diff --git a/ASEE_paper.tex b/ASEE_paper.tex index ea89008..5a7e12e 100644 --- a/ASEE_paper.tex +++ b/ASEE_paper.tex @@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ \usepackage{times} \usepackage{float} \usepackage[numbers,super]{natbib} -\usepackage{lipsum} % Package to generate dummy text throughout this template. \titleformat*{\section}{\normalsize\bfseries} % Makes section titles 12 pt font @@ -49,31 +48,74 @@ %---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- \section*{Abstract} -In this paper, I will discuss a project-based competition in an upper-level -mechanical engineering laboratory course. I redesigned the course in Fall 2018 -to prepare students to make engineering decisions and accomplish design goals. -My short-term objectives were to prepare the students to start their capstone -projects senior year and improve technical writing. The course introduced -static and dynamic beam models and experiments. The project-based competition -asked students to use a cantilever beam to measure the mass of an object. The -laboratory course focused on learning from failure in the form of writing -exercises, peer-editing, and graded progress reports during experiments. -Students spent the first 9 weeks of the course following experimental procedures -and writing lab reports. In the final project-based competition, the students -designed their own set of experiments including finite element analysis and -experimental procedures. The students were graded upon their approach to the -problem and quantification of uncertainties in measured and predicted values. I -awarded a cash prize to the most accurate mass measurement. I will discuss the -impacts of the project-based competition on the following year's senior capstone -projects and detail the measured improvements in technical writing throughout -the semesters in Fall 2018 and Fall 2019. The impacts were measured based -upon a standardized rubric and qualitative interviews. +In this paper, I discuss novel features in an upper-level engineering course +that have been used to enhance technical writing, prepare students for +engineering design, and enhance problem-solving skills. I redesigned the course +in Fall 2018 to prepare students to make engineering decisions and accomplish +design goals. My short-term objectives were to prepare the students to start +their capstone projects senior year and improve technical writing. The +laboratory course includes a number of novel features: specifications grading, +interactive Jupyter lab handouts, and a project-based competition with +\$150-prize. Students spent the first 9 weeks of the course following +experimental procedures and writing lab reports. In the project-based +competition, the students designed their own set of experiments including finite +element analysis and experimental procedures. The students were graded upon +their approach to the problem and quantification of uncertainties in measured +and predicted values. I awarded a cash prize to the most accurate mass +measurement. I discuss the impacts of specifications grading, project-based +competition, and detail the measured improvements +in technical writing throughout the semesters in Fall 2018 and Fall 2019. The +impacts were measured based upon a standardized rubric and qualitative +interviews. %------------------------------------------------ \section*{Introduction} +Engineering is difficult. Engineering students are expected to create models, +take measurements, make predictions, and validate results. + +As academics, we tend to favor rational design e.g. Newton's laws, differential +equations, thermodynamics + +Students are drawn to engineering for its empirical appeal e.g. learn by doing, +create and measure approach + +Rationalists and empiricists have been at odds for centuries, marked especially +by the conflict between David Hume's Treatise of Human Nature and Immanuel +Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. + +Since the divide between rational and empirical thought, there is skepticism +from both sides as to the validity in the work of modeling and measurement. + +Models will claim measurements are incorrect, while measurements will claim +models are not representing reality. + +Modern engineers are expected to build innovative designs with rational models, +but also validate and correct these designs with emprical measurements and +insights. + +Engineering design has to use both rational and empirical ideas to accomplish +goals. + +Use models to predict results + +Use measurements to interpret results + +validate predictions with measurements + +relate quantitative rational model to empirical measurements + +Technical writing is crucial to communicating model predictions and measured +results. Despite the necessity for strong writing skills, students struggle to +meet professors'\cite{lillis2001} and employers'\cite{conrad2017} expectation +for quality writing. In order to improve student writing, I used specification +grading\cite{nilson2015}. Specification grading introduces pass-fail grading of +the lab reports similar to competency-based education or mastery +learning\cite{bloom1971, kulik1990}. + + %------------------------------------------------ @@ -153,7 +195,9 @@ \section*{Results and Discussion} determine the change in report grade per report. The goal was to have the entire class in the green "continuous improvement"-area. In Fall~2018, 92\% of the class continually improved and in Fall~2019, 72\% of the class continually -improved their scores. +improved their scores. The "maintain quality" area represtents students +that wrote report of high quality initiially, but did not improve during the +course of the class. \begin{figure}[ht] diff --git a/ASEEpaper.bib b/ASEEpaper.bib index bd9d498..e92ca63 100644 --- a/ASEEpaper.bib +++ b/ASEEpaper.bib @@ -25,3 +25,32 @@ @article{student1908 year={1908}, publisher={JSTOR} } + +@article{conrad2017, + author = {Conrad, Susan}, + doi = {10.1002/jee.20161}, + file = {:home/ryan/Downloads/Conrad-2017-Journal{\_}of{\_}Engineering{\_}Education.pdf:pdf}, + issn = {1069-4730}, + journal = {Journal of Engineering Education}, + month = {apr}, + number = {2}, + pages = {191--217}, + title = {{A Comparison of Practitioner and Student Writing in Civil Engineering}}, + url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jee.20161}, + volume = {106}, + year = {2017} +} + +@article{lillis2001, + author = {Lillis, Theresa and Turner, Joan}, + doi = {10.1080/13562510020029608}, + issn = {1356-2517}, + journal = {Teaching in Higher Education}, + month = {jan}, + number = {1}, + pages = {57--68}, + publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, + title = {{Student Writing in Higher Education: Contemporary confusion, traditional concerns}}, + volume = {6}, + year = {2001} +}