Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/16
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audience were undergraduate students in our biosystems engineering curriculum at Auburn University and faculty members from across the nation that engage in biosystems engineering education. Online survey portion of the project engaged ecological engineering faculty members and ecological engineering professionals across the nation. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The project has provided training opportunities to an undergraduate student who was responsible for developing the multimedia case study. In addition, another graduate student developed a research project based on this project, thus the project provided training opportunity to this graduate student. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The multimedia case study and the ePortfolio concepts were disseminated through presentation at the North American College Teachers Association (NACTA) Annual Meeting, June 14-18, Athens, GA. The ePortfolio effort was published as a popular press article in the Resource Magazine published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. The multimedia case study and the ePortfolio concepts were also disseminated through presentation and planery discussion at the American Ecological Engineering Society meeting in Charleston, SC in June 2014. A number of faculty from other institutions expressed in replicating/using our case study in their undergraduate curriculum. The results are also being disseminated through personal contacts. This is an ongoing activity. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Through this project we have increased the number and diversity of students pursuing biosystems engineering degree. We proposed to increase the number of undergraduate students in the biosystems engineering program by 10%. During the course of the project (2012 - 2016), the undergraduate enrollment has increased by 47% (from 116 to 171). Further, the number of undergraduate students in the ecological engineering program has increased by over 100% (from 20 to 43). Female students now make up more than 50% of the ecological engineering curriculum. Therefore, we have not only accomplished this goal, but have greatly exceeded all expectations. The biosystems engineering program at Auburn University is thriving. This is remarkable considering many biosystems engineering programs across the nation are either in their decline or are closing. PROJECT EVALUATION RESULTS The results from the three biosystems engineering courses involved in this project were combined and the overall results are presented and conclusions are made overall as opposed to reporting the results from each individual evaluation measurement. A comparison of the baseline (year 1) and year 3 is given. The averages or percentages are given in parentheses and were based on a 4 point scale. The following is a comparison of the results in the courses prior to any implementation of the modified curriculum and year 3. Overall, the results indicated that the biosystems engineering curriculum was already promoting problem solving and critical thinking skills among the students. Therefore, the instructional methods that were implemented as part of this project had to be evaluated with regard to how well the modifications advanced these skills to a higher level. The results indicate that this was accomplished. BASELINE Year 2: Check all of the following that were part of your experience in this course (the percentages represent how many students reported experiencing each item in the 3 courses involved in this project) 46% Hands-on investigations 32% Research projects 59% End-of-Semester (capstone) project 17% Case Studies or real-world applications 23% Samples of industry applications 28% Interdisciplinary concepts/content 21% Technical applications of content YEAR 3: 76% Hands-on investigations 55% Research projects 96% End-of-Semester (capstone) project 89% Case Studies or real-world applications 71% Samples of industry applications 17% Interdisciplinary concepts/content 19% Technical applications of content Conclusions: According to the above results, there were significant changes in those areas that this project focused on. These results supported the conclusion that the modified curriculum did improve by including more hands-on investigations and real-world applications that would be applicable in industry. BASELINE Year 2: Indicate the extent that you feel you could do each of the following after completing the course: (average based on a 4 point scale) 2.3 - Develop a strategy to solve an engineering problem 3.0 - Figure out the resources needed to solve an engineering problem 2.9 - Apply this course content to industry applications YEAR 3: 3.4 - Develop a strategy to solve an engineering problem 3.8 - Figure out the resources needed to solve an engineering problem 3.7 - Apply this course content to industry applications Conclusions: After course modifications were made as a result of this project, the students reported they were more confident they could find the resources needed and solve engineering problems that were applicable to industry applications. BASELINE Year 2: Which study methods did you use for this course (check all that apply): 54% Content/skills learned through hands-on activities YEAR 3: 87% Content/skills learned through hands-on activities BASELINE Year2: Based on ALL the courses you have taken and the academic experiences you have received in your Program of Study, how well have each of the following been addressed: (Averages based on a 4 point scale) 2.5 - Examples of workforce engineering problems to solve 2.4 - Practical experiences from industry 2.6 - Teamwork 2.7 - Hands-on experiences YEAR 3: 3.2 - Examples of workforce engineering problems to solve 3.0 - Practical experiences from industry 3.2 - Teamwork 3.2 - Hands-on experiences Conclusions: As shown by the results highlighted in red above, the objectives of this project with regard to improving the problem-solving, critical thinking, and real-world applications within the three courses were met. There were two categories with reported percentages that actually decreased in year 3 (interdisciplinary concepts and technical applications) and the reason may have been because the students were not clear on what those terms meant with regard to their course content. They viewed their course as one subject and there weren't other subjects addressed in the course. Even though the students did report an increase on involvement with hands-on and research projects, they did not make the connection how these teaching tools were meant to help them make the interdisciplinary and technical application connections. This can be an area of improvement for further modifying the course content to address the objectives. CASE STUDY EVALAUTION The capstone project for this project involved the instructors using a case study in the three courses involved in this project with their students as an instructional tool during year 3. On a scale of 1(strongly disagree) - 4 (strongly agree), the students were asked to evaluate the case study and their experiences using the case study. The purposes of these evaluations were to measure: 1. The usability and accurate content of the case study, 2. The logistical ease of use of the case study, and 3. How effective the instructional tool was for promoting problem solving and critical thinking in comparison to the traditional lecture/textbook format. A summary of the evaluation of the implementation of the case study is given below (n=51). Averages are given in parentheses and reported based on the 4 point scale. I could easily navigate through the case study (3.28) The case study was free from spelling and grammatical errors (3.56) The material was logically organized (3.5) Descriptions and supporting data were applicable to this course (3.5) The course content was more applicable to real life engineering because of the case study (3.56) The case study examples and illustrations were helpful (3.39) The case study contained unique information not found in a textbook (3.78) I was actively engaged in solving problems (2.61) Decision making in complex situations was required on my part (2.56) Discussions were incorporated (2.94) I would recommend using case studies again for this course (3.00) Overall, the students reported the case studies were well developed and easy to use. It appeared that the students were not familiar with case studies and therefore their responses reflected that while they found the experience unique, they were not sure that they would recommend using case studies again in the courses. For example, the average 2.61 that the students reported how actively engaged they were in solving problems and making decisions on complex situations (2.56) could have been a reflection of them reporting how they had to learn the case study format as opposed to focusing on the problem solving aspect of the case study. Because this format of instruction was non-traditional, they had to spend time figuring out how to use the new method in addition to comprehending the content. Even in the presence of these factors, the students reported the case studies provided a valuable and beneficial aspect toward their learning of the material. The students strongly reported the case study provided instruction not found in the textbook (3.78) which can be interpreted as a positive deviation from traditional lecture and textbook teaching methods.
Publications
- Type:
Other
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
Srivastava, P. and R. McGehee. 2016. Transforming Ecological Engineering Education Using a Hybrid Pedagogical Approach, Biosystems Engineering Seminar Series, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, September 15, 2016.
|
Progress 09/01/14 to 08/31/15
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audience were undergraduate students in our biosystems engineering curriculum at Auburn University and faculty members from across the nation that engage in biosystems engineering education. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The project has provided training opporutnities to an undergraduate student who was responsible for developing the multimedia case study. In addition, another graduate student developed a research project our of this project, thus the project provided training opportunity to this graduate student. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The multimedia case study and the ePortfolio concepts were disseminated through presentation at the North American College Teachers Association (NACTA) Annual Meeting, June 14-18, Athens, GA. The ePortfolio effort was published as a popular press article in the Resource Magazine published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. The results are also being disseminated through personal contacts. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We plan to continue to refine our multimedia case study, approach to ePortfolio, and hands-on laboratory exercises. In addition, we plan to analyze the student evaluation data we have been collecting to quanfity how the changes to the curriculum has helped the students improve their learning. In addition, we plan to disseminate the findings of their project more broadly through peer-reviewed publications.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Through this project we have increased the number and diversity of students pursuing biosystems engineering degree. We proposed to increase the number of undergraduate students in the biosystems engineering program by 10%. We have accomplished this goal and exceeded all expectations. The quality of undergraduate instruction and curriculum in order to better meet projected workplace needs in the agricultural sciences has also improved through the implementation of multimedia case study, ePortfolio, and hands-on laboratory exercised. We have also introduced project-based "spiral curriculum" concepts. Together these innovations are helping us transform the ecological engineering curriculum within our biosystems engineering degree. Partly because of our efforts a number of other institutions (e.g., Michigan State University and North Carolina State University) are either changing the name of their curriculum or implementing ecological engineering curriculum in their undergraduate program. These innovations are also helping students improve their cognitive and affective behavior. In the long-term, we hope that the project will develop an exemplary ecological engineering curriculum and a curriculum model that not only can be used for biology-based engineering education throughout the nations, but can also serve as a model for other cross-disciplinary agriculture and engineering programs that share many common foundation subjects.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Other
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Srivastava, P. 2015. Challenges with Biosystems Engineering Education and Recommendations for Action, North American College Teachers Association (NACTA) Annual Meeting, June 14-18, Athens, GA.
- Type:
Journal Articles
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2015
Citation:
Fasina, O., P. Srivastava, M. Dougherty, S. Adhikari, T. McDonald, S. Taylor, and M. Marshall. 2015. Incorporating ePortfolio in Student Learning. Resource Magazine, November/December 2015; pages 10-12
|
Progress 09/01/13 to 08/31/14
Outputs
Target Audience: Target audience were undergraduate students in our biosystems engineering curriculum at Auburn University and faculty members from across the nation that engage in biosystems engineering education. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? The project has provided training opporutnities to an undergraduate student who was responsible for developing the multimedia case study. In addition, another graduate student developed a research project our of this project, thus the project provided training opportunity to this graduate student. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? The multimedia case study and the ePortfolio concepts were disseminated through presentation and planery discussion at the American Ecological Engineering Society meeting in Charleston, SC in June 2014. A number of faculty from other institutions expressed in replicating/using our case study in their undergraduate curriculum. The results are also being disseminated through personal contacts. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? We plan to continue to refine our multimedia case study, approach to ePortfolio, and hands-on laboratory exercises. In addition, we plan to analyze the student evaluation data we have been collecting to quanfity how the changes to the curriculum has helped the students improve their learning. In addition, we plan to disseminate the findings of their project more broadly through peer-reviewed publications.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Through this project we have increased the number and diversity of students pursuing biosystems engineering degree. As an example, female students now make up more than 50% of the ecological engineering curriculum. The qualityof undergraduate instruction and curriculum in order to better meet projected workplace needs in the agricultural sciences has also improved through the implementation of multimedia case study, ePortfolio, and laboratory equipment. We have also introduced project-based "spiral curriculum" concepts. Together these innovations are helping us transform the ecological engineering curriculum within our biosystems engineering degree. The ecological engineering curriculum is part of many biology-based engineering programs. These innovation are also helping students improve their cognitive and affective behavior. In the long-term, we hope that the project will develop an exemplary ecological engineering curriculum and a curriculum model that not only can be used for biology-based engineering education throughout the nations, but can also serve as a model for other cross-disciplinary agriculture and engineering programs that share many common foundation subjects.
Publications
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Srivastava, P., D. Blersch, O. Fasina, S.R. Chaudhury, P.K. Raju, and R. Halpin. 2014. Transforming Ecological Engineering Education Using a Hybrid Pedagogical Approach. 14th American Ecological Engineering Society Meeting, Charleston, SC, June 9-11, 2014.
- Type:
Conference Papers and Presentations
Status:
Accepted
Year Published:
2014
Citation:
Srivastava, P. 2014. Transforming Ecological Engineering Education Using a Hybrid Pedagogical Approach. Special Curriculum and Body of Knowledge Plenary Session (Invited Discussion). 14th American Ecological Engineering Society Meeting, Charleston, SC, June 9-11, 2014.
|
Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: We initiated an online survey of ecological engineering faculty members and ecological engineering professionals. So far, we have received responses from a total of 38 people. We also initiated baseline data collection from the courses involved in the project. Therefore, we also reached out to undergraduate students in this reporting period. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? (1) Curriculum Planning Summit – We plan to conduct our curriculum planning summit in conjunction with the American Ecological Engineering Society (AEES) annual meeting in June 2014. This meeting will be in Charleston, SC from June 9 – 11. (2) We will continue to develop the case study which will be made available to the students in the fall of 2014. (3) We will continue to conduct online survey to obtain feedback from ecological engineering faculty and professionals. (4) Baseline data on student learning will continue next year. (5) We will begin implementation of hands-on laboratory exercises next year.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Following tasks were accomplished during this project period: (1) We obtained the IRB approval to proceed with the data collection for this project. (2) Baseline Data Collection: The data collection has focused on collecting the baseline data from the courses involved in the project. The purpose of the baseline data is to make a comparison once the spiral curriculum is in place. The baseline data includes (1) demographics, (2) hands-on labs, (3) reporting of technical problems, (4) evaluation of students' study habits, (5) evaluation of students' homework and tests, and (6) course syllabi. The continuous collection of formative and summative data from the faculty and students will be the basis for the course developments. (3) Online Survey of Ecological Engineering Faculty and Professionals: The online survey instrument was developed in QualTrics. The survey is being conducted. So far, we have received 38 response (23 from academia and 15 from industry). The survey was sent to the American Ecological Engineering Society (AEES) listserv. We are in touch with the President of AEES to get him to send periodic reminders so that we get more responses. (4) Co-PIs Oladiran Fasina and Puneet Srivastava wrote and internal grant to implement ePortfolio in the ecological engineering curriculum. We did not propose this activity, but to increase the outcome of this project, we are adding this activity to the project. (5) Co-PIs Puneet Srivastava, Oladiran Fasina, Shiladitya Chaudhury, and Steve Taylor visited Oregon State University and Virginia Tech to learn about their ecological engineering curriculum. This visit was part of the benchmarking activities proposed in this project. (6) Implement Hands-on Investigation: We have identified and purchased a teaching equipment to implement more hands-on investigations in our curriculum. The equipment ordered will give us the ability to study the properties and behavior of liquids under hydrostatic conditions. Examples of student labs that can be conducted with this equipment include capillary, metacentric height determination, stability of floating bodies and center of pressure determination for partially and fully immersed bodies. This will complement the laboratory equipment that is currently used to study the dynamic behavior of liquids. (7) Multimedia Case Study: We identified a topic (Ag Heritage Park Storm Water Wetland Design Case study) for the case study. Dr. Raju and his research associate Pramod Rajan worked with Dr. Srivastava to develop a multimedia case study on storm water wetland design. The Ag Heritage Park Storm Water Wetland Design case study has the following learning objectives: To understand the importance of storm water wetlands To teach the students about the environmental and water quality best management practices To showcase the design of a wetland at Ag Heritage Park that improves water quality and provides habitat for native plants and wildlife This case study was initiated during the summer of 2013. The case study needs refinement in the content and needs to include student assignments. Feedback from faculty and students will be taken to further refine the case study.
Publications
|
|