scholarly journals Design of a Completely New First Year Engineering Program at the University of Saskatchewan

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Maw
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Course Design ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
First Year ◽  
Program Structure ◽  
Delivery Methods ◽  
High School Curriculum ◽  
Graduate Attributes ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University

The rapidly evolving role of the engineering profession in society requires an engineering graduate with a more diverse and robust skill set than ever before. To answer this challenge, the University of Saskatchewan’s College of Engineering has embarked upon a complete redesign of its first year program. This project essentially started from a “blank slate” and posed the question, “If we could design any first year program that we wanted, what would we create?” The outcome of this endeavor is intended to be an extremely effective first year program that excites, engages and inspires students, and that holistically prepares them for the challenges to come in later years. In this paper, we review the broad learning objectives of our new first year, and the values that we applied to our decision making during its design.The overall project consists of three distinct phases: determination of required first year graduate attributes, development of program structure and delivery methods, and detailed course design. Phase I has been completed. It has left us with a detailed inventory of knowledge, skills, experiences, and attitudes, distributed across 23 content categories, that the College wants students to internalize by the end of their first year of study.We will outline the methods that we used to compile and refine this attribute inventory, including multiple approaches aimed at meaningful stakeholder engagement, surveys of existing first year programs across Canada, and an analysis of gaps and redundancies between the Saskatchewan high school curriculum and our existing first year program. We will also describe the 23 content categories used to organize the graduate attributes of the proposed first year program and how these categories are weighted in relative terms.  We share some of our key learnings from Phase I of the project, including which consultation strategies worked most effectively, why we focused on first year graduate attributes and not content, and key elements that will be emphasized in our new program. We will also briefly describe the process by which we are starting to develop the program structure and delivery methods i.e. Phase II.

scholarly journals A MODEL TO DEVELOP PEER FEEDBACK SKILLS IN FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING STUDENTS

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Mattucci ◽  
Jim Sibley ◽  
Jonathan Nakane ◽  
Peter Ostafichuk
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Students ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Professional Communication ◽  
First Year ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
University Of British Columbia ◽  
Feedback Model ◽  
Poster Presentations ◽  
The University ◽  
Proper Interpretation

Abstract – Giving and receiving feedback is a necessary, but often difficult skill for young engineers to acquire. We developed and piloted the delivery of a feedback model as part of the first-year engineering experience at the University of British Columbia. The approach is based on recognizing feedback as a form of professional communication, and that it requires practice to improve. We wove different aspects of communication skill development through two large newly-designed first-year introduction to engineering courses, building towards face-to-face feedback through a staged series of communication experiences. The full feedback model highlighted the nuances of face-to-face communication, and was called the "3×3", since it includes the three components involved in face-to-face feedback (sender, message, and receiver), each with three associated aspects. The sender uses appropriate words and body language, ensures proper interpretation, and is empathetic; the message is objective and non-judgmental, sufficiently detailed, and contains suggestions for improvement; and the receiver remains open and listening, acknowledges to the sender that they are listening, and clarifies to ensure understanding. Students applied what they had learned through an activity reviewing poster presentations from a major course design project. In the activity, they each had an opportunity to craft a feedback message before delivering the message face-to-face to a peer. Students then reflected on the feedback they received by summarizing the message, recognizing how the sender delivered the feedback, and identifying why the feedback was helpful. Student reflections were analyzed for themes from the 3×3 model. Students found feedback from peers particularly helpful when it was delivered in an appropriate and courteous manner, checked for proper interpretation, provided clear suggestions for improvement, and was coupled with praise of something that was done well. Providing students with a structured model allows them to follow a process in both providing effective face-to-face feedback, but also better appreciate why receiving feedback is beneficial in helping them improve.  

scholarly journals Understanding Barriers to Student Success: What Students Have to Say

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Kuley ◽  
Sean Maw ◽  
Terry Fonstad
Keyword(s):  
Student Success ◽  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
First Year ◽  
Self Directed Learning ◽  
Directed Learning ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University

This paper focuses on feedback received from a set of qualitative questions that were administered to undergraduate students in the College of Engineering at the University of Saskatchewan, as part of a larger mixed methods study. The larger study aims to identify what characteristics, if any, can predict or are related to student success; The “start-stop-continue” method was utilized to assess student perceptions about  their success in the college as a whole. The students were asked: Are there any specific things that you can think of that act/acted as barriers to your success in engineering (stop)? What could the college do/change to make first year more successful for engineering students (start)? Is there anything in your engineering degree so far that you feel is done well and helps students succeed (continue)? Students identified the quality of instruction early in their program as well as adjustment to college workloads and self-directed learning as the most significant barriers tostudent success.

scholarly journals Integrative Activities for First Year Engineering Students-Fuel Cell Cars as a Linking Project Between Chemistry, Mechatronics Concepts and Programing

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Hulls ◽  
Chris Rennick ◽  
Mary Robinson ◽  
William Melek ◽  
Sanjeev Bedi
Keyword(s):  
Fuel Cell ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Low Voltage ◽  
First Year ◽  
Joint Project ◽  
Graduate Attributes ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Team Environment ◽  
Hands On Learning ◽  
The University

In Mechatronics Engineering at the University of Waterloo, a joint project involving small, inexpensive fuel cells cars was introduced to show how courses in the first term relate to one another. Additionally, the project was designed to provide the students with hands on learning, to give the students a taste of what to expect in later years, and to start incorporating many of the CEAB's graduate attributes at an introductory level. The fuel cell car consists of two low-voltage cells, a low power microcontroller and several sensors mounted on a motorised platform. Students employed concepts from chemistry, programming and mechatronics systems throughout the project, submitting reports at key milestones. during the projet, students needed to make decision in a team environment on which strageties to implement to meet the goals of the project. The project culminated in a final competition and report. Students were surveyed at the start, and end, and the term to measure any changes in attitude with regards to the courses as well as their satisfaction with the project. The project was well recieved by students but significant challenges remain to be solved.

scholarly journals REDESIGNING THE UBC FIRST YEAR INTRODUCTION TO ENGINEERING: SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter M. Ostafichuk ◽  
Carol P. Jaeger ◽  
Jon Nakane ◽  
Susan Nesbit ◽  
Naoko Ellis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
First Year ◽  
Engineering Profession ◽  
University Of British Columbia ◽  
Practical Engineering ◽  
Assessment Techniques ◽  
High Level ◽  
The University

A new first year introduction to engineering experience was developed at the University of British Columbia. This paper provides an overview of the two new courses and the lessons learned both in developing and delivering the courses. Several key problematic areas in the previous curriculum were addressed, namely, to improve student connection with the engineering profession, increase design and practical engineering experiences, more effectively integrate sustainability into the curriculum, and better emphasize the human and social connection to engineering.The courses operate in a flexible learning framework with a sequence of online, lecture, and studio components arranged in a whole-part-whole format delivered to a class of 850 students. Elements of numerous effective course design, teaching and learning practices, including integrated course design, constructive alignment, components of Team-Based Learning, classroom assessment techniques, peer evaluation, and peer grading were incorporated into these courses. Student feedbackthrough surveys has shown that the new format has been highly successful in addressing most of the key high-level goals, such as establishing a student connection to the engineering profession, helping students understand what engineers do and how they do it, and providing an introduction and appreciation for design, sustainability, decision-making, professionalism, and ethics..

scholarly journals 2013 Alan Blizzard Award Feature Article - Enriching Educational Experiences through UBC’s First Year Seminar in Science (SCIE113)

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Fox ◽  
Gülnur Birol ◽  
Andrea Han ◽  
Alice Cassidy ◽  
Ashley Welsh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Writing Skills ◽  
First Year ◽  
Teaching Team ◽  
The University ◽  
First Year Seminar

The First Year Seminar in Science (SCIE113) was developed during 2009/2010 academic year through an exemplary collaboration between faculty, administrators and educational support staff in the Faculty of Science at the University of British Columbia (UBC). SCIE113 reflects the vision and values of the Faculty of Science and UBC by offering an enriched educational experience to its first year students. The small class format provides students an intimate connection with faculty, an opportunity for significant engagement early in their academic careers, and helps with transitioning to the university environment.The overall goal of SCIE113 is to introduce skills that cross disciplinary boundaries and that every scientist and student in science must master: how to constructively build an evidence-based argument and how to communicate effectively. The overarching course goals are to define and discuss the elements of a scientific approach, to think like a scientist, and to communicate science through writing. SCIE113 fosters the development of authentic scientific scholars through the construction, integration, and use of argumentation skills and through an exploration of science as a way of knowing using a collaborative class environment.  SCIE113 engages students in interactive and collaborative activities and promotes learning of scientific argumentation and writing skills. In-class and out-of-class activities allow students to frequently discuss, debate, and defend their views of science. Specific learning activities such as case studies, targeted readings, and examinations of media and scientific articles allow students to evaluate the validity of scientific claims and to construct a scientific argument. Meanwhile, activities such as reflections, in-class writing, peer review, and discussions on the fundamentals of writing help students to improve their writing skills which are assessed by three short essays and a term project. The guided peer review process, which fosters collaboration, enables students to provide expert-like feedback to their peers. Faculty and TA feedback completes the review process.  SCIE113 is an exemplary model of collaboration and is guided by best practices in instructional design.SCIE113 is a model of collaborative course design and instruction with a large, multi-disciplinary teaching team. The design of SCIE113 is guided by best practices and continues to evolve in response to emerging research. The teaching team consists of faculty and teaching assistants from 14 different departments, representing four Faculties, with a wide range of expertise and experience in fostering student learning. The teaching team meets bi-weekly to cultivate reflective practice and to support faculty in their professional development for teaching this writing intensive course.SCIE113 is informed by the scholarship of teaching and learning.SCIE113 is informed by comprehensive research that is incorporated into course design and implementation and utilizes validated assessment tools. Frequent feedback from students and faculty, and measures of perceived and actual learning gains, ensure successful course implementation and promote student learning. 

scholarly journals Design of a Completely New First Year Engineering Program at the University of Saskatchewan – Part II

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel B. Frey ◽  
Sean Maw ◽  
Susan Bens ◽  
Jim Bugg ◽  
Bruce Sparling
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Current Status ◽  
First Year ◽  
Final Exam ◽  
Course Scheduling ◽  
Summative Assessments ◽  
Blank Slate ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University ◽  
Academic Year

Over the last three years, the University of Saskatchewan’s College of Engineering has embarked upon a complete redesign of its first year common program. This project started from a blank slate and posed the question, "If we could design any first year program that we wanted, what would we create?" The goal is to offer a first year program that excites, engages, inspires, and holistically prepares students for learning in subsequent years. At CEEA 2018, Phase I of this project was reviewed with a focus on the content of the new first year. This year, the focus is on the structure of the proposed program and how it aims to satisfy programmatic design objectives. The proposed first year program is highly modular, allowing for more intentional uses of time during the academic year. Course duration and intensity vary and are selected to best serve student learning, rather than conform to the traditional academic schedule. To provide more timely and targeted feedback, summative assessments occur throughout each term allowing course scheduling to extend into the traditional end-of-term final exam period. This paper presents the current structural design of the new first year and the rationale for its significant features. Some of the program design objectives that have been facilitated by this structure include: • strategic sequencing of learning with opportunities to integrate and reinforce essential skills, • multiple, individualized opportunities for students to stumble and recover, • holistic balancing of content and pacing for better student wellbeing, and • comprehensive, well-timed exposure to wide-ranging programmatic choices for students. Throughout this project, the program structure has evolved continuously. This paper will describe the development process, the challenges faced in that process, and the lessons learned. The paper will conclude by describing the current status of the project, and the focus of work currently being undertaken to prepare for implementation.  

Editorial comment: As we read

1967 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 547-548
Author(s):  
James E. Inskeep
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Elementary School ◽  
Junior High School ◽  
Junior High ◽  
School Teacher ◽  
School Curriculum ◽  
First Year ◽  
High School Mathematics ◽  
High School Curriculum ◽  
Basic Ideas

The modern elementary school teacher deals easily with number sentences, inequalities, and other basic ideas for expressing the characteristics of number relationships. Such an expression as 4 + □ = 7 is common in most primary-grade classrooms. Ideas of negative integers are not unfamiliar to the elementary school pupil. Solution sets cover many a junior high school mathematics class chalkboard. These ideas are not difficult and seem quite natural in the context of the elementary- junior high school curriculum. But, when I went to school, we called it algebra! And we called it algebra in the first year of high school! No sooner.

scholarly journals Becoming a marine scientist: helped by a daily quota of three lumps of coal

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 463-468
Author(s):  
Sidney J Holt
Keyword(s):  
School Curriculum ◽  
Growing Up ◽  
High School Curriculum ◽  
Job Interview ◽  
The North ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
The North Sea ◽  
The University ◽  
First Job ◽  
Management Issues

Abstract Growing up in the 1930s and being educated in England was much easier than it is now. The high school curriculum was necessarily pretty limited, and my energy went into physics, biology, and chemistry. At the University of Reading, I was pointed towards fisheries research. My first job interview resulted in me being hired as a “naturalist” at the Lowestoft Laboratory. My first trip on the North Sea, in winter, went well, and my boss Michael Graham showed me how to handle live fish gently. Back from that first voyage in spring 1946, I was introduced to my new colleague and close collaborator, Ray Beverton. Three lumps of coal is what Ray and I were allowed per day to keep us warm in the little annex of a terrace house on Lowestoft’s seafront. Much of the technical work on our 1957 book was completed by about 1950 when I left to take a job with the Nature Conservancy. In December 1953, I began a 25-year career with Food and Agriculture Organization’s Fisheries Division, which eventually led to my involvement with whales and the International Whaling Commission’s Committee of Three. My final years returned me to management issues regarding fisheries, especially demersal fishing in European Union waters, focusing on the matter of choosing target fishing mortality for sustainable fishing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document