Proposal to the Ethics Education in Science and Engineering Program, National Science Foundation: Role-Play Scenarios for Teaching Responsible Conduct of Research

We propose to develop and assess role-play scenarios to teach central topics in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) to graduate students in science and engineering. Together the scenarios will cover plagiarism, authorship, conflict of interest, interpersonal conflicts in mentoring, and concerns about compliance with research regulations on human participants in research, animal subjects, or hazardous substances. Two scenarios will present potential whistleblowing situations. Intellectual merit: Few previous studies have carefully assessed the effectiveness of role-play in teaching ethics. We will conduct a rigorous, systematic assessment of role-play, using multiple methods, with a diverse group of graduate students. We will examine whether role-play helps students identify moral issues in research, understand multiple perspectives in ethical disputes, and negotiate practical solutions to moral problems. We will document how students’ conceptions of RCR change. We will determine whether students retain their new knowledge and skills. For this project, we will draw on our previous experience in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Broader impacts: Collaborating with both graduate and undergraduate students, we will develop educational materials that can be adopted by graduate programs in all science and engineering departments. These materials will be disseminated through professional meetings and archived online. We believe that by engaging students through the role-play scenarios, we would teach graduate students to handle ethical problems in RCR effectively. As an outcome of this project, we expect to find that long after students have participated in role-play sessions, they will recall the lessons of those sessions, and they will be able to apply those lessons to a wide range of ethical problems that they may encounter in their professional careers

A Qualitative Study of Emotions Experienced by First-year Engineering Students during Programming Tasks

In introductory computer programming courses, students experience a range of emotions. Students often experience anxiety and frustration when they encounter difficulties in writing programs. Continued frustration can discourage students from pursuing engineering and computing careers. Although prior research has shown how emotions affect students’ motivation and learning, little is known about students’ emotions in programming courses. In this qualitative study of first-year engineering students taking an introductory programming course, we examined the emotions that these students experienced during programming tasks and the reasons for experiencing those emotions. Our study was grounded in the control-value theory of achievement emotions. Each research participant came to two laboratory sessions: a programming session and a retrospective think-aloud interview session. In the programming session, each participant worked individually on programming problems. We collected screen capture, biometrics, and survey responses. In the interview session, each participant watched a video of their actions during the programming session. After every 2 minutes of viewing, the participants reported the emotions that they had experienced during this 2-minute period. We performed a thematic analysis of the interview data. Our results indicate that the participants experienced frustration most frequently. Sometimes they experienced multiple emotions. For example, one participant felt annoyed because she had made a mistake, but she felt joy and pride when she fixed the mistake. To promote student learning, educators should take students’ emotions into account in the design of curriculum and pedagogy for introductory programming courses

Structured Pairing in a First-Year Electrical and Computer Engineering Laboratory: The Effects on Student Retention, Attitudes, and Teamwork

This paper describes a simple technique, structured pairing, for organizing student teams in engineering instructional laboratories. This technique was adapted from pair programming, which was previously found to improve student confidence, satisfaction, and retention in computer science. A study of structured pairing was implemented in a large required course for first-year students in electrical and computer engineering. Six laboratory sections implemented structured pairing, and the other seven laboratory sections operated in a traditional way (i.e., unstructured team interactions). Data were collected from a student survey, two focus groups, and course enrollment records. Structured pairing students reported significantly higher confidence in laboratory tasks and satisfaction with the course and teamwork experiences. Focus group data indicated that structured pairing students experienced reciprocal scaffolding (i.e., students acknowledged that they learned from each other). Short-term retention in engineering did not differ significantly between structured pairing and traditional section students. These findings suggest that structured pairing is a more engaging and motivating alternative to traditional laboratory teaming methods

Minimizing Access Pointer into Trees and Arrays

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryJoint Services Electronics Program / N00014-79-C-0424National Science Foundation / MCS-801070

Complexity Theory

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryNational Science Foundation / CCR-9315696Originally published July 1995; revision published November 1995 with the same tech report number

Optimal Dynamic Embedding of Trees into Arrays

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryJoint Services Electronics Program / N00014-79-C-042

The Complexity of Sorting on Distributed Systems

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryJoint Services Electronics Program / N00014-79-C-0424National Science Foundation / MCS-821744

What Do Students Experience as Peer Leaders of Learning Teams?

In a course for engineering freshmen, peer leaders facilitated optional study sessions, which implemented peer-led team learning workshops. Some leaders were paid teaching assistants, but most were undergraduate volunteers. To understand the experiences of the peer leaders, we asked them to keep weekly reflective journals. By performing a basic qualitative analysis of fourteen journals from two semesters, we developed a description of the experience of leading peer-led team learning workshops over the course of the semester. At the beginning of the semester, the leaders were apprehensive about teaching and concerned with correctly answering students’ questions. As the semester progressed, the leaders were often frustrated with the difficulty of teaching, and the leaders tried new ways of encouraging student participation. At the end of the semester, the leaders reported that they increased self-confidence, developed an appreciation for intellectual diversity, and gained an increased interest in teaching

Self-Efficacy as a Long-Term Outcome of a General Education Course on Digital Technologies

This study investigates the long-term outcomes of a general education course on digital technologies. Through cross-sectional and longitudinal interviews with students, the authors find that self-efficacy is a long-term student outcome. The primary sources of self-efficacy in the course for students were verbal persuasion and mastery experience. Faculty and teaching assistants were key sources for verbal persuasion. Some students experienced a success paradox: they felt successful in the course even though they failed to meet all of their initial expectations. This study can guide faculty in designing a course to promote student self-efficacy

The Correctness of Tison's Method for Generating Prime Implicants

Coordinated Science Laboratory was formerly known as Control Systems LaboratoryJoint Services Electronics Program / N00014-79-C-0424National Science Foundation / MCS 81-0555