that the authorstend to hear with respect to the use of WeBWorK. Table 6: Survey Results Regarding Negative Feelings toward WeBWorKIn most areas, there were fewer negative feelings toward WeBWorK in the winter term than thefall term. This may be due to the more positive previous experience with WeBWorK among thestudents taking the course in the winter. A feeling that the problems are too difficult was notedfrom these data. Upon reflection, the authors concluded that many of the newly-crafted problemswere more on the difficult end of the scale, and more were needed at the easier end of the scaleto assist students in building their skills and confidence gradually. Additions to the problemlibrary addressing this concern have since been
of the teacherworkshops and corresponding student Discovery Weekends is that these teachers, with assistancefrom the university project team, will guide their students through the same content during theacademic year. The culminating event for the academic year project will be a design competition..Acknowledgement and DisclaimerSupport for this work was partially provided by the National Science Foundation under AwardNumber IIA-1348314. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.Bibliography1. National Academy of Engineering. Rising Above the Gathering Storm, The National Academies Press, 20072. National Academy of
from Worces- ter Polytechnic Institute (92) and his PhD from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (98). He has pub- lished two books, ”Fundamentals of Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics” and ”Interpreting Diffuse Reflectance and Transmittance.” He has also published papers on effective use of simulation in engineer- ing, teaching design and engineering economics, and assessment of student learning.Dr. Liang Hong, Tennessee State University Dr. Liang Hong received the B.S. and the M.S. degrees in Electrical Engineering from Southeast Univer- sity, Nanjing, China in 1994 and 1997, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri in 2002. Since August 2003
reported general interest in resolving technical issues in the designstudio. Less than 30% of students claim that technical concerns are always a priority in their designwork. Figure 7 shows students’ perceptions of how important technical concerns are to their studiofaculty. These results are among the most emphatic in the whole survey. Approximately 15 % ofstudents agree with the statement that “Very few instructors think it is important” and 70% agreethat “Some instructors think it is important, others do not.” These perceptions (regardless ofwhether they are an accurate reflection of their studio instructors’ actual values) elicit concern. Ifa significant majority of students do not get the message from their design faculty that
education benefits in more than one state. Therefore the national totals in the Annual Benefits Report summary statistics (Appendix table) should not be used to reflect the total number of beneficiaries during the fiscal year as these counts are calculated as the sum total of the state statistics. Figure 1. Department of Veterans Affairs Education Program Beneficiaries: FY2000 to FY201510 Lastly, these GI Bill and VR&E Program benefits may be utilized by accredited entitiesthat accept the benefits for certificate granting schools all the way to doctoral degree programs.Of
inverted sections with those in control sections (i.e., traditional coursemodel). Treatment and control students completed the same measures (e.g., content assessmentsand student attitude surveys) and faculty members, who taught in both conditions, alsocompleted reflection papers related to their experiences. The guiding research questions for thestudy and an overview of the assessment measures are shown in Table 1 below (more details onassessment measures are included in a subsequent section of this paper). In the final year of thestudy, the researchers designed what they felt were “best practices” for the inverted model in allsections of their courses and the same outcome measures were used.Table1.EvaluationQuestionsandOutcomeMeasures
andAdministration department. One person from each department is a leader (Department Head);one person is CEO of the company. The class is provided with basic input information requiredfor the design, such as demand forecast, specification, bill of materials, material requirements,cutting waste, labor time, and the company operating time. The project guidelines reflect ill-structured problem based approach with relaxed framework and freedom for performance. Onlyone written report is required from whole class. Oral presentation of the project should be givenat the end of semester (one from whole class). Each group (department) is responsible for thereport section related to the department’s activity, and for integration of all sections together intoone
. Adams, R. S.; Turns, J.; Atman, C. J., Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design Studies 2003, 24 (3), 275-294.21. Bursic, K. M.; Atman, C. J., Information gathering: A critical step for quality in the design process. Quality Management Journal 1997, 4 (4), 60-75.22. Christiaans, H.; Dorst, K. H., Cognitive models in industrial design engineering: A protocol study. Design Theory and Methodology 1992, 42, 131-140.23. Crismond, D. P.; Adams, R. S., The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education 2012, 101 (4), 738-797.24. Atman, C. J.; Bursic, K. M., Teaching engineering design: Can reading a textbook make a difference? Research in Engineering Design 1996
Workshop should have less speakers Other (please specifiy)Figure 2. Results from the panelist survey based on how the event could be improvedThe results of the attendee survey mirrored the panelists’ responses on the organization andlength of the workshop again noting that it was a well-organized event and the length wasappropriate, though a small percentage felt the event was somewhat long. In addition to thesequestions, the attendees were also asked to reflect on their thoughts regarding workshop content,suggestions for future events, if they would consider attending again and most importantly thebenefit(s) from attendance.The attendees overwhelmingly replied that the topic was of interest to them and that some
learningexperiences planned so as to achieve this desired knowledge? [32]. The key to course design is thedetermination of the enduring outcome for the course. In other words, what is the set of keyoutcomes one would like for their students to have possessed at the end of the learningexperience or even years after they have exited the learning process? For example, in theintroductory circuit course used for study three it was evident that students were expected tohave developed a certain level of engineering problem solving skills that could be translated toother complex learning experiences. The emphasis on working problems in the class or the use oflearning activities meant to provide more class time for working problems were also reflected instudies two
have an open mind and reflect thoroughly onethical situations in the future before jumping to conclusions. For the point/counterpointassignment in this experiment, the first team chose a case study that was related to the topic ofthe engineering class. The students were asked to write a point/counterpoint essay and discusstheir opinions in class. Upon completion of the point/counterpoint study, the students were askedto complete a survey to gauge how effective this method of ethics teaching was, as well asdetermine reactions to the assignment. In addition to the point/counterpoint assignment, the first team also developed a heuristicsassignment for the same senior-level class. A six step analysis method was adapted from varioussources10-13
classroom knowledge on real-world challenges and issues. The team has ranked as high as first place in 2008 and as low as 27th in 2015. Obviously,winning is what the students want to achieve. However, the educational value and engineeringinsight are highly important along with learning to work in a team environment with diverse teammembers outside of their areas of study. This is reflected in a survey conducted with formerstudents who are now working as engineers in various engineering fields from defense analyst todesigner and flight test engineer. Two former students are working in the UAS field, although atthe time of this writing they had not responded. These former students are either in the privatesector, government contractor, or
and presentation skills of all students was observedfrom abstract to final report phase, partly reflected in quantitative scores provided by anindependent panel of faculty judges for the midterm and final presentations.The RISE students became progressively integrated into their research groups, gaining autonomyin their labs over the 10 week period. In addition, participants universally expressed increasedinterest in STEM education and subsequent careers, and reported a sense of “belonging” to theirchosen labs, which can be interpreted as academic integration. A deliberate effort was further madeto include the RISE students in concurrent departmental seminars, senior design presentations,Masters and PhD defenses in addition to selected visits
which questions or set of questions will have a stronger effect on engineering designself-efficacy and other metrics. Furthermore, future studies will analyze the relationship betweeninvolvement and participation, and the impact they have on GPA, innovation self-efficacy, ideageneration ability, and retention.AcknowledgementsWe would like to acknowledge that the support for this work was provided by the NationalScience Foundation Award No. DUE-1432107/1431721/1431923. Any opinions, findings, andconclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References1. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Washington, DC
knowledge required to initiatecreative project/problem based lessons reflecting the modern maker renaissance.Documented use of 3D printing in FabLabs and Makerspaces has provided someinsight,1,2 but these workshops are the first of their kind, so the survey responses providecrucial insight for improving future workshops and informing the maker community onthe use of 3D printers in K-12.RepRap 3D PrintersRepRap (self-replicating rapid prototyper) 3D printers3,4 are open-source 3D printerdesigns available for anyone to build. It is built on structural components that arethemselves produced by another RepRap; they are indeed self-replicating.5,6 Designs areproven and rapidly maturing and given that they are built with readily available parts,they are
predict the work students will likely produce. This information will provide helpful insights in how to present problems to best educate future engineers. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge funding and support from Tufts University Center for Engineering Education and Outreach, Tufts University Department of Mechanical Engineering, the Center of Science and Mathematics in Context at the University of Massachusetts Boston, USAID and The Sampoerna University . This work was also supported by the National Science Foundation DRK12 program, grant # DRL1020243, and grant # DRL1253344. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
. Likewise, as the sample sizes inTable 4 and 82 and 65 for males and females, respectively, for the correlations below 0.30 thestatistical power of the t-tests comparing scales is well below 0.80. All of this is to say that byincreasing the sample size in future studies, it is possible we will detect relationships between thesurvey scales that we have perhaps failed to detect here by committing a Type II error.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under EEC1150874 and the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. DGE-1333468.Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
and Political Weekly, 46(21), 106-114. 7) Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K. M., Guest, G., & Namey, E. (2005). Qualitative research Page 26.753.10 methods: a data collectors field guide. 8) Shenton, A. K., & Hayter, S. (2004). Strategies for gaining access to organisations and informants in qualitative studies. Education for Information, 22(3), 223-231.9) Johl, S. K., & Renganathan, S. (2009). Strategies for gaining access in doing fieldwork: Reflection of two researchers. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 8(1), 37-46.10) Gurney, J. N. (1991). Female researchers in male-dominated
://swtuopproxy.museglobal.com/MuseSessionID=fd925b9615e67115f7e6173 a6599d7e2/MuseHost=proquest.umi.com/MusePath/pqdweb?index=0&did=1454 942261&SrchMode=2&sid=1&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309 &VName=PQD&TS=1258783964&clientId=13118[8] Kirby, P., Gile, C., & Fossner, L. (2006). Data warehouse architectures must reflect business consensus. Forrester. Retrieved from Microsoft Library[9] Longman, C. (2008). Why Master Data Management is Such a Challenge. DM Review, 18(11), 18-20[10] Loshin, D. (2008). Master Data Management. Morgan Kaufmann, CA: San Francisco[11] Lucas, A. (2010). TOWARDS CORPORATE DATA QUALITY MANAGEMENT. Portuguese Journal of Management Studies, 15 (2
America’s Research Universities. State University of New York- Page 26.788.11 Stony Brook, 1998.12. Justice, C., Rice, J., Roy, D., Hudspith, B., Jenkins, H. (2009) Inquiry-based learning in higher education: administrators’ perspectives on integrating inquiry pedagogy into the curriculum. High Educ 58, 841–855.13. Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S. and Sammon S. (2007) Inquiry in higher education: reflections and directions on course design and teaching methods. Innovative Higher Education. 31 (4), 201–14.14. Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role
personal stand on issues what I alreadypositions and others, and from support my commitment to based on my know.commit to them. reflective thinking. learning. learning. personal values and analysis. Page 26.790.44. Program Assessment RubricsThe
studies among sections of a course.2 Page 26.795.3The final top level of the classification scheme is pictured in Figure 1 which shows the eightmain outcomes (or categories) where each of the more specific outcomes are cataloged. Thecomplete classification scheme in a table format can be found in Appendix A. Figure 1: Top Level of the Classification Scheme1Application 1: Application of the Scheme among Multiple Course SectionsTwo Midwest universities have extensively utilized the classification scheme to reflect uponcurrent practices and determine gaps in content.2 A self-study exercise was performed by oneMidwestern
26.814.10imposed on the child gender data. On the other hand, reviews gathered from Amazon.com didnot seem to vary by date, as the site has kept its reviewing system largely the same over time.Future ResearchThis research can be considered a good jumping-off point for more intensive statistical analysison the raw data collected. As a largely exploratory study, its aims were merely to provideevidence of surface-level trends and how these reflect the conclusions of other researchers onthis topic, instead of performing rigorous statistical analyses. However, the data gathered is ripefor analysis, provided the researchers are able to mine independent variable data from thereviews collected; while two dependent variables are available in the child’s gender and
, multipath reflections, antenna characteristics, and interference signals.They can also run scenarios for many different kinds of tests, with full control of all aspects ofthe GNSS operating environment. At Virginia Tech., hardware signal simulators produced bySpirent Communications are currently being used for developing raw data streams for the coursedescribed here. They allow for various scenarios of vehicles as well as atmospheric andpropagation effects on the GNSS constellations (GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, and BeiDou). AGNSS simulator is combined with a spectrum analyzer to demonstrate the spread spectrumconcept in addition to the signal structures for different GNSS systems. Students can control thecontent and characteristics of the GNSS
is well worth the effort.Conclusions, Reflections, and the FutureWhat instructional planning method is best? The answer is perhaps different for each instructoras a method is selected somewhere along the path of becoming educators. These methods arechosen based on pedagogical methodologies learned or methods used that work in the givenmoment. Most of the educators in engineering programs are required to have higher-leveltechnical-based degrees, but are not necessarily required to have an advanced educational-baseddegree. Are there better instructional planning methods to balancing student and instructorworkload? Can they improve the outcomes for students and instructors? Are the methodspresented in this paper the only possibility? In reality
inMassachusetts, Maryland, and North Carolina. Members of the EiE project team conductedprofessional development with the assistance of E4 staff and state coordinators. After beingintroduced to the subject of engineering (with which many had not had significant contact),teachers engaged in hands-on training for their assigned engineering unit as well as a second unitin order to increase exposure to the curriculum. Throughout the workshop, professional Page 26.848.9development staff modeled curriculum-specific pedagogy for teachers by placing them in therole of students while engaging in the activities. Staff also helped participants to reflect asteachers
Polytechnic).Due to the complexity of the survey, the results were broken down into different sections:Program/Department Characteristics, The “First” Course (Fluid Mechanics), The “Second”Course (Heat [and Mass] Transfer), and The “Third” Course (Mass Transfer [and Separations].Some data was available for a “fourth” course (solely separations) and was not included in theanalysis. It is important to note that while these subdivisions do reflect the bulk of the surveyreplies, some overlap in the results does exist due to the wide range of course variations.Program/Department CharacteristicsFaculty size per departmentThe replies from the survey represented 59 different institutions from around the world. As canbe seen in Figure 1, there is a
courses and their additional effort was reflected in anupward shift in grades as compared to the preceding course. We speculate that this increase isdue to the increased engagement and ownership that students take in designing and building theirown robot. The student’s clearly know ahead of time that meeting milestones will result inhigher grades. All of the milestones are published on the first day of class, and one couldspeculate that a student content with a “B” or “C” would produce only the required effort for thatgrade. However, this is not the case. Students, on the average, expend greater time and effort.Perhaps, EE2930 is the first class in the program that has an open-ended problem, with no single,pre-determined solution. Therefore, the
45.2% 24.3% 17.8%Professional/PostdoctoralOther job function 54.8% 75.7% 86.6%N 31 37 415Notes: Χ2 = 13.87; df = 2; p = .001The second research question addressed whether there were differences in terms of preparationin a variety of knowledge, skills, and abilities. The survey asked alumni to reflect on theirgraduate education as well as to describe their current career situation. Retrospectively, alumniwere asked the extent to which they agreed that {institution withheld} adequately prepared themin a variety of skills, abilities, and attributes. A priori, 15
compensate for missing information and using it toconstruct the problem space5.Forster et al. have examined how different preparations, variations in goal setting, and alternativetask instructions impact performance6. By framing given design tasks in either a novel or afamiliar manner or by priming participants with reflection on novel or familiar events prior tocompleting a task, it was found that participants with less direct experience associated with agiven problem were more open to being primed in a particular manner. Chen et al. investigatedhow different facilitation effects correlate with the creative performance across differentcultures7. They tested Chinese college students and US college students by providing explicitinstructions to half