Title: Assessment of student learning – field application. Earth Educators Rendezvous (4th annual),
Our research, Landscapes of Deep Time in the Red Earth of France (NSF International Research Experience for Students project), aims to mentor U.S. undergraduate science students from underserved populations (e.g. students of Native American heritage and/or first-generation college students) in geological research. During the first field season (June 2018) formative and summative assessments (outlined below) will be issued to assist in our evaluation of student learning. The material advancement of a student's sedimentological skillsets and self-efficacy development in research applications are a direct measure of our program's success. (1) Immediately before and after the program, students will self-rank their competency of specific skillsets (e.g. data collection, lithologic description, use of field equipment) in an anonymous summative assessment. (2) Formative assessments throughout the field season (e.g. describing stratigraphic section independently, oral and written communication of results) will assess improved comprehension of the scientific process. (3) An anonymous attitudinal survey will be issued at the conclusion of the field season to shed light on the program's quality as a whole, influence on student desire to pursue a higher-level degree/career in STEM, and effectiveness of the program on aiding the development of participant confidence and self-efficacy in research design and application. We discuss herein the results of first-year assessments with a focus on strategies for improvement. We expect each individual's outcomes to differ depending on his/her own characteristics and background. Furthermore, some of the most valued intentions of this experience are inherently difficult to measure (e.g., improved understanding of the scientific process, a stimulated passion to pursue a STEM career). We hope to address shortcomings in design; e.g. Where did we lose visibility on certain aspects of the learning experience? How can we revise the format and content of our assessment to better evaluate student participants and improve our program in subsequent years? more »« less
Colaninno, Carol E.
(, Journal of archaeology and education)
null
(Ed.)
Participation in an archaeological field school is the entry point to a professional career in the discipline. Despite the importance of field schools, few scholars have investigated achieved student-learning outcomes or lasting impacts on students from participation in archaeological field research. We report on the educational design, learning objectives, and results of three years of formative and summative assessments for an interdisciplinary, archaeology and ecology research program for undergraduate students. Our learning objectives include promoting scientific literacy and communication, critical thinking and STEM skills, and capacities in archaeological and ecological interdisciplinarity. Using developed rubrics that account for both critical thinking and STEM understanding, self-administered competency surveys, and program-developed items, we found significant gains in nearly all learning objectives. Students demonstrated growth in program specific content, perceived abilities in their scientific and discipline specific skills, critical thinking skills, and scientific communication skills. These educational outcomes and assessment tools have implications for how we design and evaluate field learning in archaeology and may be applied to field school instruction.
Advancements in information technology and computational intelligence have transformed the manufacturing landscape, allowing firms to produce highly complex and customized product in a relatively short amount of time. However, our research shows that the lack of a skilled workforce remains a challenge in the manufacturing industry. To that end, providing research experience to undergraduates has been widely reported as a very effective approach to attract students to industry or graduate education in engineering and other STEM-based majors. This paper presents assessment results of two cohorts of Cybermanufacturing REU at a major university. Students were recruited from across the United States majoring in multiple engineering fields, such as industrial engineering, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, mechatronics, manufacturing, and computer science. Several of the participants were rising sophomores or juniors who did not have any industry internship or prior research experience. In total 20 students (ten per year) participated in the program and worked on individual project topics under the guidance of faculty and graduate student mentors. Unlike a typical REU program, the Cybermanufacturing REU involved a few unique activities, such as a 48-hour intense design and prototype build experience (also known as Aggies Invent), industry seminars, and industry visits. Overall, the REU students demonstrated significant gains in all of the twelve research-related competencies that were assessed as a part of formative and summative evaluation process. While almost all of them wanted to pursue a career in advanced manufacturing, including Cybermanufacturing, the majority of the participants preferred industry over graduate school. The paper provides an in-depth discussion on the findings of the REU program evaluation and its impact on undergraduate students with respect to their future plans and career choice. The analysis is also done by gender, ethnicity, academic level (sophomore, junior, senior), and type of home institution (e.g., large research universities, rural and small schools) to explore if there was any significant difference in mean research competency scores based on these attributes.
Sahoo, Avimanyu; Park, Haejun
(, ASEE Conferences)
Early involvement in engineering research has proven to be a highly effective way to inspire undergraduate students to pursue advanced studies or research-intensive careers. By engaging students in real-world, hands-on research projects, they not only sharpen their problem-solving skills but also develop the intellectual independence needed to tackle complex engineering challenges. These benefits are amplified when the research experience is multidisciplinary, allowing students to engage with topics beyond the confines of their chosen major. Moreover, participation in a collaborative cohort—where continual interactions and shared learning experiences occur—helps foster a sense of community and shared purpose, further enhancing the learning process. This paper presents the outcomes and impacts of a unique undergraduate research program conducted collaboratively between Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, and the University of Alabama in Huntsville. What sets this program apart is its fusion of engineering and engineering technology disciplines, its blend of applied and fundamental research, and its focus on multidisciplinary topics such as human safety, fire protection technology, mechanical engineering technology, electrical engineering, and artificial intelligence. The program engages students from sophomore to senior levels, offering them a chance to explore various research methodologies and work on projects that span multiple fields of engineering. This exposure helps them cultivate a comprehensive understanding of engineering systems and their real-world applications. In this paper, we will delve into the structure and activities of the Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program, discussing its various components as well as the educational and research outcomes it has produced. A central theme of the program is its focus on multidisciplinary research, which ranges from technical fields such as fire protection and mechanical engineering technology to more advanced areas like electrical engineering and artificial intelligence. This breadth of topics ensures that students are equipped with a wide range of skills, from analytical problem-solving to creative thinking, as they learn to approach engineering challenges from multiple perspectives. Additionally, the program’s emphasis on cohort-building activities plays a crucial role in shaping the students’ experiences. By promoting collaboration among students from different disciplines, the program encourages the cross-pollination of ideas, mutual learning, and the development of soft skills such as communication, teamwork, and leadership. The interactions fostered within the cohort help students build a network of peers who share similar academic and career aspirations, strengthening their commitment to research and professional development. The paper will also present the results of both formative and summative assessments of the program, highlighting its impacts on student learning, skill development, and long-term career trajectories. By examining these outcomes, we demonstrate how this collaborative and multidisciplinary research program has successfully nurtured the next generation of independent researchers and engineering leaders, equipping them to meet the challenges of an increasingly complex and interconnected world.
This paper summarizes the overall approach and assessment of a National Science Foundation Research Experience for Undergraduates Site focused on sustainable civil and environmental infrastructure in rural areas. This site has hosted over 60 students over 5 years, including 1 year of virtual participation due to travel restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Detailed discussion and results are provided with respect to the recruitment approach, including particular attention to first-generation college students, and the potential negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on first-generation applicants. This site also incorporates targeted instruction on technical writing, which occurs over several weeks throughout the first half of the summer and culminates with a final conference paper deliverable. This approach has yielded over 20 peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers, or national conference presentations, which have been co-authored by the undergraduate student participants. External evaluation of this site has included both formative and summative assessments, including pre-program, mid-program, and post-program surveys and focus groups, which has enabled a successful continuous improvement cycle, in which cohort-building activities, technical writing deliverables, and mentor training have been gradually incorporated or enhanced. Results of this assessment have also been used to quantify the site’s success with respect to student exposure and interest in research and graduate education. In addition to most participants persisting in STEM fields, many have gone on to pursue graduate school in civil and environmental engineering and win national fellowships.
Unlike summative assessment that is aimed at grading students at the end of a unit or academic term, formative assessment is assess- ment for learning, aimed at monitoring ongoing student learning to provide feedback to both student and teacher, so that learning gaps can be addressed during the learning process. Education research points to formative assessment as a crucial vehicle for improving student learning. Formative assessment in K-12 CS and program- ming classrooms remains a crucial unaddressed need. Given that assessment for learning is closely tied to teacher pedagogical con- tent knowledge, formative assessment literacy needs to also be a topic of CS teacher PD. This position paper addresses the broad need to understand formative assessment and build a framework to understand the what, why, and how of formative assessment of introductory programming in K-12 CS. It shares specific pro- gramming examples to articulate the cycle of formative assessment, diagnostic evaluation, feedback, and action. The design of formative assessment items is informed by CS research on assessment design, albeit related largely to summative assessment and in CS1 contexts, and learning of programming, especially student misconceptions. It describes what teacher formative assessment literacy PD should entail and how to catalyze assessment-focused collaboration among K-12 CS teachers through assessment platforms and repositories.
@article{osti_10099330,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Assessment of student learning – field application. Earth Educators Rendezvous (4th annual),},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10099330},
abstractNote = {Our research, Landscapes of Deep Time in the Red Earth of France (NSF International Research Experience for Students project), aims to mentor U.S. undergraduate science students from underserved populations (e.g. students of Native American heritage and/or first-generation college students) in geological research. During the first field season (June 2018) formative and summative assessments (outlined below) will be issued to assist in our evaluation of student learning. The material advancement of a student's sedimentological skillsets and self-efficacy development in research applications are a direct measure of our program's success. (1) Immediately before and after the program, students will self-rank their competency of specific skillsets (e.g. data collection, lithologic description, use of field equipment) in an anonymous summative assessment. (2) Formative assessments throughout the field season (e.g. describing stratigraphic section independently, oral and written communication of results) will assess improved comprehension of the scientific process. (3) An anonymous attitudinal survey will be issued at the conclusion of the field season to shed light on the program's quality as a whole, influence on student desire to pursue a higher-level degree/career in STEM, and effectiveness of the program on aiding the development of participant confidence and self-efficacy in research design and application. We discuss herein the results of first-year assessments with a focus on strategies for improvement. We expect each individual's outcomes to differ depending on his/her own characteristics and background. Furthermore, some of the most valued intentions of this experience are inherently difficult to measure (e.g., improved understanding of the scientific process, a stimulated passion to pursue a STEM career). We hope to address shortcomings in design; e.g. Where did we lose visibility on certain aspects of the learning experience? How can we revise the format and content of our assessment to better evaluate student participants and improve our program in subsequent years?},
journal = {Earth Educator's Rendevous Abstracts},
author = {Lily Pfeifer, Lynn Soreghan},
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
An official website of the United States government
