedinger [25], Salame [26] and others identifytradeoffs in learning outcomes with online formative assessments through immediate feedback,which is useful for allowing for reflection whereby the student use of feedback becomes a toolfor continuous growth [27-29].Related works utilizing dynamically-formed peer cohorts are
chose those five social identities. We aimedin this exercise to help displace white privilege from the center of LATTICE practices andoutputs, as well as other privileges like heteronormativity, class status, and career stages.Another purpose of this activity was to understand which identities are most important to groupmembers, how these identities intersect with our work in designing professional interventions forwomen. Additionally, this Identity Examination activity helped LATTICE team membersilluminate and reflect on the aspects of our identity that motivate our work and our engagementin this social/intellectual movement in academic engineering. Further, our professional activitiesshape and are shaped by our lived experiences. Sharing our
meeting of Engineering 2 course instructors; they chosehow to address it with their students. While the curriculum includes instruction on providingconstructive feedback in teams, the connection between that part of the curriculum may or maynot have been made explicit at the time peer-to-peer comments were introduced.4.2.1 Lack of detailLack of detail in comments reflects a lack of discrimination in students’ ratings of themselvesand each other. One student received 18 3’s of a possible 20 ratings (4 teammates rating 5dimensions). The comments provided little insight into this unremarkable behavior.Table 1 – Comments about Gwen Yield Little InformationBy Gwen By Teammate #2 By Teammate #3 By
or lessacademically successful and then asking them to reflect on their future goals has beendemonstrated to impact the goals listed [17]. Action-readiness is the process by which salientidentities prompt individual to engage with related activities, and how these activities impacttheir overall motivation [14]. Interpretation of difficulty refers to the ways in which studentsrespond to failure. In the case of identity-congruent tasks, it signals that the task and identity areimportant and require more effort. For identity-incongruent tasks, failure indicates that theidentity is unlikely or unimportant, and one should withdraw from the task.To assess dynamic construction among EDS, salient identities and relevant contexts were drawnfrom the
analysis, controlling for Gender, Race, Honors Courses at Baseline, Family Income, and ParentalSupport for STEM with added interaction variable for female program participants.B. Interest in Majoring in STEM-related FieldsThe positive impacts on STEM-related attitudes were also reflected in reported interest in STEMmajors at college, though with a clear distinction between Engineering and technology-relatedmajors and other STEM fields. Exhibit 7 shows the percent of all first year college students whoare “very interested” in majoring in the specified field (i.e., reporting a 6, 7, or “alreadydeclared” on a 7-point scale measuring interest in specific college majors). The calculations ofstatistical significance and the odds ratios are based on a
address these questions, we interviewed 13 new engineering graduates within 1-2 years ofcompleting their bachelors degree, analyzing participant-produced critical work-relatedincident narratives against a framework of transformative learning [20]. As one of theprominent theories of adult learning, transformative learning describes learning as “theprocess of using prior interpretation to construe a new or revised interpretation of themeaning of one’s experience in order to guide future action” [20]. It offers a usefulframework for examining events that have been meaningful for the participants themselves[21] distinguishing between five different dimensions in these experiences: 1) meaningful events in actions, reflected in the behavior of the
].Collaborative, student-focused, learning environments are shown to greatly increase and deepena student's understanding of the topic. Discussion among the students while doing an activityengages higher level thinking resulting in better outcomes in the course.This collaborative learning environment is a new way of teaching for many instructors, includingPurdue faculty. The IMPACT program has four goals. Those goals are: • Refocus the campus culture on student-centered pedagogy and student success. • Increase student engagement, competence, and learning gains. • Focus course redesign on research-based pedagogies. • Reflect, assess, and share results to benefit future courses, students, and institutional culture.There are three
clear: students need access to information and encouragement to pursue thatinformation if they are to successfully detect and resolve discrepancies through adaptation anddecision-making.Points of ImprovementGame Assessment. We found that the weekly reports were helpful in familiarizing the gamemasters with teams’ decision-making processes, and would like to continue this form of serialassessment. However, the prompts for these weekly reports should be more specific, and shouldalign with the learning frameworks identified in our analysis. We propose that in each weeklyreport, teams should be asked to reflect on the following: (1) What discrepancies exist betweenexpected and actual results of the previous week, (2) what strategies led to the
on specific reading material and/or video content. The coursealso includes a field trip that provides opportunities for students to talk directly with membersfrom various stakeholder groups in the VA coalfields including state regulators, industrymembers and local citizens.3. SurveyAppendix A includes the survey instrument used in the first year of the study analyzed here. Itwas designed to measure students’ knowledge, abilities, and attitudes [15] related to CSR andcollect relevant background information to explore possible connections between those and thedemographic information, students’ motivations for pursuing engineering, their career desires,and their civic activities. The survey reflects feedback from an expert panel of
-five minutes and thelongest interview was fifty-eight minutes. We provided the participants with the interview questions severaldays in advance to allow them to reflect upon the questions.C. Data AnalysisThe interviews were audio-only, conducted via telephone, and recorded for later analysis. The audio datawere coded directly without transcription using qualitative analysis software (NVivo 11) with an initial codeset that had been developed from the research questions and the interview questions. The code set containedtwenty-two codes with four codes added as emergent codes during the coding process. One author(Fitzmorris) conducted the interviews and coded the interview data. Once the data were coded, all threeauthors listened to selected
ofpeople” [24], Brown et al. [32] outline the construct of discursive identity to investigate the waysin which individuals’ identities are developed through discourse. This perspective discussesidentity as enacted through language, social interactions, and interpretive processes: discursiveidentity “reflects an understanding that speakers select genres of discourse with the knowledge(tacit or implicit) that others will … interpret their discourse as a signal of their culturalmembership” [32]. Discursive identity aligns with the sociocultural view of identitydevelopment, in which an individual’s presentation of oneself to a community, and thecommunity’s recognition of the individual as a kind of person, is central to an identity. Thisperspective
activities (98 percent of 44 survey respondents), especially big equipment (over 80 percent).Students enjoyed the discovery experiments (more than 83 percent) but had mixed feedback ondealing with open-ended aspect of discovery experiments, with only half of students appreciatingthe open-ended structure. With respect to the open-ended design project, approximately 62 percentfelt comfortable with open-ended design.Shortly after 2010, in response to student feedback and instructor assessment of the courses, bothLab I and Lab II each became 2-credit hour courses to reflect the quantity and quality of workaccomplished. In the sixteen semesters over eight academic years following the full transition,various instructors have attempted to further improve
havesome kind of engineering analysis” and pressed them to explain why their project was “sogreat.” Her concern reflected the instructor’s comment, “What can you really uniquelycontribute as an engineer?” as she pressed, “Why is there a need for it?” The studentsexplained the potential for saving lives by having a way to detect symptoms of shock.Steve’s team struggled to define this as a design problem and resisted reframing theproblem. Instead, they treated the problem as well-structured and their task as finding theright answer, primarily adopting a performance orientation. Vignette 4: Feb 4Daniela: I just thought that something bothers me the fact that (.) yeah we're gonna put the sensor on the stomach (.) right? During surgery