Designing Learner-Centered & Equitable Courses with ACUE banner

ENGR/NSM 193: STEM Leadership, Ethics, and Social Change

Data-driven, Student-friendly, Rubric

Reflection on Instructional Change:

I analyzed my Project 1 rubric data from Spring 2024 to improve my instruction and, ultimately, the rubric itself. Analyzing the rubric itself, I found that I had a rubric inside of a rubric—that is, a criterion (ethical analysis) that was itself broken down into five components, each of which was evaluated. So I analyzed the student data on each component and tabulated it in an Excel spreadsheet. Mostly, the numbers of students attaining a specific level of performance on a specific criterion were spread out from 4 (A) to 2 (C), which is what I expect from STEM students taking an upper division humanities elective. But one criterion, "reasoning," had slightly more level 2 performance than others. This prompted a great deal of reflection on the rubric criteria itself (e.g., "reasoning" is the wrong term, criteria need to be differently weighted, two categories could be conflated into one), on ways to use the rubric to improve student understanding and buy-in, and on the instruction I need to provide in class to properly prepare students for this assignment, specifically the area where the data showed lower values. I ended up completely revising the rubric, inviting student feedback on the rubric, spending one full class day focusing on application (which was a more accurate term than "reasoning") of ethical theories using the film The Matrix, and encouraged the use of rubrics in peer response sessions.

This work on the Project 1 rubric--and taking the time to go over the rubric in detail and inviting students to ask questions and propose changes--increased student engagement with it. During the in-class discussion of the rubric, one student asked, "What do original claims mean?" This detailed question made me realize that while Project 1's application and explanation might be original, the claims should be clear. This change improved the rubric for all students.

I found the ACUE discussion/instruction videos (where instructors are talking about strategies and the reasons behind them), the implementation resources, and the Practice and Reflect process to be most influential for me. For example, the first module included a step-by-step process of aligning course outcomes and objectives using student-centered language. Though I hadn't anticipated changing my learning outcomes, I did end up finding the process useful and revised my outcomes and syllabus language to be more student-centered. The idea to dig into my rubric data came from one of the instruction videos on rubrics. Because I use rubrics regularly in my teaching so much of that instruction wasn't new or helpful, I thought it particularly effective that ACUE included information and ideas for instructors with varying levels of familiarity with rubrics. The Practice and Reflect process helped me take my new ideas further than if I hadn't reflected on them.

From my Observe and Analyze session, a great idea my colleagues gave me was to map the rubric to an outline of the project. Because the project is quite structured with few organizational choices, I created an outline in the form of a flowchart (trying to accommodate my visual learners). I found it difficult to actually map the rubric to the project flowchart, so instead I spent time in class tying the various parts of the rubric to the flowchart. My students really responded well to the flowchart. I created another flowchart for Project 2, where it was easier to incorporate the rubric language in the flowchart. Thank you, Observe and Analyze colleagues!

Evidence of Instructional Change

Evidence of Learning
Evidence 1	Evidence 2	Evidence 3
Revising the Project 1 rubric based on student's question	Analysis of student data that began my revision of the rubric (top); revised rubric incorporating student suggestions (bottom)	Completion of ACUE course badge

Practice and Reflect on: Ensuring Learner-Centered Course Outcomes

Course Syllabus

Faculty Bio

Faculty Bio
	I am a lecturer in the Department of Civil Engineering, where I teach writing, leadership, and ethics for STEM students. I was a tenured Associate Professor of Communication at Kettering University, an engineering-focused STEM college in Flint, Michigan, until I resigned in 2018. I have a PhD in English from University of Nebraska-Lincoln, an MFA in creative writing from Mills College, and a BA in English at Cal State Northridge. My specialties are engagement, especially listening, across difference and genocide studies. I am also a publishing poet.

Program Sponsors
	This work was supported by: National Science Foundation Hispanic Serving Institution Project STEM Zone DUE 1832335 US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project Degree with a Purpose P031S210061 US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project STEM4Equity P031C210012 *Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the US Department of Education.