Evolution of Student Attitudes Toward Teamwork in a Project-based, Team-based First-Year Introductory Engineering Course
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Evolution of Student Attitudes Toward Teamwork in a Project- based, Team-based First Year Introductory Engineering CourseFor the past decade, engineering schools have developed a variety of models for introducingfirst-year students to their chosen field. One common model is a project-based course, in whichstudents work together on teams to design (and often build and test) something. Through thisprocess, students develop professional and teamwork skills and often also practice technicalcommunication in the context of a real design project. Such courses have been found to increasestudent persistence1 and self-efficacy, though in the latter case project-based learning appears tobe more beneficial for male students than for females2. More research is needed, however, intostudent attitudes toward teamwork and the characteristics of team experiences that lead toimprovements in student attitudes toward working in teams.This study is an exploratory investigation of student attitudes toward teamwork at three timepoints during a first-year team-based design course: before students have begun working inteams, after they have completed an initial small-scale design project in a 4- or 5-person team,and after they have completed a larger-scale design project with a different, similarly-sized team.In this presentation, the authors will explain how teamwork is managed in this first-yearengineering course through our methods of grouping students into teams of 4-5 as well as ourefforts to facilitate successful teams. These efforts include: ● a fun, engaging “ice breaking” exercise to encourage students to consider their team’s communication style as well as to get to know each other ● class discussion of the characteristics of effective teams ● peer mentors (alumni of the course) paired with each student team ● a skit about teamwork prepared by the Educational Theatre Company at our institution ● incorporation of real-stakes team member evaluations in which team members evaluate each other and receive peer feedbackWe will then report the results of a survey, administered this fall at the three time pointsdescribed above (n= about 55). The survey includes quantitative information regarding studentperspectives of the teamwork experience and the fun, frustration, and learning that occurred andqualitative information on the students’ perceived positive and negative characteristics ofteamwork. By administering the same survey at three time points during the semester, we canchart the evolution of those perspectives and assess our teaching methods. 1 Knight, D. W., Carlson, L. E., & Sullivan, J. F. (2007, June). Improving engineering student retentionthrough hands-on, team based, first-year design projects. 31st International Conference on Research inEngineering Education, Honolulu, HI.2 Kilgore, D., Sheppard, S., Atman, C. J., & Chachra, D. (2011, June). Motivation makes a difference, butare there differences in motivation? What inspires women and men to study engineering? 118th ASEEAnnual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, Canada. The largest contribution of this project may be the qualitative information gathered via thesurveys, which will help us better understand what aspects of teamwork experiences studentsbelieve most impact their perceptions of teamwork. For example, we may learn that groupcharacteristics such as gender balance or group size are most important in student attitude towardteamwork. This qualitative data will be used to further develop research questions that could beinvestigated quantitatively with a follow-up survey in future semesters.The data will be collected in September, October, and early December 2013, and is not availablefor this initial abstract. If accepted, a paper written up on this project will of course include thedata and an analysis of it. Our teaching schedule would allow us to conduct a new survey with anew cohort of students in the semester beginning in January 2014, and that data would beavailable for presentation at the conference (but not for inclusion in the paper).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle