theirlives, have adequate supervision and hands-on training, for the sake of both safety andproficiency. Therefore, a sizeable number of students who had completed the pilot course wererecruited to act as Undergraduate Teaching Associates (UTAs) for the semester long version.The UTAs were all selected based on their performance in the course, as reflected both in thegrade they received as well as their competence in the hands-on aspects of the course. One of theinteresting outcomes of these selection criteria was that the resulting percentage of femalestudents selected as UTAs was significantly higher than the percentage of female studentsenrolled in the course. The percentage of female UTAs in the course has consistently beenbetween 40 and 50
software engineeringcurriculum. J. Comput. Sci. Coll., 17(6):115–123, May 2002.10. Appendices Appendix 1: PM activities and expectationsProject Manager ActivitiesThe main project component of this course will involve groups with voluntary Project Managers.Project Manager Responsibilities Coordinate team activities, meetings, and deliverables for the duration of the term starting approximately week 6 Meet with the professor at the start or during class to discuss individual group dynamics/activities or cross-PM coordination Meet with other project managers outside of class to conduct cross-PM coordination Ensure that team deliverables reflect the available time, resources, and given scope
consistency between the twoauthors, Dedoose Training feature was utilized by having both researchers take the codeapplication test. A test was set by each researcher and both researchers take each other’s test toevaluate how consistent the coding process was done with respect to each other. Multiple testswere set and done after each iteration as the researchers deliberate to ensure all the coding donewas consistent. The test gives a Pooled Kappa that reflects the agreement between bothresearchers. The final two tests gave a Pooled Kappa of 0.67, which falls in the range of goodagreement between both researchers. The relationship between Pooled Kappa and Cohen’s kappa(a measure to evaluate inter-rater agreement) is that the Pooled Kappa is a global
10 ways to engage underrepresentedstudents in computing. Retrieved from http://www.ncwit.org/resources/top-10-ways-engage-underrepresented-students-computing/top-10-ways-engage-underrepresented23 DO-IT. (2014). Checklist for making science labs accessible to students with disabilities. Retrieved fromhttp://www.uw.edu/doit/checklist-making-science-labs-accessible-students-disabilitiesAcknowledgementThis material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant #EEC-1444961. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do notnecessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation
may be part of thecompetitive edge of U.S. engineers.”Another area emphasized in the report is sustainability. It states “Engineering practices mustincorporate attention to sustainable technology, and engineers need to be educated to considerissues of sustainability in all aspects of design and manufacturing.”NAE’s subsequent publication Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting EngineeringEducation to the New Century11 produced a 58 page report supplemented with 11 additionalessays and papers. The report produced 14 recommendations as summarized below: 1. “The baccalaureate degree should be recognized as the “pre- engineering” degree or bachelor of arts in engineering degree, depending on the course content and reflecting the
from an Internet sourceand write a reflection summarizing the article and relating it to their careers. We have foundMachine Design magazine’s website12 in particular to be an excellent source for this type ofarticle. For outcome i, we found a white paper on non-linear analysis from SolidWorksCorporation13 to be appropriate. After completing the non-linear analysis assignment, we gavethe students the assignment as follows: In this assignment, we used tabulated results that have been available for many decades along with non-linear software that was not readily available to engineering graduates of only a few years ago. Without a doubt, you will need to keep learning throughout your career. Besides formal classes, trade
Page 24.1377.3around them even though most engineering concepts are observable in our daily lives. EverydayExamples in Engineering make the new topics accessible to students and provide context as towhy they are learning the material and how it relates to their lives. Everyday examples are onlyeffective if they are relevant to the life experience to date of the college student. Engineeringinstructors with years of experience must reflect back to their level of experience and knowledgeas an undergraduate. For example, axial loading and deformation of composite members is anearly topic in the Mechanics of Materials course. A common textbook example for this topic,which many experienced engineers would consider an everyday example, is a concrete
for the Page 24.1383.7 week, there were numerous possibilities: knowledge acquisition/review from readings (where the humble true/false question was often good enough), problem-solving using problems similar to ones covered in lab or the readings, exercises that would require result interpretation or reflective thinking, problem-solving that would require adaptation and transference of learning, etc.2. How much time should students expect to the week's autograded work will take, and how will you make your question selection fit within that time budget? Despite its use of autograding, our course emphasizes
) Fig. 1. Community of InquiryBut it is also appropriate for learning environments that are partly face-to-face and partly on-line. The three principal elements of the CoI model are social presence, cognitive presence andteaching presence. Social presence may be defined as the degree to which participants in thelearning environment feel affectively connected one to another; cognitive presence represents theextent to which learners are able to, via interactions with each other, construct and refine theirunderstanding of important ideas through reflection and discussion; and teaching presence is thedesign of various instructional activities such as lectures as well as activities intended to facilitateinteractions among students to help their
on a given course. From data gathered across all five courses, wefound that on average students spend 3-4 hours per week on online materials/videos, 1-2hours per week on online quizzes/assessments, and 3-4 hours per week on paper-basedproblem sets (if they are part of the course). (See Figure 1 below.)The total time spent outside of class time is therefore 7-10 hours per week. Given that thesecourses are 3-4 units apiece, this is consistent with the definition of a Carnegie unit, whichstates that 1 unit of academic credit reflects approximately 3 hours of work per week inside oroutside of class. To confirm this conclusion, we calculated the hourly range that each studentreported spending on the course overall, and defined that range as low
methodswhereby they achieve the learning objectives. This is deliberate as the instructor gives onlytechnical guidance and course lectures are for the most part generic and not specific to the widerange of projects that the students might choose. Therefore, successful completion of the courserequires students to design and undertake their own physical or computational experiments andthus take charge of their own learning.The following are some reflections on recent cohorts from the instructor’s point of view: • At the end of the semester, there is a high degree of enthusiasm exhibited by the students taking the course. Although some students complained in the surveys of the large workload, there are almost no drop-offs for
(e.g. group vs individual) and whether the interactionswere tailored to specific student needs. Overall, 92% of students rated the experience as“excellent” or “good”, but 8% of students did identify the mentoring experience as “lacking” or“poor”. The students were not provided with information on what a good mentoring relationshipmeans. Instead they were expected to reflect on their own expectations. In regards to thenegative experience one student commented: “My mentor seemed to push off all mentorship work to her PhD students. I felt guiltyasking questions because she would hand all the questions over to her extremely busy students.The students took a lot of time out of their day to meet and discuss with me and I thank them forthat
different ways. For the mostpart however, there was a common factor that many students identified through the interview. Ifthe student received a “not mastered” mark, they would almost always redo the problem,regardless of overall performance level.Some exceptions to this occurred. First, students with poor attendance records and poor recordsof turning in the original assignment would also sometimes skip turning in resubmissions. This isnot viewed as a direct result of the mastery grading system, rather a reflection of general poorparticipation by a small percentage of students across any system. Second, some studentsindicated that if multiple resubmits piled up and important coursework from other classes alsobecame time consuming, they would
beingoverwhelmed with the content and pacing of the course. Instead of utilizing the resourcesavailable, there was a perception of being ―left behind‖ in terms of course content. This attitudemay have resulted in behaviors (e.g., failure to complete assignments, ―giving up‖, etc.) thatultimately resulted in lower course grades, despite the concept inventory indication ofunderstanding.Course Evaluation ResultsCourse evaluation comments were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the methods used in thecourse. Table 5 shows a tally, by semester, of the number of positive or negative commentswritten reflecting the teaching methods used in the course.Table 5 – Tally of positive and negative comments from student evaluations related to teachingmethods
. These fourth question opens aroom for reflection about how to reduce these perception results. All the answers weresummarized and grouped using a relationship diagram. In order to remark the findings we onlyshow the reasons which represents close to the 80% of the results. Table 6: Most relevant reason for each question Question Results Percentage Enable the solution of the other course assignments 43 1 Shows that students are able to solve real-life problems 37 Encourage the reading of tutorials and on line help systems 40 2 Shows the
substantially increased the level of coverage ofthe material when compared to the prior approach. Student success in the course coupled withrecent assessment results suggest that student learning and comprehension of the topics has beenenhanced.Our university recently met the federal criteria to be designated an Hispanic-serving Institutionand is also ranked among the most diverse universities in the United States in terms of race,ethnicity, gender and cultural background. The Professional Practices course reflects thisdiversity in race, ethnicity and culture. In some ways, this complicates the teaching of the Page 26.87.12course, but mostly, it
recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of National Science Foundation.References1. The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. The National Academies Press; 2004.2. Genco N, Hölttä-Otto K, Seepersad CC. An Experimental Investigation of the Innovation Capabilities of Undergraduate Engineering Students. Journal of Engineering Education. 2012;101(1):60-81.3. Crawley EF. Creating the CDIO syllabus, a universal template for engineering education. Paper presented at: Frontiers in Education, 2002. FIE 2002. 32nd Annual2002.4. Crawley EF, Malmqvist J, Lucas WA, Brodeur DR. The CDIO Syllabus v2. 0. An Updated Statement of
impact of our teamwork skits. As seen in Figure 4, weasked our audience what they would do if their team starts to encounter difficulty. Anecdotally,we hear from students that they do not like working on teams because they end up doing all ofthe team’s work; this is reflected in the pre-skit response of 30% of our students, who respondedthat they would simply take over the project. About 15% of the students before the skit said theywould talk to the teacher or stop working. After the skits, a full 15% more of the class said theywould call a team meeting if they noticed they were having trouble, equaling a 15% drop in thenumber of students who said they would take over the project. The number of students who said
480 0.206 0.405 0-1 Ethnicity 476 0.264 0.441 0-1 Family/Friends Engineers. 561 0.597 0.491 0-1 First Interest in Aerospace 551 0.080 0.271 0-1 Co-op Internship 520 0.325 0.469 0-1 Page 26.114.6 Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations for the variables used in this study.Since all respondents did not answer all items, the number of responses for each item varies andthe statistics reflect those varying sample sizes
activities (unassociatedwith courses or engineering student clubs).11 Rarely is the facility used to support curriculum orresearch activities. Given its purpose to support student design interests, this facility perhapsqualifies to be called an academic makerspace but that title may not be appropriate due to aunique attribute of the facility. The MITERS workshop operates nearly independent from MIT,with the student members directing all aspects of its operation. This organizational structure ismore reflective of that found in community-based makerspaces outside of the academicenvironment.What is striking in these two examples from the same institution is their very different
, agents, including assistive technologiesincluding assistive technologies Table 2: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0As we know, the Web has changed dramatically during the development of WCAG 2.0,and shows every promise of continuing to evolve at a rapid pace. WCAG 2.0 consists oftechnology-neutral principles, guidelines, and success criteria that reflect properties ofweb content that make it accessible to people with varying disabilities and combinationsof disabilities. However, as the Web evolves, the guidelines should keep on evolving aswell to continue assisting technology developers and authors in ensuring people withdisabilities can share in the benefits of the World Wide Web (Reid &
recognize that putting the Thévenin impedance in parallel with a voltage source or in series with the Norton current source is redundant, and therefore not the logical form of such circuits. Some reflection shows that hinging is actually a special case of redundancy, where the ideal voltage or current source
in a dashboard for each player.This particular game, called Penny Drops© , has three players – Tom, Joe and Sue - and each ofwhom is a single family home owner consuming three different levels of water – 350, 400 and450 gallons per month respectively. The game board designed is shown in Figure 4 below. Figure 4 – Home Water Management Game Board – 3 Players Page 26.160.10The main design-feature of the game-board is that it reflects the major water usage in a singlefamily home in the US. The different landing-areas are self-explanatory (through the icons onthem) on the water usage in a household. Water end use distribution
and clearly state that sophomores wereencouraged to enroll. This is reflected in the enrollment numbers listed in Table 2. Table 2: Semester Enrollment in ME 449 (formerly ME 601) Semester Sophomore Junior Senior Graduate Fall, 2012 3 6 2 3 Spring, 2013 0 2 14 8 Fall, 2013 0 2 13 3 Spring, 2014 0 2 17 5Additionally, it was noted during that first semester that students with lower technicalbackgrounds, e.g., those who
researchexperience so that the students can learn how to conduct their own research projects.While other benefits may be experienced by particular students, they should not beconsidered an expectation for a successful URE for most engineering students.AcknowledgementsPartial support for this work was provided by the National Science Foundation's ResearchInitiation Grants in Engineering Education program under Award No. 1340324. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material arethose of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation. The authors would also like to thank Al Ghorbanpoor and Wendy Pero atUWM for their assistance with this project.Bibliography1. National Science Board
paper is organized into the following sections: Background: The Need for a MobileRobotics Course, Mobile Robotics Course Goals, Course Innovations, Analysis of StudentFeedback, Reflections, and Conclusion. Page 26.460.2Background: The Need for a Mobile Robotics CourseThe Mobile Robotics course was developed as part of a progression of educational roboticsinitiatives birthed on our campus from 2005 to 2013. A brief overview of these initiatives is firstgiven to provide the motivation and context for the creation of this course and its designelements. Figure 1In 2005, the idea of using robotics to
, 𝑑!" 6where hp is the horse power delivered, T is the shaft torque, N is shaft's rpm, dpC and dpDrespectively are gears C and D pitch diameters, and F1t and F2t are tangential gear forces on gearsC and D, respectively.Knowing the pressure angles, the radial forces on gears C and D are found, respectively, as: 𝐹!! = 𝐹!! 𝑡𝑎𝑛20! = 197 𝑙𝑏𝑓 and 𝐹!! = 𝐹!! 𝑡𝑎𝑛20! = 262 𝑙𝑏𝑓.The dynamical effects are considered by reflecting first on gear C's tilt of its axis relative to theshaft axis (See Fig. 2). x x x' x X Gear C
programmable logic at thesame time as combinational and sequential logic. The new digital electronics 1 and 2 playlists atColumbia Gorge Community College reflect this modernized approach by incorporatingprogrammable devices and HDL early. Additionally, an inexpensive FPGA trainer board hasbeen incorporated into the curriculum that allows students to program the device at home.In 2014 in cooperation with CREATE Columbia Gorge Community College began to developand use flipped classroom resources to teach the “EET111 Basic Electronics 1: DC CircuitAnalysis” course. These resources incorporate a significant number of basic circuit analysisillustrated example problems, live action videos, applications, and photos of instrumentation andlab experiments. The
courses if those courses fit intotheir schedule and academic requirements. This interest was expected given that the students wereenrolled in an upper-division elective course.Over the course of the three interviews, students’ responses showed low self-efficacy levels whenasked about performing various cybersecurity related tasks, with comments such as “I’m not sureI could do that” being common. Meanwhile interest levels seemed to grow, reflected in commentssuch as “That was really cool!”. For some students, self-efficacy levels decreased over the courseof the semester. Given that students admitted to having very little knowledge of cybersecurity atthe beginning of the semester, this was not totally unexpected as students became aware of
point Chemical and Mechanical Engineering are the only two coreengineering discipline divisions that have committed to a diversity effort. It is our hope that thiswill change during the ‘year of action on diversity’.To quantify the prevalence of diversity-related efforts in engineering education, we did akeyword search for articles that appeared in the Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) and inthe European Journal of Engineering Education (EJEE). The number of relevant articles in thesejournals will reflect the diversity-related efforts happening in the United States (JEE) and Europe(EJEE). The keywords ‘diversity’, ‘women’, ‘minority’, and ‘gender’ were used as search termsfor homologous hits in article titles. Two other keywords commonly