process in which faculty are engaged inongoing evaluation of what their students are supposed to learn, what they are actually learning,what evidence-based pedagogical approaches will help their students get to their goals, and howthese factors inform one another [6, 7]. To participate in the course transformation program,engineering faculty had to write a proposal for the courses they wanted to redesign, withendorsement from the department chair. Faculty who participated were expected to evaluate anddisseminate the outcomes of their course transformations to other faculty in their department,especially when other faculty were to teach these redesigned courses. Active learning approachessuch as student response systems, interactive digital
skilled at literature reviews. To overcome this deficiency, we have instituted a new research methods course for seniors, which is co- taught by an Architectural Engineering Professor as well as an English Professor. Another resource is the research librarian at the university library; we have asked them to make a targeted presentation to our students. Finally, we have developed a research guide, which we handed out to students to show the proper format for report writing, and it contains suggestions of how to use engineering databases and what not to do when using internet resources.AssessmentInitial assessment is subjective. It is tantamount to making sure some progress is being made.This is conducted
, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Florida. His research on the longitudinal study of engineering students, team assignment, peer evaluation, and active and col- laborative teaching methods has been supported by more than $11.6 million from the National Science Foundation and the Sloan Foundation and his team received the William Elgin Wickenden Award for the Best Paper in the Journal of Engineering Education in 2008 and multiple conference Best Paper awards. Ohland is Past Chair of ASEE’s Educational Research and Methods division and an At-large member the Administrative Committee of the IEEE Education Society. He was the 2002-2006 President of Tau Beta Pi
designed around the three goals: 1) to increase the number of women of color in STEMfaculty positions, 2) to improve the success of all women STEM faculty, and 3) to engage allfaculty in transforming Purdue. Current programming includes: ≠ Search Chair Workshops on Faculty Hiring designed to increase awareness of the impact of unconscious bias; ≠ Cultural Center Events for faculty that celebrate the culture and heritage of African American, Latino, and Native American people, particularly those currently employed by or enrolled at Purdue; ≠ a Mentoring Institute for newly hired assistant professors to develop a peer-mentoring network across campus; ≠ Leadership Development opportunities for tenured faculty
industrial and faculty mentors • Preparation and presentation of case problems • Access to official leadership transcript • Networking with industry partners, faculty, and peers • Use of ESC’s Collaboratory and meeting facilities • Opportunity to practice skills in projects, seminars and classesA Case for Leadership ExperienceOne of the most pressing issues facing companies today is the need for an increased number ofemployees who demonstrate positive leadership skills. Over 70% of top company executivessupported this statement in a study conducted by the Human Resources Institute1. Furthermore,only 8% of executives surveyed rated their employees’ leadership skills as “excellent.”2 Manycompanies do not have leadership training
2. Description of current issues and challenges 20 3. Quality of solution proposed [Alternatives, 30 Recommendations, Implementation Plan] 4. Value of solution [Link to Profitability] 10 5. Grammar/ Writing Quality 10 6. Bibliography/ References 10 Table 2 Grading Rubric for final project report 1.Organization 15 2.Subject Knowledge/Content 30 3.Graphics and Mechanics 15 4.Eye Contact, Elocution and Body Language 15 5
management software workshopsDevelop project, peer, team, & conflict Diversity workshop assessment inventories Ongoing assessment of project, team, peers, &Develop portfolio format conflictDesign project & build prototype Ongoing team issues, discussions, & resolutionsDevelop team skills bank based upon instructor's reading of individualTrain to use Problem-Solving Techniques & team journals-Conflict ManagementProject management & team videos Individual and Team plans Course RequirementsThis course engages students in both authentic and traditional assessment. Each activity listedabove
reports - Teamswritten design reports at mid-semester and at the end of the course. They must document boththeir technical work and the management of their work. Each team member must write part of Page 4.498.2the report and then the report must be integrated to read as a coherent document. Typical teamdesign reports are about 100 pages in length.Create posters /models that illustrate final designs - The team is required to developmaterials to help "sell" their design to company management and the public. Usually a smallsubset of the team develops the model and another subset develops the poster.Conduct peer evaluations of all team members (including
The Use of Clickers in Engineering Classrooms Janet deGrazia, John L. Falconer and Al Weimer Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering University of Colorado Boulder, CO 80309-0424 As emphasized by many studies, cooperative learning can improve engineering education(1,2). One form this has taken in Physics and Chemistry departments is in-class ConcepTests (3,4).These are multiple-choice conceptual questions posed to the class. After all the students respondwith an answer, they are asked to discuss the answers amongst themselves (peer instruction), andthen given the opportunity to
commercialize the ProspectorTM hematology analyzer in Sept 2022. Dr. Chen’s main research interests are developing innovative biomaterials and nanomaterials for drug delivery, cell/tissue imaging, biosensors, and hematology analysis applications. He has co-invented multiple patents and co-authored 29 peer-reviewed journal articles and proceedings papers.Ahmed Abuhussein, Gannon University 15th Annual First-Year Engineering Experience Conference (FYEE): Boston, Massachusetts Jul 28 Full Paper: Comprehensive Analysis and Assessment of An Introduction to Engineering and Computing CourseLongfei Zhou1,4,*,+, Varun K. Kasaraneni2,+, Longyan Chen1,+, Ahmed Abuhussein3,+, Nicholas Devine4,+1 Department of
least one of the five group projects. Theseprojects, in conjunction with classroom discussions, highlight the distinctive responsibilitiesassociated with leaders, managers and producers on teams.During one of the initial class meeting the students were asked to write down what they felt werethe important attributes of a leader. The instructor then discussed the roles of leaders, managersand producers on teams. He pointed out that every student will serve as a leader and as amanager on at least one of the five group projects. The instructors assign the teams and identifyboth the leader and manager on each project. Students should use these opportunities to assesstheir interests and capabilities in the various roles.As of early October, the
principles are reinforced through open ended, student conducted, multifacetedmechanical and thermal/fluid system experiments. The students work in a collaborative mannerto develop mathematical models, create test plans, apply measurement techniques, perform dataanalysis, and write comprehensive technical reports. In this paper, an overview of the threeexperimental systems and accompanying student learning objectives will be presented. The firstexperiment features the modeling, testing, and analysis of a single degree-of-freedom systemsubject to excitation from a rotating unbalanced mass. The student teams are tasked toanalytically and experimentally investigate the system and design a dynamic vibration absorber.In the second experiment
coursework; 3. Pass Qualifying Exam; 4. Pass Competency/Preliminary Exam; 5. Write Dissertation; and 6. Defend.These are very common elements across most PhD programs as reflected by their presence on most, if notall, of the group maps. These are elements that you would likely find in a graduate school manual for thesteps to completing a PhD and are typically the elements that require the completion of some sort ofpaperwork with the institution to verify that they have been completed. However, there are other implicitelements that are not as directly seen in a manual that are required to meet these steps. For example,choosing an advisor was only explicitly placed on one of the participant group (Group 4) maps. Theadvisor was included as
their robot, their first assignment was to write a program to allow therobot to move forward for one meter, turn 180 degrees and then move forward for another meter.By gradually introducing new programming techniques, the level of programming difficulty wasincreased. During the 3rd week of the course, the students were introduced to functions whichmade repetitive code more efficient and programmer-friendly. By this time, the moreexperienced programmers were actively helping the less experienced. Peer work always workshand-in-hand with teacher instruction. In the 4th week, before students would begin their finalprojects, the final objective was to program the remote controller. The course was designed thisway to ensure that students would not
thantheir peers without ADHD [15].1.2 Strengths-based approachThe work of the project is anchored by a strengths-based approach toward teaching and learningin general, and neurodiversity in particular. The literature related to strengths-based educationsuggests that incorporation of student strengths into the learning environment may enhancestudent engagement and motivation [16], [17]. For neurodivergent students, such as those withADHD, who may struggle to maintain interest and motivation within the traditional classroom, astrengths-based approach may be particularly impactful. Schreiner [18] writes that “strengths-oriented teaching recognizes the talents students bring to the learning environment and usesthose talents as the foundation for
, such as the final project,were vital to our learning as engineering students. Specifically, the way our professor taught thecourse was rated either on par or higher than the department and university mean in theeffectiveness of instruction. Along with the 5-point scale, students were also able to leaveanonymous feedback about their opinions of the course. A response from one of our peers sumsup our views on the course by saying, “If you devote the time and energy to [our professor’s]class[,] it is extremely rewarding as you will come out with coding experience, 3D modeling, aswell as tangible products and technical writing.”The course also helped us with our time management skills. One of our peers said, “He [ourprofessor] has a strong focus
design process Page 13.1009.2through project-based instruction with a blend of technical skills and non-technical or so-called“soft” skills. At the time of the writing of this paper, the first semester course, EG109, had beencompleted, and EG110 had just begun. The objective of this paper is to describe thedevelopment, design, and first year implementation of the course.After six years of discipline-specific freshman engineering courses for Civil Engineering,Mechanical Engineering and Electrical Engineering majors, it was decided that all Engineeringand Construction Management majors would share the same curriculum during their freshmanyear. The
various pedagogical techniques that a facultymember employs to connect and teach students. The traditional teacher-centered pedagogy isassociated with top down, hierarchal pedagogy that reinforces passive learning, rolememorization, and hinders the development of higher level cognitive skills ( (Duckworth, 2009;Cristillo, 2010). On the other hand, student-centered pedagogical strategies which promotekeeping students actively thinking, writing, comparing, and applying new knowledge result indeep learning and better student performance (Weimer, 2002; Wohlfarth, et al., 2008). In ameta-analysis of 119 studies, across grades K-20, Cornelius-White, found that learner-centeredvariables such as non-directive verbal interactions, incorporation of higher
Paper ID #12574Integration of Information Literacy Skills to Mechanical Engineering Cap-stone ProjectsDr. Farshid Zabihian, West Virginia University Institute of Technology Farshid Zabihian, Ph.D., P.Eng. Assistant Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering West Virginia University Institute of Technology Education: Ph.D., Mechanical Engineering,Ryerson University, 2011 M.S. Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, 1998 B.S. Mechanical Engineering, Amir Kabir University of Technology, 1996 Authored or coauthored more than 70 papers in Journals and peer-reviewed conferences.Ms. Mary L
peers 88% of the time.During the spring semester, the SCALE-UP students had higher scores 69% of the time. Ingeneral, when the traditional students did better, the problems tended to be one-step problemslike simple unit conversions and the performance differences were smaller.In addition, the students in both the first and second semester SCALE-UP classes performed wellon qualitative and complex quantitative problems. The students learned to reason qualitativelyand to write short essays using physics concepts without calculations. In general, theydemonstrated a high level of understanding. The SCALE-UP students’ performance on all threetypes of exam problems suggests a better understanding of the main concepts
. Page 22.735.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 In addition to his client focused efforts, Darrel has authored numerous peer refereed publications, scien- tific and technical reports, and white papers. Darrel holds a Ph.D. from Texas A&M University in Human Resource Development, a M.S. from the University of Illinois in Human Resource Development, and B.S. in Agricultural Leadership and Education from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.Rick L. Homkes, Purdue UniversitySarah E. Leach, Purdue University, Statewide Technology Sarah Leach is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering Technology. She is a registered pro- fessional engineer with over 15 years of
ourinstrument was guided by the research question: What influence does the instrumental andpsychosocial support that engineering graduate students perceive from their advisor haveon their thesis self-efficacy? Using SCCT as our theoretical foundation, this work focuseson the development and validation of the Advisor Support and Self-efficacy for Thesiscompletion (ASSET) instrument with graduate students pursuing master’s and doctoraldegrees in engineering disciplines.Our resultant construct of Thesis Self-efficacy measures the confidence that a student has in theirabilities to complete specific tasks that are key to the writing of their dissertation, thesis, orapplied project report, while our Advisor Support construct measures a student’s perception
. The goal is to encourage students to step back, as it were, and reflect on things thatwent well and things that didn’t go so well; we also encourage them to consider ways to avoidsuch pitfalls in the future and build on what they’ve learned. For example, the portfolioassignment asks students (as part of the assignment) to provide thoughtful responses to whateach of them has learned about their strengths and weaknesses as a writer (such as their use oflanguage, organizing their writing effectively, and developing clarity in their writing), and whatareas each of them will continue to work on as they move forward. We also ask them to considerthe value of the two peer reviews we have conducted during two writing labs, where studentsboth give and
and Creativity into standard ECS courses o The Importance of Innovation and Creativity in the Way we TeachOther o Role of technology o Mechanics of teaching (administrivia) o Testing o Grading o Writing o Assessment o Peer evaluation o Business o Compensation Page 25.602.6ECS Teaching Seminar SurveyBefore the seminars and Mini-Conferences can be implemented, it was necessary to surveythe faculty to determine interest and get feedback on the basic concept to improve teachingexcellence. The first item to determine was, “what time would be the best time to hold theseminars to maximize availability?” We didn’t want
Engineering program since 2009. He received his Ph.D. degree in Petroleum Engineering from Texas A&M University. He held a Principal position with Schlumberger and has more than 18 years of experience worldwide in technical and management positions in well testing, field development, and production enhancement. He served as SPE Drilling & Completion journal review chairman, SPE Cedric K. Ferguson Medal Award committee member, SPE Drilling, and Completion Advisory committee, and SPE advanced technology workshops. He received the A Peer Apart SPE Award, which is dedicated to the technical excellence of authors to the industry. He received the Associate of Former Student of Texas A&M University College-level
technicalwriting by providing various models and templates. The students were first introduced to articlesin the Science Section of the New York Times as an example of writing that exemplifies theclarity and conciseness needed to explain technology and science to the average reader. Inaddition, the international template known as IMRaD, (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Page 22.5.8Discussion) was explained and modeled from articles found in peer-reviewed publications. Thiswas done in preparation for the students’ own technical report on research topics that representedcurrent challenge in technology and science. Many students choose to report on
area 4.48 Develop and manage budgets for research 8 projects 4.48 8 Synthesize information 4.48 8 Manage multiple projects 4.48 8 Write peer-reviewed papers 4.48 Delegate tasks/projects based on others' 9 strengths 4.43 Understand how your research fits into the 9 field more broadly 4.43 9 Create proposals 4.43 9 Write grant proposals 4.43 10 Work in teams 4.38 10 Find problems 4.38 10
the workshop,CIVE 202 instructors identified department-level requirements, accreditation-level requirements, generaldata analysis skills, and engineering skills and translated these requirements into a set of learningoutcomes for CIVE 202. The instructors generated a list of coding and engineering skills using apreviously developed syllabus for the class and their own personal experiences coding big data analysisprojects in R and Python for past research and consulting projects. Instructors wanted to emphasize notonly how to sequence and write code, but also how to present code and to understand what types of tasksstudents may need to code using real-world consulting and project-based examples that would requirestudents to understand how to
and WestVirginia require students to complete three or four math courses, but those course selections canvary.KeywordsMath, College Preparation, High School Diploma, Civil Engineering, Tutoring, RetentionIntroductionCivil engineering is built upon a core set of mathematics, science, and humanities topics.Incoming students are expected to have a level of base knowledge acquired prior to matriculatinginto a civil engineering program. How they obtain this knowledge is unique to every student dueto the vast number of options to gain secondary education and prepare for college. In manycases, the depth of this knowledge varies greatly, especially in mathematics, science, and writing. © American Society for Engineering
not necessarily result in all students completing the required activities. Some students takeon little responsibility for the team activity and depend on their peers to complete the work.Since it is a team activity, these students benefit academically from their peers’ efforts thoughtheir new knowledge is limited. Thus, assessing the outcomes of team projects may noteffectively measure individual student learning.This study addresses one means to increase the responsibility, and thus learning, of individualteam members when completing a team-based project. It reports on an intervention the courseinstructor made to increase individual contribution to a team design project and theintervention’s result on student learning and contribution