The devastation caused by recent natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes, has increased awareness regarding the importance of providing interdisciplinary solutions to complex infrastructure challenges. In October 2018, the University of Puerto Rico received a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) collaborative award from the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop an integrated curriculum on resilient and sustainable infrastructure. The project titled “Resilient Infrastructure and Sustainability Education – Undergraduate Program (RISE-UP) aims to educate future environmental designers and engineers to design and build a more resilient and sustainable infrastructure for Puerto Rico. This paper presents the design, initial implementation, and assessment of a curriculum encompassing synergistic interactions among these four domains: integrated project delivery, user-centered design, interdisciplinary problem-solving, and sustainability and resiliency. The project seeks to foster interdisciplinary problem-solving skills involving architects, engineers and construction managers, in order to better prepare them to face and provide solutions to minimize the impact of extreme natural environment events on infrastructure. The new curriculum stresses on problem-settings, the role that participants have on defining the characteristics of the problems that have to be solved, learning in action, reflecting on the process, and communication between the different stakeholders. This multisite and interdisciplinary program provides students with the necessary support, knowledge, and skills necessary to design and build resilient and sustainable infrastructure. This instructional endeavor consists of four courses designed to reduce gradually the difference between what students are able to accomplish with support structures and what students are able to accomplish on their own. To maximize and enhance the educational experience, the program blends a technology-infused classroom learning with broad co-curricular opportunities such as site visits, undergraduate research, and internships. As students advance in the program, they will be exposed and required to perform increasingly complex tasks. During the first year of the program, the following outcomes were achieved: 1) implementation of the faculty teamwork process to develop courses and analyze cases from an interdisciplinary perspective, 2) development and approval of an interdisciplinary curriculum on resilient and sustainable infrastructure, 3) development of case studies on situations associated with disaster and interdisciplinary responses, 4) development of a case study database, 5) establishment of an Advisory Board with government agency representatives and faculty, and 6) recruitment and enrollment of 30 students as the first RISE-UP cohort. In summary, the body of knowledge acquired from this project can serve as a model that can be replicated to develop and enhance academic programs at other institutions.
more »
« less
Developing Case Studies for a Repository for Resilient Infrastructure and Sustainability Education following a Natural Disaster
To preserve the stories of resiliency and document the infrastructure damages caused by Hurricanes Irma and María and the 2020 earthquakes in Puerto Rico, the timely collection of evidence is essential. To address this need, case studies of damages caused by the natural disasters and a repository of information aimed to keep record and centralize information regarding relevant cases that provide examples of evidence of infrastructure damages and processes worth preserving is needed. To develop said case studies and a repository, a two-prong approach was used in this study. First, the case study methodology was followed. According to Yin, a case study is “an intense study of a single unit with the purpose of a larger class of (similar) units”. Case studies are used in academia for both research and teaching purposes. Our research team advocates for the use of case studies as tools to inform both learning and decision-making. Secondly, the repository model was developed. This paper presents the results of the development of the repository and includes sample case studies. The repository allows students, academics, researchers, and other stakeholders to understand the impact of extreme environmental conditions on the built environment. Faculty can use the repository in their courses to teach Architecture, Engineering and Construction students topics related to resiliency and sustainability in the build environment. Each case study developed and deposited in the repository, answers to research questions regarding what, how and when the damages happened, who were the stakeholders involved in the processes, what were their actions, and what are the lessons learned. The case studies have the potential of becoming responses to hypotheses for those mining the repository. The paper contributes to the body of knowledge by presenting the results of the development of case studies and a database that can be used for both research and teaching purposes. These can be replicated in the US and other countries, in need of recording and systematizing information after natural events.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1832468
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10291592
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract: 100 words Jurors are increasingly exposed to scientific information in the courtroom. To determine whether providing jurors with gist information would assist in their ability to make well-informed decisions, the present experiment utilized a Fuzzy Trace Theory-inspired intervention and tested it against traditional legal safeguards (i.e., judge instructions) by varying the scientific quality of the evidence. The results indicate that jurors who viewed high quality evidence rated the scientific evidence significantly higher than those who viewed low quality evidence, but were unable to moderate the credibility of the expert witness and apply damages appropriately resulting in poor calibration. Summary: <1000 words Jurors and juries are increasingly exposed to scientific information in the courtroom and it remains unclear when they will base their decisions on a reasonable understanding of the relevant scientific information. Without such knowledge, the ability of jurors and juries to make well-informed decisions may be at risk, increasing chances of unjust outcomes (e.g., false convictions in criminal cases). Therefore, there is a critical need to understand conditions that affect jurors’ and juries’ sensitivity to the qualities of scientific information and to identify safeguards that can assist with scientific calibration in the courtroom. The current project addresses these issues with an ecologically valid experimental paradigm, making it possible to assess causal effects of evidence quality and safeguards as well as the role of a host of individual difference variables that may affect perceptions of testimony by scientific experts as well as liability in a civil case. Our main goal was to develop a simple, theoretically grounded tool to enable triers of fact (individual jurors) with a range of scientific reasoning abilities to appropriately weigh scientific evidence in court. We did so by testing a Fuzzy Trace Theory-inspired intervention in court, and testing it against traditional legal safeguards. Appropriate use of scientific evidence reflects good calibration – which we define as being influenced more by strong scientific information than by weak scientific information. Inappropriate use reflects poor calibration – defined as relative insensitivity to the strength of scientific information. Fuzzy Trace Theory (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995) predicts that techniques for improving calibration can come from presentation of easy-to-interpret, bottom-line “gist” of the information. Our central hypothesis was that laypeople’s appropriate use of scientific information would be moderated both by external situational conditions (e.g., quality of the scientific information itself, a decision aid designed to convey clearly the “gist” of the information) and individual differences among people (e.g., scientific reasoning skills, cognitive reflection tendencies, numeracy, need for cognition, attitudes toward and trust in science). Identifying factors that promote jurors’ appropriate understanding of and reliance on scientific information will contribute to general theories of reasoning based on scientific evidence, while also providing an evidence-based framework for improving the courts’ use of scientific information. All hypotheses were preregistered on the Open Science Framework. Method Participants completed six questionnaires (counterbalanced): Need for Cognition Scale (NCS; 18 items), Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT; 7 items), Abbreviated Numeracy Scale (ABS; 6 items), Scientific Reasoning Scale (SRS; 11 items), Trust in Science (TIS; 29 items), and Attitudes towards Science (ATS; 7 items). Participants then viewed a video depicting a civil trial in which the defendant sought damages from the plaintiff for injuries caused by a fall. The defendant (bar patron) alleged that the plaintiff (bartender) pushed him, causing him to fall and hit his head on the hard floor. Participants were informed at the outset that the defendant was liable; therefore, their task was to determine if the plaintiff should be compensated. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 experimental conditions: 2 (quality of scientific evidence: high vs. low) x 3 (safeguard to improve calibration: gist information, no-gist information [control], jury instructions). An expert witness (neuroscientist) hired by the court testified regarding the scientific strength of fMRI data (high [90 to 10 signal-to-noise ratio] vs. low [50 to 50 signal-to-noise ratio]) and gist or no-gist information both verbally (i.e., fairly high/about average) and visually (i.e., a graph). After viewing the video, participants were asked if they would like to award damages. If they indicated yes, they were asked to enter a dollar amount. Participants then completed the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule-Modified Short Form (PANAS-MSF; 16 items), expert Witness Credibility Scale (WCS; 20 items), Witness Credibility and Influence on damages for each witness, manipulation check questions, Understanding Scientific Testimony (UST; 10 items), and 3 additional measures were collected, but are beyond the scope of the current investigation. Finally, participants completed demographic questions, including questions about their scientific background and experience. The study was completed via Qualtrics, with participation from students (online vs. in-lab), MTurkers, and non-student community members. After removing those who failed attention check questions, 469 participants remained (243 men, 224 women, 2 did not specify gender) from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds (70.2% White, non-Hispanic). Results and Discussion There were three primary outcomes: quality of the scientific evidence, expert credibility (WCS), and damages. During initial analyses, each dependent variable was submitted to a separate 3 Gist Safeguard (safeguard, no safeguard, judge instructions) x 2 Scientific Quality (high, low) Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Consistent with hypotheses, there was a significant main effect of scientific quality on strength of evidence, F(1, 463)=5.099, p=.024; participants who viewed the high quality evidence rated the scientific evidence significantly higher (M= 7.44) than those who viewed the low quality evidence (M=7.06). There were no significant main effects or interactions for witness credibility, indicating that the expert that provided scientific testimony was seen as equally credible regardless of scientific quality or gist safeguard. Finally, for damages, consistent with hypotheses, there was a marginally significant interaction between Gist Safeguard and Scientific Quality, F(2, 273)=2.916, p=.056. However, post hoc t-tests revealed significantly higher damages were awarded for low (M=11.50) versus high (M=10.51) scientific quality evidence F(1, 273)=3.955, p=.048 in the no gist with judge instructions safeguard condition, which was contrary to hypotheses. The data suggest that the judge instructions alone are reversing the pattern, though nonsignificant, those who received the no gist without judge instructions safeguard awarded higher damages in the high (M=11.34) versus low (M=10.84) scientific quality evidence conditions F(1, 273)=1.059, p=.30. Together, these provide promising initial results indicating that participants were able to effectively differentiate between high and low scientific quality of evidence, though inappropriately utilized the scientific evidence through their inability to discern expert credibility and apply damages, resulting in poor calibration. These results will provide the basis for more sophisticated analyses including higher order interactions with individual differences (e.g., need for cognition) as well as tests of mediation using path analyses. [References omitted but available by request] Learning Objective: Participants will be able to determine whether providing jurors with gist information would assist in their ability to award damages in a civil trial.more » « less
-
more » « less
Background/Context: Computer programming is rarely accessible to K–12 students, especially for those from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Middle school age is a transitioning time when adolescents are more likely to make long-term decisions regarding their academic choices and interests. Having access to productive and positive knowledge and experiences in computer programming can grant them opportunities to realize their abilities and potential in this field.
Purpose/Focus of Study: This study focuses on the exploration of the kind of relationship that bilingual Latinx students developed with themselves and computer programming and mathematics (CPM) practices through their participation in a CPM after-school program, first as students and then as cofacilitators teaching CPM practices to other middle school peers.
Setting: An after-school program, Advancing Out-of-School Learning in Mathematics and Engineering (AOLME), was held at two middle schools located in rural and urban areas in the Southwest. It was designed to support an inclusive cultural environment that nurtured students’ opportunities to learn CPM practices through the inclusion of languages (Spanish and English), tasks, and participants congruent to students in the program. Students learned how to represent, design, and program digital images and videos using a sequence of 2D arrays of hexadecimal numbers with Python on a Raspberry Pi computer. The six bilingual cofacilitators attended Levels 1 and 2 as students and were offered the opportunity to participate as cofacilitators in the next implementation of Level 1.
Research Design: This longitudinal case study focused on analyzing the experiences and shifts (if any) of students who participated as cofacilitators in AOLME. Their narratives were analyzed collectively, and our analysis describes the experiences of the cofacilitators as a single case study (with embedded units) of what it means to be a bilingual cofacilitator in AOLME. Data included individual exit interviews of the six cofacilitators and their focus groups (30–45 minutes each), an adapted 20-item CPM attitude 5-point Likert scale, and self-report from each of them. Results from attitude scales revealed cofacilitators’ greater initial and posterior connections to CPM practices. The self-reports on CPM included two number lines (0–10) for before and after AOLME for students to self-assess their liking and knowledge of CPM. The numbers were used as interview prompts to converse with students about experiences. The interview data were analyzed qualitatively and coded through a contrast-comparative process regarding students’ description of themselves, their experiences in the program, and their perception of and relationship toward CPM practices.
Findings: Findings indicated that students had continued/increased motivation and confidence in CPM as they engaged in a journey as cofacilitators, described through two thematic categories: (a) shifting views by personally connecting to CPM, and (b) affirming CPM practices through teaching. The shift in connecting to CPM practices evolved as students argued that they found a new way of learning mathematics, in that they used mathematics as a tool to create videos and images that they programmed by using Python while making sense of the process bilingually (Spanish and English). This mathematics was viewed by students as high level, which in turned helped students gain self-confidence in CPM practices. Additionally, students affirmed their knowledge and confidence in CPM practices by teaching them to others, a process in which they had to mediate beyond the understanding of CPM practices. They came up with new ways of explaining CPM practices bilingually to their peers. In this new role, cofacilitators considered the topic and language, and promoted a communal support among the peers they worked with.
Conclusions/Recommendations: Bilingual middle school students can not only program, but also teach bilingually and embrace new roles with nurturing support. Schools can promote new student roles, which can yield new goals and identities. There is a great need to redesign the school mathematics curriculum as a discipline that teenagers can use and connect with by creating and finding things they care about. In this way, school mathematics can support a closer “fit” with students’ identification with the world of mathematics. Cofacilitators learned more about CPM practices by teaching them, extending beyond what was given to them, and constructing new goals that were in line with a sophisticated knowledge and shifts in the practice. Assigned responsibility in a new role can strengthen students’ self-image, agency, and ways of relating to mathematics.
-
Coastal Communities are exposed to multiple hazards including hurricanes, storm surges, waves, and riverine flash floods. This paper presents the outcome of a Basin-wide Flood Multi-hazard Risks module that was developed and offered as part of a collaboration between two research projects: the UPRM-DHS Coastal Resilience Center of Excellence (CRC) funded by the Department of Homeland Security and the Resilient Infrastructure and Sustainability Education Undergraduate Program (RISE-UP) funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The content was designed to give students an understanding of complex project management in coastal communities. The main learning objective was for students to be able to assess and recognize the actions that can be taken to improve resiliency in coastal communities. Students learned how to manage multi-hazard floods. Through knowledge gained by participating in lectures, discussions, and the development of case studies, students were able to assess flood risk and current mitigation strategies for coastal communities in Puerto Rico. The learning experience provided an overview of the history, needs, and challenges that coastal communities face regarding flood and coastal hazards. Through the case studies, students were able to appreciate and understand the risk exposure on the natural and built infrastructure, and the importance of always taking into consideration the social impact.more » « less
-
Broadband infrastructure in urban parks may serve crucial functions including an amenity to boost overall park use and a bridge to propagate WiFi access into contiguous neighborhoods. This project: SCC:PG Park WiFi as a BRIDGE to Community Resilience has developed a new model —Build Resilience through the Internet and Digital Greenspace Exposure, leveraging off-the-shelf WiFi technology, novel algorithms, community assets, and local partnerships to lower greenspace WiFi costs. This interdisciplinary work leverages: computer science, information studies, landscape architecture, and public health. Collaboration methodologies and relational definitions across disciplines are still nascent —especially when paired with civic-engaged, applied research. Student researchers (UG/Grad) are excellent partners in bridging disciplinary barriers and constraints. Their capacity to assimilate multiple frameworks has produced refinements to the project’s theoretical lenses and suggested novel socio-technical methodology improvements. Further, they are excellent ambassadors to community partners and stakeholders. In BRIDGE, we tested two mechanisms to augment student research participation. In both, we leveraged a classic, curriculum-based model named the Partnership for Action Learning in Sustainability program (PALS). This campus-wide, community-engaged initiative pairs faculty and students with community partners. PALS curates economic, environmental, and social sustainability challenges and scopes projects to customize appropriate coursework that addresses identified challenges. Outcomes include: literature searches, wireframes, and design plans that target solutions to civic problems. Constraints include the short semester timeframe and curriculum-learning-outcome constraints. (1) On BRIDGE, Dr. Kweon executed a semester-based Landscape Architecture PALS 400-level-studio. 18 undergraduates conducted in-class and in-field work to assess community needs and proposed design solutions for future park-wide WiFi. Research topics included: community-park history, neighborhood demographics, case-study analysis, and land-cover characteristics. The students conducted an in-Park, community engagement session —via interactive posterboard surveys, to gain input on what park amenities might be redesigned or added to promote WiFi use. The students then produced seven re-design plans; one included a café/garden, with an eco-corridor that integrated technology with nature. (2) From the classic, curriculum-based PALS model we created a summer-intensive for our five research assistants, to stimulate interdisciplinary collaboration in their research tasks and co-analysis of project data products: experimental technical WiFi-setup, community survey results, and stakeholder needs-assessments. Students met weekly with each other and team leadership, exchanged journal articles, and attended joint research events. This model shows promise for integrating students more formally into an interdisciplinary research project. An end-of-intensive focus group highlighted, from the students’ perspective, the pro/cons of this model. Results: In contrasting the two mechanisms, our results include: Model 1 is tried-and-trued and produces standardized, reliable products. However, as work is group based, student independence is limited —to explore topics/themes of interest. Civic groups are typically thrilled with the diversity of action plans produced. Model 2 provides greater independence in student-learning outcomes, fosters interdisciplinary, “dictionary-building” that can be used by the full team, deepens methodological approaches, and allows for student stipend payments. Lessons learned: intensive time frame needed more research team support and ideally should be extended, when possible, over the full project-span. UMD-IRB#1785365-4; NSF-award: 2125526.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--36940
