The E NVIRONMENTS F OR F OSTERING E FFECTIVE C RITICAL T HINKING ( EFFECT s)

1. The ENVIRONMENTS FOR FOSTERING EFFECTIVE CRITICAL THINKING (EFFECTs) NSF EFFECTs Project Overview

2. Acknowledgments • EFFECTs was developed through NSF CCLI Phase I Award • “Developing an Engineering Environment for Fostering Effective Critical Thinking (EFFECT) through Measurements” [DUE 0633635] • EFFECTs is being expanded to create a Community of Practice through NSF TUES Type 2 Award • “Implementing and Assessing Strategies for Environments for Fostering Effective Critical Thinking (EFFECTs) Development and Implementation [DUE 1022971]

3. Acknowledgments • University of South Carolina • Nicole Berge, Juan Caicedo, Joe Flora, Sarah Gassman, Nathan Huynh, Steve McAnally, Bob Petrulis, Charlie Pierce, Navid Saleh, Briana Timmerman • Marshall University • Jeff Huffman, Andrew Nichols, Rick McCormick, Paulus Wahjudi, Isaac Wait, Sydney Wait • University of Virgin Islands • Midlands Technical College, Columbia SC • Beaufort Middle School, Beaufort SC

4. Motivations • Concept hatched in 2005 to improve teaching and learning in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the University of South Carolina • Formulated out of desire to … • find a better way to stimulate our undergraduate students in critical thought • show that we can document evidence of critical thinking

5. Actions • EFFECTs were first implemented in 2007 through creation of ECIV 101 – Introduction to Civil Engineering (e.g. Pierce et al. 2012) • As of 2013, EFFECTs have been integrated into more than 24 engineering, computer science, and physics courses across four institutions • electrical engineering (Wait 2012) • environmental engineering (Berge and Flora 2010) • geotechnical engineering (Pierce et al. 2013, forthcoming)

6. Workshops • 1st Annual EFFECTs Workshop • University of South Carolina, Columbia SC [2011] • 2nd Annual EFFECTs Workshop • Marshall University, Huntington WV [2012] • 3rd Annual EFFECTs Workshop • Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville TN [2013]

7. Broader Impacts CAREER: Cooperative Human-Computer Model Updating Cognitive Systems (MUCogS), Caicedo, $430,000 CAREER: Hydrothermal Carbonization of Mixed Feedstocks: Implications for Sustainable Waste Management, Berge, $411,107 NUE: Nano in a Global Context for Engineering Students, Saleh/Johnson/Caicedo, $200,000 REU Site: International REU Program in Smart Structures, Caicedo/Yun/Christenson, $107,683 (~$300,000 Total) Development and Implementation of Staggered BEM-FEM for the Assessment of Vibrations Induced By High Speed Trains, Rizos/Caicedo, $240,000 Simulation of Integrated Urban Infrastructure Systems using Component-Based Modeling, Goodall/Huynh/Caicedo, $280,000

8. Notes • Please send me an email (piercec@cec.sc.edu) if interested in receiving workshop slides, referenced papers, or other information about EFFECTs • EFFECTs website located at https://sdii.ce.sc.edu/effects

9. The ENVIRONMENTS FOR FOSTERING EFFECTIVE CRITICAL THINKING (EFFECTs) What is an EFFECT?

10. Student-Centered Learning “Be a curator of content, not a creator of content.”

11. Student-Centered Learning • EFFECTs create an environment for student-centered learning (SCL), a well-established paradigm in higher education that is highly effective in engineering (e.g. Felder et al. 2000) • EFFECTs integrate three approaches that promote SCL • inductive learning • active learning • cooperative learning

12. Student-Centered Learning • The teacher serves as a facilitator of learning rather than a direct instructor of content • Fundamental Premise: If we compel students to be responsible for their own learning, then they will need to think critically to be successful.

13. What is Critical Thinking? • Interactive Exercise • Distribute Critical Thinking Decision Worksheets • Hand out individual worksheets followed with group worksheets • Collect group worksheets • Record example descriptions or definitions of critical thinking on next slide

14. What is Critical Thinking? • 1. • 2. • 3. • 4. • 5.

15. Critical Thinking • Research in cognitive science shows that critical thinking is not a skill that, once learned, can be repeated and applied in all situations • Rather, the processes of thinking are intertwined with domain knowledge, meaning that it is contingent on content (Willingham 2007) • Therefore, there must be critical thinking skills that are engineering-specific

16. Critical Thinking • Facione (1998) : “the process of purposeful, self-regulatory judgment,” where that process encompasses “reasoned consideration to the evidence, context, conceptualization, methods, and criteria by which those judgments are made” • Lipman (1988) : “skillful, responsible thinking that facilitates good engineering judgment because it relies upon criteria, is self correcting, and is sensitive to content”

17. Critical Thinking • Critical thinking can be described as a subset of three types of thinking(Willingham 2007) : • reasoning • qualitative and quantitative (e.g. abilities to estimate and demonstrate sense of magnitude and scale) • problem solving • making judgments and decisions

18. Critical Thinking in EFFECTs • EFFECTs facilitate critical thinking through : • provision of discipline-specific context • e.g. geotechnical problem within civil engineering • self-identification of criteria and constraints • e.g. to create a good solution to a design problem • opportunities for self-exploration and self-correction • e.g. active learning and reflective writing • self-comparison of initial and final solutions • e.g. final report

19. Engineering Judgment “They let you make your own mistakes to begin with …” “… they didn’t penalize you if you did something crazy that was wrong. They wanted to encourage you to try crazy ideas …”

20. What is an EFFECT? • Instructional framework … • … to package and deliver content in a realistic context, and • … to promote active learning environments, and • … to evaluate student learning of content in terms of core knowledge and critical thinking

21. What is an EFFECT? “I think the best part … was every two weeks we got a piece of paper and it had a situation. And they asked us to just estimate anything, really, in our heads … what would happen if different situations happened, in terms of civil engineering. We just had to put whatever our estimation was, or write out all these factors on each page. Then as the week progressed, you basically made that situation come to life with the hands-on activities. You see how your estimates were, at the end. I thought it was cool to see what your theories are, in real life, instead of just on paper and numbers and variables.” - ECIV 101 student

22. What is an EFFECT? Decision Worksheet [context and criteria] + Active Learning Modules [content and self-correction] = Final Report

23. EFFECTs are Active! • active learning techniques are the heart of EFFFECTs • integrate hands-on and minds-on activities

24. EFFECTs are Adaptable! • developed and implemented at different academic levels and settings [e.g. freshmen through graduate level]

25. EFFECTs are Adaptable! • developed and implemented in all classroom environments [e.g. small interactive classes, lab classes, large lecture classes]

26. EFFECTs are Adaptable! • developed and implemented in non-engineering courses [e.g. computer science, physics, history, student in university]

27. EFFECTs are Flexible and Modular! • can use as few or as many active learning modules as desired • can use one module for multiple concepts • can use multiple modules for one concept • can interchange modules

28. EFFECTs are Integrative! • integrative, not additive • pedagogical approach for packaging and delivering the same course material

29. STEM Educational InnovationsPredictors of Dissemination Success • Four Sets of Characteristics • Innovation, Student, Faculty, Administration • Student Characteristics • Student Engagement • Motivation to Learn • Enhance Learning • Receptivity to Change