, nontraditional, and veteran undergraduates in engineering.Mr. Matthew Paul Jouffray c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Communicating Findings about Online Forum Use among Undergraduates in Distance-delivered Calculus: Developing a Help seeking Usage ModelAbstractThis paper reports on the synthesis of multiple user-centered design (UCD) tools to develop amodel for student help seeking in STEM courses. Data used to construct the model was gatheredamong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) undergraduates enrolled indistance-delivered calculus. The resultant help seeking “usage model” serves as a final projectoutcome of an NSF sponsored TUES Type I project entitled “Online Learning Forums
simulations ofperformance. The initial course plan is shown in Table 4.. Lectures Simulation Labs Syllabus & Introduction to EE concepts Introduction to EE concepts (cont’d) Nanoparticles 1. Introduction to LT-SPICE Electron tunneling 2. Coulomb blockade Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs) 3. Quantum Cellular Automata (QCA) Resonant Tunnel Diode (RTD) 4. CNT composites NanoCMOS (NanoHUB) 5. RTD & circuits Single Electron Transistor (SET) 6. SET & circuits Memristor 7. Memristor &
discussed what topics and activities students couldchoose. The negotiable elements reinforced the strategic core, but give students autonomy topursue personal interests (purpose) and competencies. For example, students could choose totake the hour exams that the interactive engagement students took or they could choose to createdesign projects or educational resources.3.2.3 Create course structures To present the strategic core and the negotiable elements in a way that supportedstudents’ sense of competence, we required students to create three learning agreements thatreplaced the normal course syllabus. These learning agreements would be completed in purpose-based learning teams to foster students’ sense of relatedness. For example
the techniques. In an effortto reduce these hurdles and encourage more faculty to use these methods, we have created adigital, open-access course package for two chemical engineering courses, thermodynamics andmaterial and energy balances. These course packages can also be used as templates for facultywho want to develop other courses that are student-centric and involve active learning. Many ofthe resources within the package stem from our online inventory of over 1,400 ConcepTests and1,000 screencasts. These encompass topics in core chemical engineering courses, but manytopics are also common to other engineering disciplines (i.e., fluid mechanics, heat transfer,thermodynamics, material science, and computing). The course packages use
discussions. The course redesign process is further informed by the inclusion of studentstakeholders in the project, namely, undergraduate and graduate students who self-identify asneurodivergent. Student contributors share individual experiences and perspectives to identifybeneficial instructional practices and foster a personal connection with the faculty.Introduction of the I-StandardsThe I-Course Standards document resulted from the first stage of the I-Team process, emergingas a framework to guide the course redesign process throughout the life of the project. The I-Course Standards were inspired by the approach and format of Quality Matters, the certificationsystem for online courses, which is adopted at the university for all online classes
information and training is available online. • Take advantage of special [and free] opportunities created for University Seminar to both illustrate the many aspects of engineering careers and to introduce the students to campus resources. For instance the pilot section was able to take a glass bottom boat tour of a spring-fed lake, schedule a stress management presentation from student health services, and even a tour of the football stadium through the athletics department. • A serious challenge for expanding this model will be in identifying enough engineering faculty to volunteer to teach a special section. The course sections in the described study were limited to 20 students in order
objectives, an Internet search ofweb sites from universities, colleges and programs was conducted for courses entitled“Introduction to Engineering”, “Engineering 1”, or courses with similar titles. A team ofundergraduate research assistants was tasked with executing this Internet search and summarizingresults in cooperation with the principal investigator during the 2012 spring semester. Researchersused common search engines to search for “introduction to engineering” and similar terms. Whensuch a course was identified, an additional search for the course syllabus was completed. Eachsyllabus found was reviewed to ensure that the course was meant to apply as a commonengineering course rather than a technically oriented, discipline specific course
engineering, diversity issues in engineering, and distance delivered engineering education. She is member of ASEE, ASME and IEEE.Dr. Joshua Marquit, Utah State University Joshua Marquit is an Instructor in the Psychology Department at Utah State University. He has a doctoral degree in psychology, with an emphasis on applied and experimental methodology. He teaches under- graduate and graduate research methods and statistics courses on campus, online, and through distance broadcast learning formats. He has previous research experience with the U.S. National Parks Service, NASA, and Utah Department of Environmental Quality. His research interests include computer-mediated communication, Internet infidelity, online medical
similar sentiments: “Theother thing that we don't really do and we haven't done this anywhere that I've worked and itwould be really nice if we could is get these instructors of different courses together to talk aboutexactly what to cover, to even just look over the syllabus. What's covered, what they expect theirstudents to know, and what they don't expect their students to know as well.” This participantalso shared: “For all I know, whoever teaches next semester's course that follows [course], theymight expect that their students understand one topic really very well and students are coming inwith no idea how to do it because I don't spend any time on it because I don't think it's thatimportant.”These statements are further supported by
in their future careers. The course components include: ● Academic and Individual Development Planning ● Communication, ● Teaching and Mentoring ● Exploring Pathways to Interdisciplinary Careers ● Leadership and Entrepreneurship ● Career Exploration and Networking ● Professional & Responsible Conduct ● Health & WellbeingThis course also was designed to provide opportunities for cohort development and networkingbetween current students and alumni of the program. A copy of the syllabus from Spring 2024 isprovided in the Appendix B.Formalization of the professional development activities for graduate students in theinterdisciplinary computational science program into a two-semester course was done to
conditions, the number of quizzes was 12, althoughonly the first 11 contained questions covering target objectives. All quizzes and study plan assignments were administered via an online system calledMyMathLab®, which is an interactive learning system developed and maintained by the Pearsontextbook publishing company. MyMathLab® includes an electronic copy of the coursetextbook, and additional types of media that provide course content such as videos, animations,presentation slides, and projects. MyMathLab® also includes the MathXL® engine which canpresent students with a problem similar to those in the exercise sets at the end of each section inthe textbook. Most problems are algorithmic, meaning that each time the question is presented
participation, while examination grades are a stronger measure of mastery ofthe topics studied. Three examinations were given throughout the semester and collectivelycover all of the topics in the syllabus. Thus, a student's performance on the in-courseexaminations can be directly compared to their performance on the final examination. Averagedin-course examination grades are moderately correlated with student's previous academicperformance as measured by PGPA, with an average correlation coefficient of 0.486. The mean,median and standard deviation of averaged in-course examination grades are presented inTable 5.Treatment Mean Median SDSpring 2012 77.19 78.75 10.17Spring 2013 74.57 76.00 12.30Summer 2013 75.03
coding and statisticalanalysis), watched online lecture videos that facilitate a flipped-class teaching mode, completeddaily in-class quizzes to record their attendance while capturing their current understanding ofcourse topics, and took three required written exams. All of the assignments, lecture videos,quizzes, and exams were common across the sections. 4The course elements described above facilitate students’ achievement of four course goals. Thegoals, as stated on the syllabus, were to:1. Practice making evidence-based engineering decisions on diverse teams, guided by professional habits,2. Develop problem-solving, modeling, and design skills that you will use as an engineer,3. Learn how to
question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement.,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 82–96, 2007, doi: 10.1037/0022- 3514.92.1.82.[24] G. M. Walton, C. Logel, J. M. Peach, S. J. Spencer, and M. P. Zanna, “Two brief interventions to mitigate a ‘chilly climate’ transform women’s experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering.,” J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 468–485, May 2015, doi: 10.1037/a0037461.[25] L. DeAngelo et al., “Course-based Adaptations of an Ecological Belonging Intervention to Transform Engineering Representation at Scale,” presented at the 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Aug. 2022. Accessed: Feb. 13, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org
ofinstructor disposition, lack of time to restructure courses, expectation of syllabus coverage, largeclass size/room inadequate, teaching-centered tradition, and a lack of incentives/rewards [25, p.970]. A corresponding summary has yet to be established for online instruction. Therefore, we explore the following research questions: RQ1: What barriers do instructors expect to experience when adopting active learning in online instruction? RQ2: How do the barriers instructors expect to experience when adopting active learning in online instruction differ from those for in-person instruction? We recruited instructors who used or planned to use active learning in teaching a STEMcourse for first- and/or second-year
gained by students who successfully completed AM coursework. The unit of analysis was a syllabus from an individual course. All occupational completion points, student performance outcomes, or standards and/or certifications covered in the material were be analyzed through an iterative process using a codebook derived from the Department of Labor Advanced Manufacturing Competency Models [13, 14]. Researchers also used established instruments to measure the extent to which the new professionals report entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial intentions [15, 16, 17]. In addition to deriving areas of strong and weak alignment, the researchers calculated the extent of match between the syllabi and the standards. The team employed our
and lower the barriers to QISTentry? As outlined in the literature [11]–[16], various factors, such as learning environment, design andorganization of the curriculum, assessment, feedback, and learning new tools outside thestudent's comfort zone can impede learning. This research focused explicitly on identifyingfactors that could serve as barriers within the newly designed modules for the Introduction toQuantum Computing course (EEE 4423).Course Structure of Introduction to Quantum Computing (EEE 4423)The course syllabus was designed to cover the 9 key concepts for Quantum Information Science(QIS) learners [17]. This course aims to provide engineering students with an in-depthunderstanding of quantum computing software as well as some
analysisactivities including:1. Content analysis of AM course syllabi will be used to develop lists of skills gained by students who successfully complete AM coursework. The unit of analysis is a syllabus from an individual course. All occupational completion points, student performance outcomes, or standards and/or certifications covered in the material will be analyzed through an iterative process using the codebook derived from relevant national, state, and professional standards and industry certifications. Researchers will also use established instruments to measure the extent to which the new professionals report entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial intentions [28-30]. In addition to qualitatively deriving areas of strong and weak
least usedpractices also included classroom techniques that could encourage participation from all studentsmore often, which could also improve the in-classroom experience. Some of the most usedpractices from the menu included not judging student responses which directly contributes to theclassroom climate. However, some of the other highly used strategies focused on elements of thecourse outside of the classroom experience such as creating availability to meet with studentsand having explicit goals in the course syllabus. The open-ended responses from the facultysurvey expressed that faculty were grateful for the experience, but they also wanted moreinclusive teaching resources which could help them employ some of the practices that
sustainability, and July focused on convertingproject course implementation to online formats (due to COVID-19).In order to facilitate effective sharing of information and peer learning, SUMMIT-P uses twoprotocols during project meetings that provide a format for effective and fruitful discussion. Thetwo protocols, Descriptive Consultancy protocol and Success Analysis with Reflective Questionsprotocol, have historically been applied in the K-12 education community [4]. The DescriptiveConsultancy protocol [5], originally developed by Nancy Mohr and revised by Connie Parrishand Susan Taylor in August 2013, was modified by McDonnough and Henschel [6] and has beenadapted for this project to help presenters think more expansively about a particular
split into two competing or complementary teams or like in thecase of REV/T 2013, work on two different projects. The teams are mentored by faculty, otherAT ‘lead users’ and graduate students who themselves have successfully completed thedepartment’s product realization courses and training.The initial session of the REV/T that focuses on AT coursework covers product design anddevelopment with a particular emphasis on AT. The textbook “Product Design & Development”by Ulrich and Eppinger serves as the primary text for the course. The course work is deliveredthrough a series of online multi-media lectures and homework followed by a weekly two to threehour in-class session where the teams work through the principles or methods learned from
a university can obtain course content from a personalized learningserver called ISPeL (see details in Section 3.2) remotely and offer the robotics course on campuswithout hiring robotics experts. Students are required to complete a certain percentage of coursecontent in each class, but the learning path can be different. In other words, each student can learndifferent topics in the same classroom by walking through the corresponding course materials,such as videos and sample code wrapped in Jupyter-notebooks, a computer science languageexecution software. If a student has any questions, he/she should ask the general instructor first.The chatbot can answer basic questions, such as the robotics concept and syllabus-relatedquestions. If the
videos were developed and recorded for the online module of the new course entitled “Solar PV Planning and Installation”. • Senior Design Project [6] (four students, completed): “Solar-Powered Speed Radar Measurement, Display, and Logging System”. In this project, a solar PV system was designed to power a speed control system including a radar sensor, camera, microprocessor, and data logging system (Figure 10). • Senior Design Project (five students, in progress): “Solar-Tracking PV System Design and Development”. In this project, a PV system is designed and developed with the capability to track the sun based on two degrees of Figure 10. Solar-powered speed radar
timefor active learning tools so as to engage the students for further digestion of the knowledge in thecontext of industry practices. Students are expected to be prepared outside of the classroombeforehand, with assigned textbook readings or reviewing of online materials.For ease of dissemination and, more importantly delivery, an instructor packet consisting ofsample course syllabus, pre/post-tests, mid-term/final exam samples, and the active learningtools has been created. Each active learning tool module consists of the following components: a) Active learning tool description b) Instruction notes c) Student handout d) Assessment instrumentThe active learning tools are built on basic knowledge and engage the students in
Course and Module DevelopmentIn Years 1 and 2, we developed three stand-alone sustainability courses that can be adapted fordifferent levels of undergraduate curriculum: a course on green buildings and sustainableconstruction practices (GB), a course on life cycle assessment (LCA), and a SustainabilityTopics course (Topics). Development of these courses included design of instructor materials forquick adoption and implementation, including: syllabus with ABET outcomes, sample courseschedule, description and instructions for conducting experiential learning activities, lectureslides, homework assignments, sample course projects, exams, and pre- and post- courseassessments. The courses and sample experiential learning activities conducted in each
]. Thus far, two faculty members have participated inthe summer industry immersion program, which has broadened faculty views and strengthenedtheir ties to industry. Although the Faculty Immersion program was interrupted by the pandemic,other faculty members plan on joining the immersion in the coming summers.b. Faculty training. Faculty have attended multiple training courses since the beginning of theproject. In the past year, the Center of Faculty Development, the Project Center, and the Centerfor Digital Leaning and Innovation at Seattle University led various training courses on topicssuch as inclusive pedagogy, building relationship-rich classroom experiences, and effectivelymoving our courses online. Some faculty also attended workshops
model”, Engineering Design GraphicsJournal, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 5-14, Fall 1991.[10] Engage. (2009-2019). “Spatial visualization skills,” [Online] Available: Engage,https://www.engageengineering.org . [Accessed Jan 29, 2020].[11] A. Friess, E. L. Martin, I. E. Esparragoza and O. Lawanto, “Improvements in student spatial visualization in anintroductory engineering graphics course using open-ended design projects supported by 3-D printedmanipulatives,” In Proceedings of the 2016 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, NewOrleans, LA, USA, June 26-29, 2016. USA: American Society of Engineering Education, 2016.[12] D. I. Miller and D. F. Halpern, “Spatial thinking in Physics: Longitudinal impacts of 3-D spatial training
confronting issues related to inclusion. The department undergoes annual review byexternal evaluators Inverness Research. The 2019 review revealed instances where students didnot feel included. These situations involved faculty, staff, and students. Since becoming aware ofthe situations, the department has spent considerable time addressing inclusivity. All facultyattended microaggression and inclusion training (see below). Inclusion training has been addedto the new vertically integrated design project courses (see below) that will be required of allstudents. One faculty piloted a syllabus that includes a policy on microaggressions andharassment. The Department has prompted University’s Center for Teaching and Learning tolead the establishment of a
to sustainable scalability. The process is illustrated inFigure 1. As with the I-Corps™ course, I-Corps™ L begins with a three-day, face-to-face Kick-Offsession, followed by five consecutive weeks of Online Sessions, and ending with a two-day, face-to-faceWrap-Up. Each team is comprised of three members, including a principal investigator, anentrepreneurial lead, and a mentor. I-Corps™ L teams receive support in the form of mentoring andfunding to accelerate the learning that helps assess the potential for successfully sustaining and scalingthe innovation.I-Corps™ L launched with a pilot course that ran January-February, 2014, in which nine teams startedand completed the program. The pilot was based on and followed the syllabus for the I
, participated in team-building exercises, military training, and social activities.Course StructureCalculus I was taught with both face-to-face and online components over a six-week term. Embeddedwithin CSI, the face-to-face component was held five days per week in 110 minute sessions and led by amath instructor. Topics covered during instruction included: limits, continuity, differentiability, andintegrability. We worked closely with our Department of Mathematical Sciences to ensure that alllearning objectives addressed during a full-term Calculus I course were included in our acceleratedsummer course. Typical sessions included lecture time with intermittent problem-solving sessions. Thecourse syllabus is available by request.Online instruction and