Engineering Education Graduate Student Series Copyright (c) 2013 Purdue University All rights reserved. http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs Recent documents in Engineering Education Graduate Student Series en-us Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:30:53 PST 3600 Doctoral Students as Course Instructors: Three Engineering Teaching Assistants' Socialization Experiences http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/7 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/7 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 12:15:50 PDT The purpose of this study was to explore and understand the types of socialization experiences that result from engineering graduate teaching assistants‟ (TAs) roles as course instructors. Socialization refers to an individual‟s process of becoming a part of a group. In the context of doctoral education, socialization can be a complex area to study, largely because there are many roles and groups for which graduate students can be socialized.

Using situated learning, more specifically the communities of practice literature, as the theoretical framework, this study looked at how three doctoral engineering TAs, with experience as course instructors, become members of the community of practice that is academia. This study was guided by the following research questions: 1) What socialization experiences do doctoral engineering TAs report going through as a result of working as course instructors? 2) What recommendations to improve the TA experience emerge from this study?

Data were collected in the form of interviews (individual and focus group, with participants from two schools of engineering at a Midwestern university). These data sources were analyzed and triangulated to find recurring themes. Results indicated several categories of socialization experiences, as characterized by the three TAs. Implications from the study suggest the need for a progressive TA model, in which TAs are given more responsibilities during specific stages of their program, culminating with the opportunity to be course instructors.

]]> Irene Mena et al. Facilitating Teaching And Research On Open Ended Problem Solving Through The Development Of A Dynamic Computer Tool http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/6 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/6 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:56:45 PDT Model Eliciting Activities (MEAs) are realistic open-ended problems set in engineering contexts; student teams draw on their diverse experiences both in and out of the classroom to develop a mathematical model explicated in a memo to the client. These activities have been implemented in a required first-year engineering course with enrollments of as many as 1700 students in a given semester. The earliest MEA implementations had student teams write a single solution to a problem in the form of a memo to the client and receive feedback from their TA. For research purposes, a simple static online submission form, a static feedback form, and a single database table were quickly developed. Over time, research revealed that students need multiple feedback, revision, and reflection points to address misconceptions and achieve high quality solutions. As a result, the toolset has been expanded, patched, and re-patched multiple developers to increase both the functionality and the security of the system. Because the class is so large and the implementation sequence involved is not trivial, the technology has become a necessary to successfully manage the implementation of MEAs in the course. The resulting system has become a kluge of bloated inflexible code that now requires a part time graduate student to manage the deployment of 2-4 MEAs per semester. New functions are desired but are either not compatible or are too cumbersome to implement under the existing architecture. Based on this, a new system is currently being developed to allow for greater flexibility, easier expandability, and expanded functionality. The largest feature-set being developed for the new system are the administrative tools to ease the deployment process. Other features being planned are the ability to have students upload files and images as part of their solution. This paper will describe the history of the MEA Learning System (MEALS) and the lessons learned about developing custom teaching and research software, and will explore how the development of custom software tools can be used to facilitate the dual roles of teaching and educational research.

]]> Matthew Verleger et al. Rube Goldbergineering: Lessons In Teaching Engineering Design To Future Engineers http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/5 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/5 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:51:17 PDT Hands-on learning experiences and interactive learning environments can be effective in teaching K-12 students. Design, in essence, is an interactive, hands-on experience. Engineering design can be taught in the classroom using innovative hands-on projects, such as designing and building serve to teach design, promote creativity, and provide opportunities for hands-on problem solving, in addition to giving students experience working in cooperative teams. In turn, these experiences could encourage students to consider future careers in engineering and science.

This paper explores findings from data collected during the authors’ recent experience teaching a group of fifteen 4th – 6th grade students enrolled in a 6-week Saturday talent development program to design and build Rube Goldberg machines. The purpose of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of teaching an engineering design to students enrolled in a talent development program, the use of teamwork and its influence in the design process, and how a design process aligns with the way kids approach design.

A scaffolded engineering design process was used to guide teams of 3-4 students through the project. Students took on predefined roles in order to promote teamwork. Most of the data collected were a regular part of the work subjects produced for the class, which included written descriptions of the designs, posters that include drawings of their designs, and photographs and video of the machines constructed. Additionally, the investigators maintained journals during the class, and evaluations were used to measure the students’ overall perceptions of the class. A grounded theory approach was used to determine both aspects of the course that worked well and areas for improvement, in addition to surprises encountered along the way. Using this approach allowed our conclusions to inductively emerge from the data.

In this paper, we will discuss the educational implications of the study. Results indicate that these students have difficulty working in teams, applying a design process, and demonstrating sufficient maturity to focus and manage their own schedule toward an abstract goal. This project is important for teachers considering implementation of a hands-on project like this in a middle school environment, in engineering and science talent development programs, and for professors interested in design experiences that their future students might have.

]]> Shawn Jordan et al. Decision Making In First Year Engineering: Exploring How Students Decide About Future Studies And Career Pathways http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/4 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/4 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:51:15 PDT The number of students enrolling in engineering has declined steadily over the last fifteen years, and the number of engineers joining certain fields in engineering has decreased even more drastically. A number of studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between students’ interests and abilities and their persistence in engineering. It is therefore logical to assume that students who choose a major which makes the best use of their skills and engages their interest, are more likely to not only stay, but also thrive in the field of engineering which they choose. Students who make a poor choice, because of incomplete information or misconceptions about various disciplines, often find themselves frustrated and sometimes leave engineering altogether.

A number of colleges offer first-year programs with the explicit intention of helping students make informed choices by introducing them to the various engineering disciplines before they are required to select one. The success of these programs depends on a better understanding of the processes and events that influence how students make decisions about their engineering major. The purpose of this study, conducted in a first year program, is to gain an understanding of the factors involved as students make choices about their careers in engineering. The study, conducted over a three year period, involved surveys, interviews, and narratives. This paper reports on a portion of the findings of that study. Initial results indicate that the reasons students choose to pursue a particular engineering discipline are very field specific.

]]> Ida Ngambeki et al. Impact Of Feedback And Revision On Student Team Solutions To Model Eliciting Activities http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/3 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/3 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:51:12 PDT Helping first-year engineering students to embrace the iterative and open-ended nature of engineering problem solving is a challenge when their prior learning experiences have focused heavily on achieving a correct answer in a single attempt. In this paper, the authors will present a case study of student work from the Fall 2007 implementation of Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs) to demonstrate the impact of the iterative process of feedback and revision on the quality of student products. They will also discuss some of the future research questions resulting from the iterative process used with MEAs.

]]> Matthew Verleger et al. "... A Good Imagination and a Pile of Junk." http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/2 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/2 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:35:32 PDT The engineering workplace is placing more emphasis on teamwork in interdisciplinary environments, out-of-the-box thinking, creative engineering, and brainstorming. These skills are taught to varying degrees in standard engineering curriculums, and often the most fruitful opportunities exist for students to learn in venues outside of the classroom.

This paper will show how building Rube Goldberg machines is a fantastic way for learners from various disciplines to get hands-on project experience in a team environment. Intense brainstorming and work sessions result in inventive and unique machines that are fascinating for both participants and spectators to watch. In addition, students have opportunities to apply the technical skills they have learned in the classroom in an application where creativity is king but reliability is key.

This paper takes the reader on a journey through the author’s experiences leading a Rube Goldberg team through winning the national championship in 2006. This paper is the result of a deep iterative reflection, assisted by a collaborator in order to pull out the aspects of this experience that illuminate lessons related to design knowledge and learning. The aim of this paper is to identify important areas for future research and build a foundation for a future book intended to engage young learners in innovation and creative problem solving in a problem to product-focused environment. The experiences described in this paper will be particularly interesting to those looking to develop similar learning experiences for their students.

The machine the team built completed a task of individually shredding 5 sheets of 8 1/2" x 11” 20 lb paper into strips using a shredder over 215 steps. This paper will elucidate a successful design process including task determination, theme selection, module brainstorming, storyboard creation, and machine building. Artifacts of the process will be described, including an example of a module design where reliability became a problem that required multiple design iterations to thoroughly solve. Finally, a discussion of storyboarding as a way to promote creativity and innovation in design will be presented.

]]> Shawn Jordan et al. The Case Method: Using Case Based Instruction To Increase Ethical Understanding In Engineering Courses http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/1 http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/enegs/1 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 10:15:16 PDT Brock Barry et al.