activities would provide an initialgood analysis of the data. Projects completed in individual classes may be term papers, designprojects, debates, and more in-depth capstone projects. Oftentimes in the engineering curriculum,these in-class projects do not really focus on the social and environmental aspects of technologyor engineering design, however, this brief exposure may be enough to change students’perception of what engineering really is. Comparing the 3rd and 4th year students’ responses, thenumbers are not very surprising. Most of the 4th year students mentioned that their capstone hadat least a small focus on social and environmental impact, and this explains the higher percentageof students answering in that way.Projects that are
. Afterwards, the students were asked to blindpeer review and to grade all the designs except their own. The second exercise asked students todraft a paper about creativity in the HVAC industry, and a third exercise involved the design andanalysis of a class II pipeline system. The students were also asked to analyze the economicaland societal impact of their design based on the selection of three materials for their pipelinesystems.Preliminary assessment results support the continued use of these PBL and the integration ofentrepreneurial mindset learning content. The evidence shows students developed anunderstanding of technical content while developing an entrepreneurial mindset. These outcomessatisfy the latest ABET student learning outcomes and
of key terminologyused in ABET EAC SOs 1 – 7. The third is to provide a framework for mapping embeddedindicators within an environmental engineering curriculum to key words in SOs 1 – 7 forassessment and evaluation purposes. We hypothesize that some programs may overlook thesechanges and their assessment and evaluation of ABET EAC SOs 1 – 7 could be incomplete. Thispaper can be useful for programs who remain in a transition between ABET EAC SOs a – k andthe new SOs 1 – 7, or for programs who want to cross-check their approach with ours. Our hopeis that this study provides baseline definitions for key words in ABET EAC SOs 1 – 7 for thegreater engineering community.1. IntroductionWords have meaning. Individual words found in important guiding
Knowledge (SWEBOKv3, [16])and the Software Engineering Competency Model (SWECOM, [17]) also have security as a top-level skill/knowledge area.Figure 1 shows the CC2020 report conceptualization of the relationship between curricularsubdisciplines. There are several things to note in this figure. First, Security as an area rangesmore than any other of the five areas (dashed ovals) from Computing Foundations up to DomainActivity (Y-axis) and from Hardware to Organizational Needs (X-axis). Second, the IT Platformsand Infrastructure oval is wholly contained within the Security oval. Finally, SoftwareEngineering curriculum (SE) sits not only near the center point of the figure (ComputingTechnology X Software), but also closest to the center of the
Abdelnour Nocera, Anicia Peters, Susan Dray, and Stephen Kimani. 2016. A living HCI curriculum. In Proceedings of the First African Conference on Human Computer Interaction. 229–232.15. Ida Larsen-Ledet, Nathalie Bressa, and Jo Vermeulen. 2019. Reflections on Teaching a Mandatory HCI Course to Computer Science Undergraduates. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.16. Leydens, Jon A., and Juan C. Lucena. "Making the invisible visible: Integrating engineering-for-social-justice criteria in humanities and social science courses." In 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. 2016.17. Blaise W Liffick. 2004. Introducing assistive technology in an HCI course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 36
/social dualism. Social concerns cannot be presented as secondary to engineeringeducation or as an addition to squeeze in when there is a second of free time. In a review editorial,Berdanier [10] acknowledges that there is precedent to integrate the humanities and social sciencesinto engineering education and was called for by founders like Charles Mann (1918) and WilliamWickenden (1920’s). Despite 100 years of various calls to do so, the integration has not gone wellas engineering is perceived as a hard/applied discipline versus a soft/pure field such ascommunication or sociology [10]. Sticking to this distinction allows for the lessons that pertain to“dealing with people” to sit at the margins of the engineering curriculum. Arguably, these need
curricula which so heavily stresses rigor and technical content whilesometimes ignoring the integration of leadership competencies. However, the role of out-of-classactivities seemed to serve as an acceptable complement for this technical curriculum in theclassroom once students gained awareness of this phenomenon.Involvement in OOCAs was found to be essential to these students' leadership development, andstudents were attributing very little classroom content to leadership development. As one student,Lilly put it, “You become a leader if you’re like put in a position where you have to lead otherpeople. I wouldn’t say I went to class and like learned them [leadership skills]” . Therefore, inorder to better prepare students for their future careers
with their instructor, highlighting their knowledge of the material and their experienceworking in the field.RecommendationsCollaborative programs between academia and industry such as this can produce many benefitsand opportunities for those involved and society. There are some items to consider when firstdeveloping these joint programs to meet the required expectations of all parties.When first selecting the curriculum material for these programs, it must cover a broad field of viewto make the program accessible to the most significant number of enthusiasts. The goal of thisprogram was to provide an introductory overview of the onshore wind turbine industry to itsparticipants. If the program included climb training practices, then the
and curriculums (Vossoughi & Bevan,2014).The emergence of the maker movement has led to an explosion of Makerspaces across the globe(Sheridan et al., 2014). Makerspaces are informal sites for creative production in art, science,technology and engineering, where people of all ages and experience meld digital and physicaltechnologies to explore ideas, learn technical skills and create new products (Sheridan et al.,2014; Dougherty, 2013; Lisa Brahms & Werner, 2013). In the past decade makerspaces havebeen opening in museums and science centers (Lisa Brahms & Werner, 2013), universities(Forest et al., 2014; Wilczynski, 2015; Wong & Partridge, 2016), libraries (Noh, 2015; Cao, Wu,& Stvilia, 2020), and independent non for
using longitudinal data from the FE exam,” ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. Conf. Proc., 2013, doi: 10.18260/1-2--22398.[4] J. K. Estell and S. M. Williams, “Program Educational Objectives: What Constitutes Sufficient Assessment?,” in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, 2011, pp. 22.1182.1-22.1182.17, doi: 10.18260/1-2--18523.[5] ABET, “Criteria for accrediting engineering programs: 2012-2013 accreditation cycle,” Baltimore, 2012. [Online]. Available: www.abet.org.[6] ABET, “Criteria for accrediting engineering programs: Effective for Reviews During the 2013-2014 accreditation cycle,” Baltimore, 2013. [Online]. Available: www.abet.org.[7] E. W. Nault and M. S. Leonard, “An Integrated
the Texas A&M Indy Racing team was created. The facultymember in this paper, Dr. Hur, was engaged with this team for the system integration part. Inorder to assist this Indy Racing team, he intended to create a small-scale autonomous carplatform. In order to reach this goal, as an intermediate phase, a car simulator was chosen to bebuilt first. For this purpose, four undergraduate engineering students have met with the facultymember and decided to make a capstone project team for the car simulator that can also monitorthe driver’s health and the attention status. This capstone project idea was proposed to theprogram and was selected to be supported by a capstone endowment given by the institutionalTexas A&M foundation. This capstone
thefull liberal arts general education curriculum in addition to the engineering curriculum. Theprogram has had a successful start, with great interest from students and also from prospectiveemployers. Westmont engineering is built on three “pillars:” a Christian liberal arts foundation,excellence in technical competence, and integration of a Design Innovation thread throughout thecurriculum. This paper will provide details of the three pillars and then proceed to show theimpact of these pillars in three areas: impact on student recruitment, student satisfaction duringthe program and employment potential (from the perspective of prospective employers). Someadditional aspects of the Westmont engineering experience are also evaluated including
with similar goals existed around the world, i.e., an international review of other doctoral programs addressing similar needs. ❑ To begin the process of identifying the curriculum and course content of the program. ❑ To conduct an interest and needs assessment of a sample of high probability individuals.The findings of all studies were positive, and their key features incorporated into subsequentdecision making [6], [7].Then, in the fall of 2019, the D. Tech. degree program was approved, after having been passedthrough the internal university approvals and the State’s Commission of Higher Education [8].How Was the Business Need Envisioned?For-profit business and industry exist to benefit the shareholders [6]. They do so through
, Construction Contracts: Law and Management, London: E&F Spon, 1996.[17] S. K. Sears, G. A. Sears, R. H. Clough, J. L. Rounds and R. O. Segner, Construction Project Management, Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2015.[18] J. Demirdoven, "An Interdisciplinary Approach to Integrate BIM in the Construction Management and Engineering Curriculum," in 9th BIM Academic Symposium & Job Task Analysis Review , Waschington, DC, 2015.[19] McGraw Hill Construction , "The Buisness Value of BIM for Construction on Major Global Markets: How Contractors Around the World Are Driving Innovation With Building Information Modeling," McGraw Hill Construction, Bedford, 2014.[20] M. S. Cole, H. S. Feild and W. F. Giles, "Using Recruiters
Conference (2021).[6] Wenger, Etienne. "Communities of practice: A brief introduction." (2011).[7] Capobianco, Brenda M., Heidi Diefes-Dux, and Euridice Oware. "Engineering a professionalcommunity of practice for graduate students in engineering education." IEEE Frontiers in EducationConference. (2006):1-5.[8] Borrego, Maura, et al. "Developing an engineering education research community of practice througha structured workshop curriculum." American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference(2006): 11-437.[9] Hirst, R. A., Bolduc, G., Liotta, L., & Packard, B. W. L. (2014). Cultivating the STEM transferpathway and capacity for research: A partnership between a community college and a 4-yr college.Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(4
engineering learning for historically marginalizedcommunities, over the past six years we have designed and developed a Localized Engineeringin Displacement (LED) model. Originally evolved from implementation in differentdisplacement contexts across Kenya and Jordan, the model integrates four components: (i) alocalized engineering curriculum that centers students identifying and solving communitychallenges that is implemented using an Active, Blended, Collaborative, and Democratic(ABCD) pedagogical approach; (ii) supportive learning technology for both deployment ofcurricular content and for hands-on learning of STEM concepts; (iii) sustainable teacherdevelopment program using a Community of Practice model to empower local teachers forimplementation
. Headley is devoted to designing effective research studies with the potential to generate well-justified answers to complex questions about how students learn given variations in their health, homes, classrooms, and schools.Jenni Buckley (Associate Professor) Jenni M. Buckley is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at University of Delaware (UD). She has over 10 years of engineering experience in medical device design and biomechanical evaluation and has research interests in human factors design, medical device development, and equity and inclusion issues in engineering education. She teaches a range of courses across the mechanical engineering curriculum, including CAD, mechanics, and capstone design; and
Methodist University-Dallas, TX. He is currently a Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Cal Poly Pomona. His research interests include Digital Signal Processing and Digital Image Processing applications, Communication Systems, and Robotics. He is an author of numerous research papers and presentations in these areas. He has worked on undergraduate education projects focused on increasing student learning, academic success, and retention in critical freshman and sophomore level gateway STEM courses. Dr. Aliyazicioglu is a member of the IEEE, Eta Kappa Nu, Tau Beta Pi, and ASEE. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022
undergraduate engineering education, sustainable infrastructure, and community engagement. She teaches the introductory engineering course for all first-year undergraduate students in the College of Engineering at UD. Her undergraduate teaching experience includes foundational engineering mechanics courses like statics and strength of materials as well as courses related to sustainability and infrastructure. Her research interests are in foundational engineering education, sustainability in engineering curriculum, and green technologies in infrastructure.Joshua A Enszer (Associate Professor) Joshua Enszer is an Associate Professor in Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering, having joined the department in 2015. He is an
incorporated into most curriculums. The lack ofonline teaching in engineering is typically attributed to the difficulties of converting hands-onlabs to virtual classrooms, a lack of helpful resources, and the unfamiliarity of instructors withonline teaching techniques [3]. While online education has sometimes been included in theelectrical and computer sub-fields of engineering, a lack of instructor competence with helpfultools and technology is still a significant barrier to successful integration [4]. In the past,engineering students have reported negative reactions to online learning. In contrast, wheninstructors focused on compassion and flexibility when adjusting their pedagogy andcommunication during the initial COVID-19 crisis, students
.), Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design (pp. 182–209). Routledge. Actions[7].Ali, H., Abhyankar, R., Brunhaver, S. R., Bekki, J. M., Jordan, S. S., & Lande, M. (2020, June). An Additive Innovation-Based Faculty Development Program: Methods for Case Study Research. In 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access.[8].Seitz, S. (2007). Technology integration and educational reform: Considering student voice. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and learning, 3(3), 82-96.[9].Menold, J., Jablokow, K. W., Simpson, T. W., & Waterman, E. A. (2016, June). The Prototype for X (PFX) framework: Assessing its impact on students' prototyping awareness. In 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.[10
research is interdisciplinary as she has collaborated with colleagues from across the university. She has over 30 years of evaluation experience, conducting community-level assessments and evaluating collaborative research efforts. Dr. Mobley has also been involved in extensive applied work in the community, reflecting an explicit integration of her teaching, research and service endeavors.Marisa K. Orr Marisa K. Orr is an Associate Professor in Engineering and Science Education with a joint appointment in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University. Her research interests include student persistence and pathways in engineering, gender equity, diversity, and academic policy. Dr. Orr is a recipient of
://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114- fqs0503440Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M. & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE.Montfort, D., Brown, S., & Shinew, D. (2014). The personal epistemologies of civil engineering faculty. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(3), 388–416. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20050Offorma, G. C. (2016). Integrating components of culture in curriculum planning. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 8(1), 1–8. http://ijci.wcci- international.org/index.php/IJCI/issue/view/3Patton, M. Q. (1990). Quality evaluation and research methods. SAGE.Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Designing main questions and probes. In
twice. He has published one book and more than 165 book chapters, scholarly journal papers, and refereed conference proceedings. He has supervised more than 20 Ph.D. and MS students to completion during his tenure, and taught more than thirty (30) different courses related to computer and engineering technology. He is active in several professional societies and editorial boards and is a senior member of IEEE and ASME and ASEE and AHSIENancy Romance FAU STEM Collaborative 916 SW 35 Ct. College of Engineering and Computer Science Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Florida Atlantic University Home 561-752-0990 Boca Raton, Florida 33431 Cell 561-716-4000 (561)-297-3577 EDUCATION Ed.D. 1982 Educational Leadership – Curriculum
Paper ID #37831Research on the Construction of Artificial Intelligence andHuman Language Lab in China’s Universities: Progress,Challenges and ProspectsXi Xi LU Xixi LU is a graduate student at the Graduate School of Education, Beijing Foreign Studies University, Beijing, China. Now, she is mainly engaged in research on curriculum and instruction as well as higher education. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.comTHE CONSTRUCTION OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND HUMAN LANGUAGE LAB 1 Research on the
thequality-control review process again and can pass the decision gate when it meets the SPCcriteria - within control limits including any six-sigma SPC. Each phase is a touch-point forquality assurance and control. The control limits for each phase may be tailored for a phasebased on historical records of the phase and hence each phase is treated independently. Figure 2also shows the connections between the different decomposition phases. Each decompositionsubphase is directly related to an integration sub-phase. These relationships are important since apoor performance in an integration phase may be strongly related to poor execution in itscorresponding decomposition phase.Once the system validation is done (the last development phase in the
college to start several successful programs: an undergraduate major in Robotics and Mechatronic Systems Engineering, a graduate certificate in Advanced Electric Vehicles, and a thriving partnership for student recruitment with several universities in China. He has also been the dissertation advisor for and graduated many Ph.D. students. Dr. Das’s areas of research interests are modeling and simulation of multi-disciplinary engineering problems, modeling multi- physics problems in manufacturing, engineering education, and curriculum reform. He has worked in areas ranging from mechatronics system simulation to multi-physics process simulation using CAE tools such as Finite Elements and Boundary Elements. He has authored or
allows us to observe students’ behavior in online courses and can beconsidered as another indicator of their success [19].This study examines students’ behavior online, especially video lecture viewing, and its effect ontheir performance. It utilizes learning analytics available from the video-hosting platform ofPanopto. Since instructor-created videos are an integral component of a blended course, ageneralized deduction is that the greater the engagement of a student in the online component,the better the performance of the student in the course. Previous studies have mostly focused oncumulative data analysis with regards to video views, video watch times, or course grades. Whilecumulative data provide good insights, examining each student’s
) Nathan Delson is a Teaching Professor at the University of California at San Diego. His research interests include robotics, biomedical devices, and engineering education. He teaches introductory design, mechanics, mechatronics, capstone design, medical devices, and product design & entrepreneurship. His interests in design education includes increasing student motivation, teamwork, hands-on projects, and integration of theory into design projects. In 1999 he co- founded Coactive Drive Corporation (currently General Vibration), a company that provides haptic solutions. In 2016 Nate co-founded eGrove Education, Inc. an educational software company focused on teaching sketching and spatial visualization skills
year Ph.D. student studying in Science Education at COE and working in Engineering Education at Purdue University. Interested in researching engineering design thinking, curriculum development, and educational psychologyMuhsin Menekse (Associate Professor) Muhsin Menekse is an Associate Professor at Purdue University with a joint appointment in the School of Engineering Education and the Department of Curriculum & Instruction. Dr. Menekse's primary research focuses on exploring K-16 students' engagement and learning of engineering and science concepts by creating innovative instructional resources and conducting interdisciplinary quasi-experimental research studies in and out of classroom environments. Dr. Menekse is