✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Taylor ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ *Pseudonym assigned by the researchersIt is our intention to include all five participants regardless of the number of open-ended questionsthey were willing to answer. We believe that their selection of questions also revealed the real- 3world scenarios they were able to comfortably discuss. In turn, this would also reflect specificelectric circuit concepts that they perceive to sufficiently know and use in explaining thephenomena.Analysis and FindingsThe transcriptions were organized, coded, and cross-analyzed on Dedoose through multipleiterations of coding. Descriptive and in vivo coding were used for the first cycle, while
Communication, Initiation,Reduction, and Extension (Figure 1). This model was developed based on four critical aspects: a)a combination of teaching practices employed by the author during lecture sessions; b) post-courseevaluation of teaching experiences; c) literature on instructional best practices; d) sensitivity ofcircumstances surrounding students during COVID-19. The combination of experientialknowledge, post-course reflection and scholarly literature provided a framework through whichthe purposed model was conceptualized, developed, and implemented. 4. Granting 1. Constant Extensions on
a dance will be choreographed around. Y e ece be ab e be b f e ee ece f d, 8 4 1/16 . Y de g e e e e of any fasteners, with the exception of fasteners made out of the plywood itself. (Note that if your design is chosen for construction, we will work with you to design supports for it which may include the use of additional wood and/or fasteners.) We will then be building 1/12 scale models using thi d a d e UST De g Lab a e c e . A this project, please reflect on the lectures, readings, discussions of the engineering design process that we had at the beginning of the semester!T e e e e e ec de e ables were
lecture method is a helpful start.Lectures have a number of characteristics that makes them, for the right subject matter, desirablein the classroom (Bonwell and Eison 1991). It does, to a great extent, depend on the abilities andexperience of the lecturer. An able and committed lecturer can accomplish the following: Proceedings of the 2010 ASEE North Midwest Sectional Conference 4 1. Relate the material proficiently and effectively, in a manner that reflects lecturer’s personal conviction and grasp of the subject matter; 2. Provide students with a thoughtful, scholarly role model to emulate; 3. Supplement the subject
-efficacy, and mastery of sustainable engineering are addressed.20-21 The case study reflection essay is administered with the whole cohort in a room, and handwritten over a period of 30-45 minutes. The online survey is comprised of 25 Likert-scale questions that are based in sub-groups examining self-efficacy, beliefs, and knowledge of sustainable engineering. This survey typically takes students approximately 10 minutes to complete. From this assessment a better understanding of the students, possible explanations of their sustainable engineering mindset in relation to international service, as well as the effectiveness of the programs in which they were involved can be examined
to reflect on the effectiveness of the rubric and revise it prior to itsnext implementation7. It does not help retain consistency of scores from year-to-year, which yourprogram may want as you document your continuous improvement efforts, but it is oftennecessary.In our EET program we have found that groups write better final reports when the group hasbeen keeping their webpage information updated well12. We use this rubric as a part of ourassessment for ABET (o) the ability to use appropriate engineering tools in the building, testing, Proceedings of the 2011 North Midwest Section Conferenceoperation, and maintenance of electronic systems.Another checklist type rubric is shown in Figure 12. There are many
grant from the National Science Foundation # 2027471. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] J. Bourne, D. Harris, and F Mayadas, “Online engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 131-146, 2005.[2] C. Hodges, S. Moore, B. Lockee, T. Trust, and A. Bond, “The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning,” Educause Review, vol. 27, 2020, [Online]. Available:https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between- emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning.[3] L
. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 “Mapping” the Landscape of First-Year Engineering Students’ Conceptualizations of Ethical Decision MakingAbstractWhen working in a professional world, engineers often encounter problems that involve social andethical considerations that cannot be solved using the technical skills that make up a majority oftheir engineering education. When encountering ethical challenges, an engineer should haveethical awareness and be reflective on the ethical implications of their decisions. It is importantfor universities to focus on improving their students’ ethical reasoning and social awareness if theywant to develop successful engineering graduates
retrospective reflections regardingthe impact participating in our program had on their education and career choices.Alumni tracking for the three comparison environmental engineering REU Programs found thatover 60% of participants of the Clarkson REU attended graduate or professional school [9],approximately 60% of the CU-Boulder Program’s participants continued on to graduate studies,and nearly 50% of participants of the Water REU at Virginia Tech were attending or hadattended graduate school [10]. Thus, our outcomes for students attending graduate school aresimilar to single-campus REUs in the same discipline.Challenges and opportunitiesOperating an REU Site across multiple campuses presents a number of logistical challenges, asothers have described
they enjoy finally being able tobegin building their project. During the Week 7’s construction week, many report struggles,setbacks and trouble with coding, resulting in a decrease in motivation. Week 8 is the lastconstruction and testing week. Some teams report their design starts functioning properly whileothers still struggle to get it to work. Week 9 is the presentation and demo day. Many reflect theyenjoy growing together as a team, have fun building the project and learn a lot. Some complainabout uncooperative team members and challenges of the project. 7 6 Self-Determination Index (SDI) 5 4
analytical thinking pervades engineering design activities,the integration of the performance of components and sub-systems is vital to the success of allbut the simplest design problems. Consequently, the role of systems thinking is vital in solvingcomplex engineering design challenges while simultaneously considering environmental issues,safety, ethical implications, and economic factors [11]. Systems thinking permits students “tobreak out of the narrow definition of a problem and reflect on the relevant systems and how theyaffect, and in turn are affected by, new and improved technologies” [12]. By integrating systemsthinking experiences into early engineering design challenges, students may become moreexcited about engineering, while learning
under-represented minorities in the sample is too small to draw strongconclusions.When survey results were filtered according to students’ academic year of study, third yearstudents reported the most interest in the certificate program. 48% of third year students wereinterested in the certificate program. Fourth year students, on the other hand, reported the leastinterest across academic year. This is a likely a reflection of the fact that fourth-year studentswho have not already begun to complete the certificate will not have an opportunity to do sowithout delaying graduation. Although there was no difference regarding interest in the programfor males, females on average were less likely to be interested (23%). Additionally, first-generation
approaches of incorporating active learning andstudent interaction is a discussion board [3], [4]. To make the process more dynamic, use of studentgenerated audio and videos are suggested as a way of engagement and reflection about the coursematerials [5]. This setup can be useful in some settings. However, perhaps less so for moreanalytical courses such as Business Analysis [6]. It may also be more in use for small classroomsettings [7]. Beyond the setting, some other issues with this approach entail students feelingburdened with the additional time spent on producing content for the discussion board andsustaining student interest to encourage participation. The structure of the blended format’s in-person classes, where some students are in class
? What are some potential concerns? (c) What simple design changes could you make, and what performance tradeoffs would result?Lab survey questionsPlease complete this survey after you have submitted your lab report. Participation in this survey will earn you 1point towards your lab report score. As you answer the questions, reflect on all aspects of the lab activity.Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with these statements based on your most recent labexperience in this course:Scale: Strongly disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly agree 1. I am in control of setting the goals for this lab activity. 2. I am in control of choosing the appropriate analysis tools to evaluate experimental data. 3. I have the
the possibilities that surround me, and along with them…beauty.Circling a new role, now not who I am but what I do, yet more than that.A minister, literally, to be a servant, one who serves, reflecting my values unveiled and embraced.Circling fluidly between identities and roles grounded in who I am, a leader, a husband, a father, a teacher, a student, still…a servant.My eyes gazing outward, not on a goal nor an identity, external or internal, but anchored to a purpose found within myself yet beyond myself, to live for others, to serve humanity, particularly the “least of these.”Crashing into labels and stereotypes, Slowly circling, while negotiating the
- academia collaborations in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 2016. 79: p. 106-127.[8]. Weagle, D., D.B. Ortendahl, and A. Ahern P.E., Universities and Industries: A Proactive Partnership Shaping the Future of Work, in 126th ASEE National Conference. 2019: Tampa, FL.[9] Harrisberger, L., Experiential Learning in Engineering Education. 1976.[10] Banks, S., et al., Focus on EMPLOYABILITY SKILLS for STEM Workers - Points To Experiential Learning, S.I.T. Force, Editor. 2015, STEMconnector: Washington, D.C.[11] Moon, J.A., A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. 2004: Psychology Press.[12]. Hauhart, R.C. and J.E
) decreasing over time (c) staying about the same (d) unsure.”Questions 10 and 11 of the Qualtrics Survey were more reflective in nature than the previousnine questions. While the previous questions took a data-based route, these two questions wereimportant to understand how institutions and ARL libraries were supporting the needs ofstandards acquisitions. Question 10 asked if librarians felt that institutions understood the needsfor standards access, while question 11 asked if library administration understood the needs forstandards access. In figure 8, both questions show their results in a bar-chart form with 49% ofrespondents marking that they felt their institution understood the need to standards access and46% of respondents marking that they
well as thediscussion that occurred as the participants discussed each action research presentation.Additionally, some participants submitted a final report using a template provided by NationalAlliance for Partnerships in Equity, where participants shared information on their actionresearch issue, strategies applied, number of students reached, results, reflections, goals for nextyear, and other additional information (see Figure 2 in Appendix A). Additional data have beencollected throughout the project that will provide added content for analysis in the future,especially as it relates to the findings from this preliminary study. These data include student andschool team surveys, focus group interviews, and artifact collection and review
Junior Year Participant Comparison Discussion and Conclusions We are grateful to the National Science Foundation for supporting the SustainableBridges project. Please note that any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendationsexpressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of theNational Science Foundation. The data presented here on the first three cohorts of theEngineering Ahead first-year bridge program for pre-major Engineering students is part of thelarger Sustainable Bridges project (#1525367). The preliminary results are promising for the first three cohorts of the first-year
compact layer), transparent layer, and scattering layer.The following procedure is adopted to produce these layers: i) Titanium diisopropoxidebis(acetylacetonate) solution (with anhydrous ethanol) is deposited on the clean FTO substrate andis subjected to sintering at a temperature above 400 °C to form a compact, electron blocking layer.ii) Then, the transparent layer of TiO2 nanocrystalline (10-15 μm) is screen-printed. iii) to increasethe backscattering, a reflective layer at about 5 μm thick is deposited on the transparent layer; thefilm is further treated with an aqueous solution of TiCl4 to increase the roughness. As the last step,the film is loaded with dye sensitizers to make the photoanode ready for use. Similar to thephotoanode, the
clear, long term goals to complete tasks.11. I had confidence in each team member to contribute his/her fair share of what was required.12. This team helped me understand the material presented in this course.13. Deleted – incomplete question-14. Our team did not function well as a team; we did not establish any process to hold one another accountable nor did I ever know what individuals were responsible for. (Reverse)15. Working on this team made me realize that some things about myself (e.g., communication ability, leadership) that I was not aware of.16. My team reflected upon its goals in order to plan for future work.17. My team used a process/method (e.g., code of cooperation) to hold each member accountable.18. This team
& Exposition, pp. 26.15109.1-26.1519.16, 2015.[10] D. W. Hess, Leadership by Engineers and Scientists: Professional Skills Needed toSucceed in a Changing World, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley/AIChE, 2018.[11] D. W. Hess, “Leadership Skills Awareness and Development via Interactive EngineeringCourses or Workshops”, Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 53(1), pp. 33-41, Winter, 2019.[12] D. Hess, Leadership by Engineers and Scientists: Professional Skills Needed to Succeed ina Changing World, Hoboken, NJ, Wiley/AIChE, 2018, pp. 40-42 and Appendices A and B.[13] A. N. F. Versypt, “Self-evaluation and Reflection for Professional Development of ChEStudents”, Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 53(3), pp. 157-161, Summer, 2019.[14] Kolbe Group: https
amanner that the grades themselves will reflect the students’ mastery of the learning objectivesand that higher levels of collaboration during study can be encouraged.The second-chance examThe second-chance exam varies in two aspects from the first-try exam. Of the nine questions,typically two of them will pivot upon one learning objective or shift to an entirely differentlearning objective within the material to be assessed. Also, in the second-chance exam, the helpsheet is removed as a crutch. Students are asked to depend upon memory through practice for therecollection of basic circuit formulae. The remaining seven questions continue the samerandomization procedures as in the first-try exam. In the fall of 2019, each midterm exam wasfollowed
help students to bettercomprehend engineering problems. To evaluate this hypothesis, a few visualization methodswere implemented in the flipped classroom including:a) Instructor built simple foam models to show design details and potential loadings and stresses.Figure 1 shows sample foam models used in Mechanics of Materials course. The instructordisplays and interacts with the foam models during lectures to visually show deformation andfailure modes. More than 80% of students reflected in SET data that these foam models veryhelpful in their learning. However, they suggested that letting them to interact with the modelswill be more beneficial. (a) (b) Figure 1. Foam models to
-quality interactions and higher scores in this study could have beeninfluenced or caused by other variables beyond our control; more controlled studies are neededto validate these findings.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1628976. Anyopinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] D.H. Jonassen, and W. Hung, “All problems are not equal: implications for problem-based learning,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 6-28, 2008.[2] D.H. Jonassen, “Instructional Design Models for Well
ofteam 6 shared responsibility on the project and each made a substantive contribution to theoutcome: “Each member knew the assigned content assigned to him/her and I couldn't be morethrilled about how the delivery went.” Another example is team 11. One member wrote: “Ourteam members are not afraid to bring up ideas and or concerns during the project period. Wewere able to compromise on conflicts.”Teams in Group 2 evidenced weak TD and low IE. Teams 4, 5 and 7 fit into this category.Survey comments from this group reflected persistent challenges with Team Dynamics: “We hadone team member that didn't do too much and what he did do was last minute. That was a bitdifficult to work around,” and “We all did well when we worked together, but it was
satisfaction among ECE faculty.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) underaward EEC-1623125. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. References[1] M. F. Fox, “Women and Men Faculty in Academic Science and Engineering: Social- Organizational Indicators and Implications,” American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 53, no. 7, 2010, pp. 997–1012.[2] E. A. Frickey and L. M. Larson, L. M. “A closer examination of Engineering Department culture: Identifying supports and barriers.” Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the American
a priority forimplementing the B&R which need PCEE to give assistance.Universities have richexperience and activity forms at PCEE, which can help enterprises to carry out PCEE andultimately promote B&R construction. Therefore, the successful university-industrycollaboration participating in the PCEE of B&R should be reflected in four factors:professional knowledge training, cultural exchange & transmission, International studenteducation and joint research. Only to achieve the above four points can it be said to besuccessful.But all things are difficult before they are easy. At first, enterprises did not realizethat universities could help. Few enterprises took the initiative to seek cooperation withuniversities, and
ceiling for each one. The trip also provided experience intransportation over a vast expanse of water - many of them for the first time. Apart from theinformation provided before each field trip, an official from each organization was contacted tospeak to the students and to provide a guided tour of the facilities. After each field trip, there wasa reflection session were the students discussed their experiences and the lessons learnt. Figure 6shows students in a field Trip to the Cape May Ferry and the Wildwood Aviation MuseumFigure 6 Students on the Cape May Ferry (L) and in the Wildwood Aviation Museum (R)Questionnaires and Exit SurveysThere were Questionnaires completed by the students every week on the activities of the Instituteon each
(14.0%). These authorship trends may have reflected the nature of the type of materialavailable outside of academia. For example, information on websites introducing aerodynamicprinciples tended to come from anonymous or layman authorship. Websites covering the topicsof convection and truck aerodynamics were far less common. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 3A: Anonymous Authorship 3B: Layman 3C: Corporate Authorship 3D: Professional Amateur 3E: Applied Professional 3F: Academic Professional 3Z: Source Unknown Convection Airfoil TruckFigure 6. Breakdown of Facet 3: Author Identity by report.The results for Facet 4