manufacturing pillars1.1 Product DesignProduct design is an integral part of manufacturing. Product Design is the process of definingproduct characteristics such as dimensions, appearance, materials, tolerances, etc. It starts withclearly defined customer needs, which are translated into measurable target specifications.Concepts of the product will then be generated, selected, tested, and final specificationsdetermined. For a product to make its way successfully to the market, various aspects of designneed to be carefully analyzed and modeled. One main advantage of computer modeling in product design is that various tests can beperformed on the model that are otherwise dangerous or costly to be done on actual products. Mostreal-life systems are
three broad learning domains –affective (i.e., self-efficacy), thinking patterns (i.e., developing connections in the pursuit ofvalue creation), and content knowledge/skills [14]. Included in EML content knowledge/skillscan be design iteration and prototyping, which is the assessment focus of this paper and is anelement not seen in many of other first-year engineering design projects that harnesses EML.In the College of Engineering at Rowan University, we set out to foster EM in our first-yearengineering students by transforming a project that leverages Universal Design Principles as aframework for creating toys for children to include EM-related outcomes inspired by KEEN’sthree tenets: Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value (the 3Cs). In
of veteran mathematics teachers but is more common in current teacher educationprograms [3]. The in-service teachers’ beliefs about the purpose and role of instruction impactthe ways in which they may adopt curricular content and technological tools in their classroom.Thurm and Barzel [4] explored the complex relationship between mathematics teachers’ beliefsand technology use. One of their findings highlighted teacher self-efficacy in implementingtechnology when more integrated, constructivist methods were present. Not unsurprisingly,technology in the classroom tends to be more difficult for teachers with more of “a proceduralfocus than an explorative one” (pp. 57) [4]. Mathematics instructional material traditionallyincludes one right
service-learning onempathy development [6]. 5.3 Future WorkFuture research should prioritize the development and utilization of multidimensional empathymeasures that can capture the nuanced changes in both affective and cognitive empathy [10, 27].Additionally, researchers are exploring alternative classroom interventions to help studentsdevelop empathy for their end-user in the early stages of the design thinking process to enhancestudents’ empathetic self-efficacy. Investigating the longitudinal effects of service-learningexperiences and classroom empathy-building activities have on empathy could provide valuableinsights into the sustainability of empathy development over time.Does trait empathy development in these educational contexts
single goal. Engagement in unstructured-specific activities is characterized by high self-motivation and high self-efficacy. For theseactivities, sometimes people engage to learn a task, while in others, engagement is driven by afixed-mindset: their mind was set on independent task completion. For example, one studentreflected on how he approaches working on his car in high school in this manner, saying, “I'd belike, all right, I'm going to try and identify the problem. I'm going to try and look at a video, seehow to do it.” Here we see that the activity was focused, goal-oriented, and driven by one’s self.A noted difference between unstructured-specific and structured-specific, is in the type ofactivities; with unstructured activities, the
, reflection papers, peerevaluations, and course surveys. More specifically, the aim of this work is to explore the efficacyof the project in meeting a variety of learning outcomes, including enhancing 21st century skillsin audiovisual communication, and deepening the students’ knowledge of ocean engineeringconcepts. Finally, this paper shares lessons learned and provides recommendations for futureimplementations of this course project.IntroductionExperiential learning has gained ample traction in engineering education for its efficacy inmotivating students [1], increasing understanding of content [2], strengthening innovativethinking [3] and boosting self-efficacy [4], among other benefits. A wide range of pedagogiesfall under the umbrella of
doctoral degrees in Civil En- gineering from North Carolina State University in the USA. Her disciplinary research interests lie in the area of sustainability in asphalt pavements using material considerations, green technologies, and efficient pavement preservation techniques. Her doctoral work focused on improving the performance of recycled asphalt pavements using warm mix asphalt additives. As a postdoctoral scholar at North Carolina State University, she worked on several NCDOT sponsored research projects including developing specifica- tions for crack sealant application and performing field measurements of asphalt emulsion application in tack coats and chip seals. Her undergraduate teaching experience includes
: o How are the student learning activities perceived by teachers (in terms of overall quality and perceived usefulness in building STEM interest, skills, and knowledge)? o Are the teacher professional development workshops associated with improvements in teachers’ confidence delivering STEM content in the classroom? o Are the student activities associated with improvements in student outcomes (including students’ self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interest in STEM)? Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes • NASA funding Developing Teaching Teaching Modules
construct their own general education pathways.23Innovation as a Content Area for General Education As a content area, innovation is a relatively new academic focus. As part of the challengeof working across disciplines, the team addressed the fact that there is no single accepteddefinition of innovation. Some define innovation from an organizational perspective24 – as anecessary trait for an organization (corporation) to be sustainably productive and for thatorganization to produce disruptive technology.25 Others define innovation from an individualabilities standpoint – as the capacity for students to execute the known processes of innovators,at which point the focus is on self-efficacy.26 There are multiple ways of connecting
options: insights for nuclear, MIT Press, June2007.[3] AVEVA (2008). Labor shortage in energy industry a bright spot in otherwise troubled economy, RetrievedFebruary 6, 2009 from http://www.oilandgasonline.com/article.mvc/Labor-Shortage-In-Energy-Industry-A-Bright-0001.[4] Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.[5] Bolsen, T., Lomax, F. (2008). Public opinion on energy policy: 1974 – 2006. 72(2), 364 – 388.[6] Broduer Partners. (2008). Survey of journalists covering energy, agriculture, and the environment.[7] Chowdhury, B.H. (2000). Power education at the crossroads. IEEE Spectrum, Oct. 2000, 64 – 68.[8] Eilperin, J. (2006). Debate on climate shifts to issue of irreparable change. Washington Post, Jan. 29
Village, ILL: American Academy of Pedriatrics.[6] Seligman, M.E., “The Optimistic Child: A proven program to safeguard children against depression and buildlifelong resilience”, Mariner Books, 2007, ISBN: 978-0618918096[7] Seligman, M.E., “Learned Optimism: How to change your mind and your life”, Vintage, 2006, ISBN: 978-1400078394[8] Lopez, S. & Snyder, C.R., “The OxfordHandbook of Positive Psychology”, Oxford University Press, 2 nd edition 2009[18] Carver, C., Scheier, Mi., Miller, C. and Furlford, D.; "Optimism"; Lopez, S. & Snyder, C.R. (Eds.), TheOxford Handbook of Positive Psychology, Oxford University Press, 2nd edition 2009[21] Maddux, James E., "Self-Efficacy: The Power of Believeing you Can", Lopez, S. & Snyder, C.R. (Eds
business.• Integrated and utilized outside expertise including professional service providers, universities and suppliers.• Evaluated and measured vendor/supplier performance and made appropriate changes.• Encouraged a problem solving mindset based on strong customer focus and spending time in the marketplace. Source: KEEN Industrial Lecture Series, IIT, Fall 2006-07 http://www.iit.edu/~entrepreneur/#keen This example illustrates how a manufacturing firm uses its ecosystem to leverage a growth and learning orientation. This orientation helps Phoenix Closures determine where, when and how to compete. Phoenix Closures has created a type of innovation radar that interacts with different parts of the internal and external
Virginia Tech 24-26 workboth directly with FIRST robotics teams as mentors and develop technologies to help teachrobotics concepts to high school FIRST participants. Students from multiple high schools Page 22.1082.5participate in an evening class for elective credit taught by high school teachers and assisted byVirginia Tech students. The program is coordinated by faculty members from MechanicalEngineering and Education. Although not explicitly studied, Kasarda et al. 26 suggest that thisprogram facilitates the development of self-efficacy through mastery experiences in the contextof the mentoring program.Students from Michigan Tech also work with
Machine (SVM) and Random Forest (RF)approaches, and the unsupervised Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) method. Free responses toopen-ended questions from student surveys in multiple courses at University of IllinoisUrbana-Champaign were previously collected by engineering education accessibility researchers.The data (N=129 with seven free response questions per student) were previously analyzed toassess the effectiveness, satisfaction, and quality of adding accessible digital notes to multipleengineering courses and the students’ perceived belongingness, and self-efficacy. Manual codingsfor the seven open-ended questions were generated for qualitative tasks of sentiment analysis,topic modeling, and summarization and were used in this study as a
-based research approach [10], the teamwill research students’ learning of and ability to integrate socio-scientific reasoning [11] and designthinking (Li et al., 2019; Razzouk & Shute, 2012), as well as changes in students’ perceptions of scienceand engineering and engineering self-efficacy. For students, we leverage the funds of knowledgeframework[12], [13] in our curricular structure to help students make connections between their socialand community knowledge or resources and the project. The project team will also develop a robust set ofprofessional development (PD) workshops and aim to investigate how the PD and classroomimplementation impacts teachers engineering design self-efficacy, classroom teacher moves, and views offront-end
andunderstood by someone who has walked a similar path.” This shared reflection of supportsuggests that intentional modes of mentoring does not only create a sense of belonging, butrecreates a space—a community that extends beyond SWE events. Moreover, within suchspaces, students are able to build their confidence and self-efficacy—enabling them to thrive inSTEM traditionally male-dominated fields—both on and off campus.By contrast, several barriers appear to influence the effectiveness of retention and recruitment ofMSI students. In particular, the distribution of resources via grant funds and challenges inmaintaining engagement beyond the initial recruitment phase (see Table 5 for StakeholderChallenges and Lessons Learned). At the same time, a few
systematically controlling for student motivation, self-efficacy, interest in science, or other variables that might influence performance. Thus,examining the effectiveness of bridge programs solely based on student’s academic success,persistence or retention could be insufficient [9]. There exists a need to examine a broader arrayof student outcomes.Instead of focusing only on academic outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of summer bridgeprograms, we propose to consider an examination based on the transformative nature of theprograms in order to provide a holistic view of the effectiveness of the programs. Indeed, thetransformative learning theory posits that thought-provoking experiential activities or scenarios(also referred to as “disorienting
are) but they are worth fewer points each andstudents can easily attain the points by completion of assignments and by exploring other opportunitiesfor learning (Solid Professor/LinkedIn Learning). This can be perceived as a gamification of theclassroom through use of a points system where students start at zero and “earn” points by completion ofassignments rather than “lose points” through larger stakes grading. These assessment strategies supportStudent Centered Learning which leads students to be more autonomous. Students tend to perform betterwhen they feel more in control of their learning. Student-centered learning also increases studentmotivation and self-efficacy[8].Mid-Semester EvaluationWhile end-of-semester evaluations allow
with experienced researchers in a Community of Practice (e.g.,faculty, postdoctoral researchers, and graduate students in a laboratory setting). Outcomes ofthese experiences include increased STEM knowledge and experience, scientific researchpractices, career awareness, and STEM self-efficacy and identity. RET programs typically aim tosupport translation of research into classroom practices through curricular development by aProfessional Learning Community, which leads to improvements in STEM teaching andlearning, and includes outcomes such as increased persistence in STEM teaching andpedagogical content knowledge (Krim et al., 2019).The Berkeley Engineering Research Experiences for Teachers plus Data Science (BERET+D) isan example of one such
primaryconstructs influencing their choice: self-efficacy, expectations and personal goals.From a student’s perspective, a lack of sufficient knowledge about various majors along with commonuniversity requirements to declare a major before or during their first year presents a series ofchallenges. Issues that arise from choosing a major they later desire to opt out of can delay graduationby a year or more. Consequent costs of an ill-fitting choice in majors can go beyond additionalcoursework and financial setbacks to include social-emotional considerations such as degrading theirself-confidence and sense of belonging, particularly in the engineering field.Further studies on first year engineering programs highlight a trend where in-coming students showhigh
. Manduca et al., “Improving undergraduate STEM education: The efficacy ofdiscipline-based professional development,” Sci, Advs., vol. 3, pp. 1–16, Feb. 2017, doi:10.1126/sciadv.1600193.[20] T.L. Killpack and L.C. Melón, “Toward inclusive STEM classrooms: What personal role dofaculty play?” CBE-Life Sci. Educ., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1-9, Oc. 2017, doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-01-0020.[21] K. M Mack and K. Winter, “Teaching to increase diversity and equity in STEM (TIDES):STEM faculty professional development for self-efficacy,” in Transforming institutions:Undergraduate STEM education for the 21st century, G.C. Weaver, W.D. Burgess, A.L.Childress, & L. Slakey, Eds., West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2016, pp. 338–352.[22] K.M.S. Johnson
, appropriate supervision of the project team, optimization of the necessaryallocated inputs, and their application to meeting the program’s objectives. The paperdescribes the effectiveness of the team as we utilized project management tools in managingthis large group of STEM projects over the past three years. Additionally, the paperelaborates on the social management theoretical framework on which the projectmanagement principles are hinged. The impactful outcomes of the STEM program inincreasing academic performance as well as improving key constructs associated with studentsuccess such as motivation, epistemic and perceptual curiosity, engineering identity, and self-efficacy through the team effectiveness metrics and the results of the Strength
' academic self-efficacy,research skills, research confidence, teamwork confidence, education, and engineering careerintentions are also presented in the paper. In addition, this study also illustrates how the student’sglobal experiences, such as cultural awareness, worldwide perspectives, and interest in globalengineering careers, have changed as a result of this project. Lastly, the lessons learned from theCOVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the project implementation and what changes are beingmade for the next cohort are also discussed.Project backgroundThree public universities in the states of Texas, Nevada, and North Dakota are working togetheron the IRES project. North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NCAT),University of
EngagementWell supported academic makerspaces provide students with open access to resources that helpthem develop their problem-solving skills, provide opportunities for collaboration, increase self-efficacy, and develop sense of belonging [9, 10]. Sense of belonging generally relates to self-perceptions of fit within a given context and has been well established as a theoretical constructthroughout the literature [11, 12]. The context in question can be formal, such as an educationalsetting or STEM discipline, or informal, such as friendships or affinity groups. The positiveimpacts of a strong sense of belonging on academic achievement and persistence in STEMmajors are well documented [13-15]. When students interact in positive ways with diverse peers
in industry to evaluate a project against initialrequirements and highlight any need to reprioritize and refocus future efforts. Capstone DRs canfurther ensure that the work follows appropriate methodology and can confirm that the solutionincorporates sound principles and processes. A DR can ask probing questions as well as providenovel insights that teams may not have considered. (Cardoso et al., 2014). At the beginning ofCapstone 2, students in the NU plan and carry out an external DR with outside experts and reporton the outcomes. These DRs best happen at a point in the sequence when the teams and projectsare becoming firmly established (Enemuoh, 2021).Uncertainty, Professional Development, and Self-efficacy. Capstone Design projects –if
. Brady, “Academic probation, time management, and time use in a college success course,” J. College Read. & Learn., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 105–123, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1080/10790195.2017.1411214.[7] L. Li, H. Gao, and Y. Xu, “The mediating and buffering effect of academic self-efficacy on the relationship between smartphone addiction and academic procrastination,” Comput. & Educ., vol. 159, p. 104001, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104001.[8] L. E. Bernold, J. E. Spurlin, and C. M. Anson, “Understanding our students: A longitudinal-study of success and failure in engineering with implications for increased retention,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 263–274, Jul. 2007.[9] J. T. McCay, The
students are consistent within the gamifiedplatform provides further insight to how engineering students engage with gamified assignments.While the present study demonstrates the effectiveness of gamification as both a learningmanagement system and motivational tool, additional research should be conducted prior to afull endorsement of gamified homework as a valuable tool for improving inclusivity amongengineering classrooms.References[1] G. M. D’Lima, A. Winsler, and A. Kitsantas, “Ethnic and gender differences in first-year college students’ goal orientation, Self-Efficacy, and extrinsic and intrinsic motivation,” J. Educ. Res., vol. 107, no. 5, pp. 341–356, Mar. 2014.[2] S. Harris, J. Malbin, and J. Warshof, NEW FORMULAS FOR
module was organizedwith the intent to provide a new set of vocabulary in parallel with new opportunities for praxis.Engineering educators are positioned to nurture professional identity development, and indeed,the process of “identifying with a community of practice” is central to learning itself [9].Godwin [10] identifies several components of engineering identity development: individualinterest and affinity, self-efficacy, performance, recognition. In ENGINEERING 101, eachstudent produced a course portfolio in which the student curated showcase examples of theircourse production and narrated individual reflections on the assignments and methods employedtherein, their learning, and a statement of who they are across identities that hold
examinationsthat are not the same and where allowable resources are different (Ryan, 2016).Suppose the author was to comment on possible reasons for the high number of A grades in theonline group. In that case, one could "possibly" point to the general higher self-efficacy ofacademically bright students in an online environment. More of them (Giancola and Kahlenberg,2016) belong to the upper-income quartiles and can afford better resources and environment toflourish in the online environment.Individual grade components (tests, homework, projects) also show no statistically significant orpragmatic differences between the two groups except for the homework assignments. The onlineflipped class students scored 13% more than the F2F flipped classroom, which
.[3] N. D. Fleming, "I'm different; not dumb. Modes of presentation (VARK) in the tertiaryclassroom,” Research and Development in Higher Education, Proceedings of the 1995 AnnualConference of the Higher Education and Research Development Society of Australasia(HERDSA), HERDSA, vol 18, 1995, pp. 308-13.[4] J.-M. J. Booth, T. E. Doyle and D. M. Musson, "Influence of learning preference on self-efficacy and performance in mixed-modality firstyear engineering design," Proceedings of theCanadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA), 2013.[5] G. B. Dadi, P. M. Goodrum, T. R. B. Taylor and W. F. Maloney, "Effectiveness ofcommunication of spatial engineering information through 3D CAD and 3D printed models,"Visualization in Engineering, vol. 2