{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01594746716697936, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.427710843373494, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What research says to the science and engineering educator

SMET educators have been inundated with pedagogical buzzwords such as constructivism, authentic assessment, active learning, etc. These terms are the outgrowth of various educational theories that suggest that learning can be enhanced if these approaches are adopted for use in the classroom. However, there often seems to be a divide between the theory and its practical application and implementation. How can SMET educators best begin to bridge this gap? To respond to this question, we provide a brief overview of educational research literature in science and engineering. We share some successful pedagogical approaches to teaching and learning that have been developed at our own institutions and that demonstrate how to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Successful practices include the use of case studies, active and cooperative learning, and writing/reflection activities. In addition, we highlight successful assessment practices as they relate to the enhancement of student learning.