Active Techniques Implemented in an Introductory Signal Processing Course to Help Students Achieve Higher Levels of Learning.

Holding students to high standards and assessing, measuring and evaluating their learning with challenging, authentic problems in the midterm and final exams is the goal of the professors who teach core signal processing concepts. However, the heavy reliance of these subjects on mathematics makes it difficult for students to genuinely grasp the concepts and relate to a conceptual framework. Specifically, analyzing the signals and the functionality of systems in Fourier domain; separating the system level analysis from signal level analysis; and understanding how they are related in time domain and frequency domain are among the most challenging concepts. Students’ lower grades observed over past years in the introductory signal processing course exposed a potential disconnect between the actual level of learning and the high expectations set by the professors. In this paper, we present the active learning techniques that we implemented in one of the summer session offerings of this course in our department. The research explored Peer Instruction, pre-class reading quizzes and post-lecture quizzes. In addition to the mid and end of the quarter survey results, the comparison analysis of the grades students achieved in the active learning integrated course in the second summer session and the standard course offered in first summer session is discussed. According to our results, the developed techniques helped students in the active classroom perform significantly better than their peers participating in standard lectures when tested by challenging questions in their exams

New Perspective on TPACK Framework in the Context of Early Childhood Education: The “A” Stands for Affective

The purpose of this exploratory single-case study is to investigate the affordances of iPad transpired within a technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) framework by four early childhood educators with varying Technological Knowledge (TK) at a low-income preschool. Pre/post and follow-up survey, group and follow-up interviews, classroom observations and document of iPad workshop data were analyzed using coding methods in two cycles. The exploration in how teachers discovered the iPad affordances indicated parallel progression in TK and change in their value system. The exploration in the progression of TK and change in their value system suggest a relationship between progression of TK towards TPACK and of affective-valuing (AV) towards affective-characterization (AC)

Student and faculty perspectives of a scalable, sustainable, higher education, learning-rich classroom

This article profiles the development of a sustainable, learning-rich room and provides student and faculty perspectives on its effectiveness. The room features mobile furniture and instructional technology - interactive whiteboard, student response systems and FLIP camcorders. Three faculty members were selected to use the classroom for instruction. Data was collected via student surveys and videos as well as faculty meetings, videos, surveys, and reports. Faculty made extensive use of the classroom infrastructure by employing a wide variety of active teaching methods. The success of the Learning Lab resulted has given administration new opportunities to explore innovative teaching through building learning rich classrooms

The Bridge Course Design: Formative Assessment and Student-Centered Learning in Cross-Course Classrooms

This paper reports on the effectiveness of an innovative course design that bridges classes from two different disciplines. The Bridge design creates assignments in two classes: a summary class and a panel class. The design encourages students to engage in teaching and interacting with their peers within and across disciplines, and provides instructors with unique opportunities for formative assessment. Relative to control groups, students in the summary class perceived greater opportunities to teach peers, participate in class discussions, think critically, and engage in collaborative learning. Students in the panel class showed gains in critical thinking. Both classes afforded multiple opportunities for formative assessment. Following a discussion of the results, recommendations for improving the Bridge design are presented

How does the structure of a college chemistry examination affect pedagogy

This study examines variations of assessment and connections to active learning methods, which may enhance both the accuracy of assessment, engagement and retention. Correlation data relating instruction and assessment in a multiple dimensions are presented. Multiple choice (MC) and free response (FR) exams were provided and students were also given the option to provide FR answers to the MC items. This study suggests there is little overall difference in mean or median student scores on the MC vs. FR portions of the exam, but that there is some evidence to believe that student scores on MC portions are more variable than their corresponding scores on FR portions. Some students may exhibit a difference in their abilities to answer MC vs. FR questions, but these preferences do not appear to be widespread and exhibit no biases towards one particular type of assessment

Measuring Instructor Self-Efficacy when Migrating Face-to-Face Courses Online

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank all faculty who took their time to respond to the surveyThis study measures instructors’ online teaching self-efficacy with an aim to capture their immediate and initial perception of migrating their teaching online and identify potential instructional needs and support. The authors sent a survey to all instructors in our institution four days prior to the first day of classes in spring 2020 and received 73 responses (60% response rate). The number of years of experience with online tools was low (88%). Instructors reported high confidence in their ability to teach online (82%); realization of the effort to create quality online experiences (90%); belief that teaching online would be different (90%); recognition of having to modify their assessment (77%); ability of adjusting teaching efficiently with unexpected events (82%); knowledge of where to seek teaching and technology guidance (86% & 89%); and confidence in developing a similar rapport with students (71%). Respondents were split in their beliefs about offering similar active learning opportunities. This study supplements research on instructors’ perception of online teaching as a well-planned and intentional event, offering implications over the immediate and long-term support to be offered to instructors regarding migrating courses online both in times of crisis and when such opportunities arise.Yanyue Yuan - [email protected] Hargis - [email protected] Yuan - PhD, Assistant Arts Professor, Arts and Sciences, NYU Shanghai. Dr. Yanyue Yuan is currently Assistant Arts Professor at NYU Shanghai. Prior to joining NYU Shanghai, she worked as Rutherford Curatorial Researcher at the London Science Museum, Adjunct Assistant Professor at ShanghaiTech University, and Assistant Research Professor at Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences. She holds a PhD in Education from the University of Cambridge and a Master’s degree in Anthropology from the University of Oxford.Jace Hargis - Professor, Director, Center for Teaching & Learning. Dr. Jace Hargis has enjoyed working as a Professor and Director of the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) at NYU Shanghai; a CTL Director at the University of California; a Professor and Associate Provost in Hawaii; a College Director in Abu Dhabi, UAE; an Associate Professor and Assistant Provost in northern California; and an Assistant Professor and Director of Faculty Development in Florida. He has authored a textbook, an anthology and published over 160 academic articles as well as offered hundreds of academic presentations. He has earned a BS in Oceanography from Florida Institute of Technology; an MS in Environmental Engineering Sciences and a PhD in Science Education from the University of Florida. Dr. Hargis’ research focuses on how people learn while integrating appropriate, relevant and meaningful instructional technologies.Yanyue Yuan - NYU Shanghai, ChinaJace Hargis - NYU Shanghai, Center for Teaching & Learning, ChinaAngelo, T., & Cross, P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques. San Francisco: Jossey -Bass.Baghdadchi, S., Hardesty, R., Hadjipieris, P., & Hargis, J. (2018). Active techniques implemented in an introductory signal processing course to help students achieve higher levels of learning. Proceedings from the American Society of Engineering Education Conference, June 24–27. Salt Lake City, Utah: American Society for Engineering Education.Bandura, A. (1977). Self -efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychology Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033–295X.84.2.191.Bandura, A. (1982). Self -efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003–066X.37.2.122.Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self -efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3.Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal programs supporting educational change: Vol. VII. Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Rep. No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 140.Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2005/R1589.7.pdf.Chiasson, K., Terras, K., & Smart, K. (2015). Faculty Perceptions Of Moving A Face -To-Face Course To Online Instruction. Journal of College Teaching & Learning (TLC), 12(3), 321–240. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v12i3.9315.Conrad, D. (2004). University instructors’ reflections on their first online teaching experiences. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 31–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i2.1826.De Gagne, J.C., & Walters, K. (2009). Online teaching experience: A qualitative metasynthesis (QMS). MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5 (4), 577–589. Retrieved from https://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no4/degagne_1209.pdf.Foster, K.M. (2006). Bridging troubled waters: principles for teaching in times of crisis. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education. Retrieved from https://urbanedjournal.gse.upenn.edu/ node/163.Freeman S., Eddy, S., McDonough, M, Smith, M., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. & Wenderoth, M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111, 8410–8415.Freeman, L.A. (2013). Instructor time requirements to develop and teach online courses. Proceedings of the 2013 AIS SIGED: IAIM International Conference on Information Systems Education and Research, 8. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/siged2013/8.Hill, R., Hargis, J., & Park, E. (2016). Developing, teaching and assessing hybrid English courses. International Journal for the Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 123–134.Knowlton, D.S. (2000). A theoretical framework for the online classroom: A defense and delineation of a student -centered pedagogy. In R.E. Weiss, D.S. Knowlton, & B.W. Speck (Eds.), Principles of effective teaching in the online classroom (pp. 5–14). San Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.841.Kuh, G., O’Donnell, K., & Schneider, C. G. (2017). HIPs at Ten at ten. Change: Higher Learning, 49(5), 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2017.1366805.Lewis, C., & Abdul -Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices: Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10755–006-9010-z.Lockard, E., & Hargis, J. (2017). Andragogical design thinking: A transition to anarchy in and beyond the classroom. Transformative Dialogues, 10(3). Retrieved from https://kpu.ca/sites/default/files/Transformative%20Dialogues/TD.10.3.3_Lockhard%26Hargis_Andragogical_Design_Thinking.pdf.McKeachie, W. (2005). McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers. 12th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Mills, S.J., Yanes, M.J., & Casebeer, C.M. (2009). Perceptions of distance learning among faculty of a college of education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Technology, 5(1), 19–28. Retrieved from https://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no1/mills_0309.pdf.Mintz, S. (2020, February 13). Online Course Design. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher -ed-gamma/online -course-design.Puentedura, R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. Ruben R. Puentedura Weblog. Retrieved March 28, 2020 from http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/.Puentedura, R. (2012). The SAMR model: Background and examples. Ruben R. Puentedura Weblog. Retrieved March 28, 2020 from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/000073.html.Ray, J. (2009). Faculty perspective: Training and course development for the online classroom. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 263–276. Retrieved from https://jolt. merlot.org/vol5no2/ray_0609.pdf.Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self -Effi cacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp.35–37). Windsor, UK: NFER -NELSON.Stewart, C., Bachman, C., & Johnson, R. (2010). Predictors of faculty acceptance of online education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 597–616. Retrieved from https://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no3/stewartc_0910.pdf.Tschannen -Moran, M., Woolfolk -Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher -efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248. https://doi.org/10.3102 %2F00346543068002202.Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). Understanding by Design guide. Alexandria, VA: ASC.419711

Self-Regulated Learning as a Critical Attribute for Successful Teaching and Learning

The purpose of this scholarship of teaching and learning was to define and assess the level of self-regulation skills undergraduate students possess. Participants completed the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Through the analysis of the MSLQ, students reported having high expectations for themselves. Yet, students were found to not use cognitive learning skills and self-regulation practices consistently, which suggests a low level of self-regulation. Subsequently, students exhibit maladaptive and counterproductive behaviors like procrastination and disengagement. From this exploratory study a number of future studies were identified that have the potential for increasing the level of self-regulation in higher education

Providing Faculty iPods to Explore Innovative Teaching and Learning

The iPod digital music player has been available since late 2001, and even in higher education, its presence has been seen, although mostly in the hands of students and rarely for outcomes-based educational purposes. In 2004, Duke University provided free iPods to all 1,650 first year students, which subsequently enabled faculty to create learning opportunities, which actively engaged students to integrate digital audio and more into their lessons. Our study takes an alternate approach in which the Center for Teaching and Learning provided a small group of faculty (n=11) from different disciplines with a free iPod, microphone, training, support and collaboration opportunities. The faculty members were asked to create innovative instructional methods and then use the tool in their classes for the 2008 spring semester. In return, faculty agreed to share their outcomes, which would become part of a resource showcase to assist other faculty. So, instead of distributing the technology to a wide audience, where only some may participate, and our goal was to identify those who would actively engage in the project, develop specific applications, and ultimately assist faculty and subsequently students, in integrating functional instructional technology. The primary purpose of this study is to share another model for using and distributing electronic media tools in higher education and secondarily to provide the results of this model in the form of varied and successful uses of the device in teaching and learning

Providing faculty iPods to explore innovative teaching and learning

The iPod digital music player has been available since late 2001, and even in higher education, its presence has been seen, although mostly in the hands of students and rarely for outcomes-based educational purposes. In 2004, Duke University provided free iPods to all 1,650 first year students, which subsequently enabled faculty to create learning opportunities, which actively engaged students to integrate digital audio and more into their lessons. Our study takes an alternate approach in which the Center for Teaching and Learning provided a small group of faculty (n = 11) from different disciplines with a free iPod, microphone, training, support and collaboration opportunities. The faculty members were asked to create innovative instructional methods and then use the tool in their classes for the 2008 spring semester. In return, faculty agreed to share their outcomes, which would become part of a resource showcase to assist other faculty. So, instead of distributing the technology to a wide audience, where only some may participate, and our goal was to identify those who would actively engage in the project, develop specific applications, and ultimately assist faculty and subsequently students, in integrating functional instructional technology. The primary purpose of this study is to share another model for using and distributing electronic media tools in higher education and secondarily to provide the results of this model in the form of varied and successful uses of the device in teaching and learning