Paper ID #39265Measuring Biomedical Engineers’ Self-Efficacy in Generating and SolvingProvocative Questions about SurgeryMr. Nathan Zhang, Vanderbilt University Nathan Zhang is a undergraduate studying biomedical engineering at Vanderbilt University working on biomedical engineering education in conjunction with the Vanderbilt Institute for Surgery and Engineer- ing.Dr. Stacy S. Klein-Gardner, Vanderbilt University Dr. Stacy Klein-Gardner serves as an Adjunct Professor of Biomedical Engineering at Vanderbilt Univer- sity. She is the co-PI and co-Director of the NSF-funded Engineering For Us All (e4usa) project. She is
quantifying adaptation of muscle architecture in humans. She also desires to implement innovative teaching, mentoring, and hands- on problem solving to develop students’ deep understanding of engineering principles and to inspire them to tackle real-world problems which can aid human health.Prof. Naji S. Husseini, North Carolina State University at Raleigh Naji Husseini is an Associate Teaching Professor and the Associate Director of Undergraduate Stud- ies in the Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering at UNC and NC State. HE received a B.S. and M.Eng. in Engineering Physics from Cornell University, and an M.S. in Electrical Engineering and Ph.D. in Applied Physics from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. His
learning outcomes. The authors are also interested in increasingthe sample size for faculty participants. As this program was designed in a virtual format, itshould be amenable to delivery across different disciplines and even different universities. Level 1 Level 2 Figure 1. Survey 1, assessing participants' perceptions of the course design program at Kirkpatrick’s Level 1: Reaction and Level 2: Learning. (n=11) Figure 2. Survey 2 assessing the impact of the course design program on Kirkpatrick’s Level 3: Behavior of the participants (n=6).References[1] R. S. Anderson and B. W. Speck, “‘Oh what a difference a team makes’: Why team teaching makes a difference,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 671
would like to thank Dr. David Schmidtke, Dr. Gu Kang, and Chunya Wu fortheir help in developing the “Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals and Design” course. 3 AppendixTable A1: Example Course Schedule. The course was divided into 3 primary sections: DesignLectures (Blue), Training Modules (Green), and Project Build Time (Orange) Week Lecture Topic(s) Labs 1 Syllabus Overview, Intro to Design 2 Problem Statements and Stakeholders 3 Requirements 4 Conceptual Design and Down-selection 5
slight increase in drowsiness. One participantfelt the video was longer than in actuality, while the other two felt it was shorter than in actuality. Theclinical immersion video (see appendix Table 5) elicited an average level of engagement at 6.33, with twoof the participants beginning to feel bored at around 10 minutes. No participant fell asleep, one felt adrowsiness level of 7 out of 9 while the other two did not experience any drowsiness from watching thevideo. Interestingly, all participants felt that the video was longer than in actuality.Discussion:Due to issues during data acquisition, the EEG statistical analysis was inconclusive despite observingstatistical difference in subjects 2 and 3 (see appendix Table 1). Namely, Subject 2’s
, J., & Merrill, T., & Sood, S., & Greene Ryan, J., & Attaluri, A., & Hirsh, R. A. (2017,June), Clinical Immersion and Team-Based Design: Into a Third Year Paper presented at 2017 ASEEAnnual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--28040[7] Muller-Borer, B. J., & George, S. M. (2018, June), Designing an Interprofessional EducationalUndergraduate Clinical Experience Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition,Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2—30279[8] Zapanta, C. M., & Edington, H. D., & Empey, P. E., & Whitcomb, D. C., & Rosenbloom, A. J. (2017,June), Board # 18: Clinical Immersion in a Classroom Setting (Work in Progress) Paper presented at 2017ASEE Annual
Figure 2, we found a statistically significant improvement in problem-solving masterywhen comparing the Abstract #1’s draft to the final submission (* refers to p=0.000031). Onlycompleted abstracts were included in the analysis (n=19 out of 26). The mean Hake gain for thefirst abstract is 48 +/– 7 %, suggesting that students earned almost half of the points lost on thedraft on the final abstract submission. Additionally, the quality of peer reviews scored 35 +/– 9 outof a maximum score of 48 (maximum of eight points per standard and six standards evaluated).Initial investigation of the correlation between mastery improvement and quality of peer reviewwere not significant for either the critic or the critiqued. Thematic analysis of peer review
mentorship program for underrepresented minorities (URM). She was a founding member of a STEAM Innovation Program at an urban vocational technical school servicing URM in STEM, where she taught Biology, Chemistry, and Biotechnology. Hilderbrand-Chae has a Masters’ De- gree in Genetics from Tufts University Medical School and now focuses research on epigenetic regulation influenced by substrate stiffness.Shalain Iqbal SiddiquiDr. Chiara E. Ghezzi Chiara Ghezzi, PhD is assistant professor in the department of biomedical engineering at University of Massachusetts Lowell. She received her undergraduate and masterˆa C™s degrees in biomedical engineer- ing from Politecnico di Milano, in Italy. During her dBryan Black
willing to find the logical connectionbetween ideas in problem-solving.References[1] Parrish, C. W., Guffey, S. K., & Williams, D. S. “The impact of team-based learning onstudents’ perceptions of classroom community,” Active Learning in Higher Education (2021).[2] Leupen, S. “Team-Based Learning in STEM and the Health Sciences” In: Mintzes, J., Walter,E. (eds) Active Learning in College Science. Springer, Cham. (2020)[3] Rui M. Lima, Pernille Hammar Andersson & Elisabeth Saalman “Active Learning inEngineering Education: a (re)introduction”, European Journal of Engineering Education, 42:1, 1-4, (2017)[4] Hernández-de-Menéndez, M., Vallejo Guevara, A., Tudón Martínez, J.C. et al. “Activelearning in engineering education. A review of
to feel comfortable with both their peers and their TA tobe able to recover from a setback quickly. 1. Student experiences a setback (lab does not go as planned). 2. Student looks to a) lab partner(s) or peers, and/or b) TA, and/or c) class and lab materials to decide how to respond. 3. Student's ability to move past the setback depends on whether a) others experience the same setback, b) others normalize setbacks, and c) they know where to look to help them troubleshoot. These factors impact whether they can effectively manage their frustration in the moment.Figure 1. Student Response to Setbacks in Lab Settings FlowchartConclusion To summarize, students’ ability to recover from
? Investigating relationships between teaching assistants and student outcomes in undergraduate science laboratory classes,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 463–492, Apr. 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21373.[4] C. Kepple and K. Coble, “Investigating potential influences of graduate teaching assistants on students’ sense of belonging in introductory physics labs,” PERC Proc., pp. 282–287, 2019.[5] S. M. Love Stowell et al., “Transforming Graduate Training in STEM Education,” Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am., vol. 96, no. 2, pp. 317–323, Apr. 2015, doi: https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9623-96.2.317.[6] N. M. Trautmann and M. E. Krasny, “Integrating Teaching and Research: A New Model for Graduate Education
combiningthe qualitative analysis described with a quantitative assessment based on assignment scores willbe implemented providing a more complete outlook on the effect of the STEAM-based activity.7. References[1] M Jamrisko and W. Lu, “The U.S. Drops Out of the Top 10 in Innovation Ranking,” Bloomberg. Technology., Jan. 22, 2018. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018- 01-22/south-korea-tops-global-innovation-ranking-again-as-u-s-falls#xj4y7vzkg (accessed Jul. 10, 2022).[2] D. Schaffhauser, “7 Ways to Get More Girls and Women into STEM (and Encourage Them to Stay),” The Journal, Oct. 02, 2017. Accessed: Feb. 22, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://thejournal.com/articles/2017/10/02/7-ways-to-get-more-girls-and-women-into
Conference, Denton, TX, March 15-17 2023: American Society for Engineering Education, p. in press.[4] G. D. Kuh, High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2008.[5] S. Ash and P. Clayton, "Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning," Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, vol. 1, pp. 25-48, 2009.[6] H. Chenette and T. Ribera, "Prediction and reflection activities in a chemical engineering course: Fundamentals of heat and mass transfer," presented at the 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, New Orleans, LA, June
of Problem-based Learning,” Interdiscip J Problem-based Learn, vol. 6, no. 1, 2012, doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1314.[4] K. M. Markham, J. J. Mintzes, and M. G. Jones, “The concept map as a research and evaluation tool: Further evidence of validity,” J Res Sci Teach, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 91–101, 1994, doi: 10.1002/tea.3660310109.[5] L. Hsu and S.-I. Hsieh, “Concept Maps as an Assessment Tool in a Nursing Course,” J Prof Nurs, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 141–149, 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2005.04.006.[6] D. M. Torre, B. Daley, T. Stark-Schweitzer, S. Siddartha, J. Petkova, and M. Ziebert, “A qualitative evaluation of medical student learning with concept maps,” Med Teach, vol. 29, no. 9– 10, pp. 949–955
. Newton, “How to Co-Lead a Team,” Harvard Business Review, 2015. https://hbr.org/2015/07/how-to-co-lead-a-team (accessed Nov. 07, 2022).[13] Q. Wu and K. Cormican, “Shared Leadership and Team Effectiveness: An Investigation of Whether and When in Engineering Design Teams,” Front. Psychol., vol. 11, no. January, pp. 1– 12, 2021, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.569198.[14] “Best Biomedical Engineering Programs - Top Engineering Schools - US News,” 2022. https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/biomedical-rankings (accessed Feb. 22, 2023).[15] Allen, R. H., Acharya, S., Jancuk, C., & Shoukas, A. A. (2013). Sharing best practices in teaching biomedical engineering design. Annals of
that students’self-reported attendance of office hours throughout the quarter was low, with 50% of studentsnever having attended office hours and 39% having attended infrequently (1-4 times).Motivation and Barriers to Office Hours Attendance: Students in the Test Course were askedfor what reason(s) they typically have attended office hours in previous courses, andapproximately 47% of students indicated that “build[ing] relationships with instructors” was agoal of their attendance. Students additionally reported through a free response question that adiverse set of reasons can prevent them from attending office hours. Most importantly, a number of the barriers cited by students in the pre
impact on our undergraduate Biomedical Engineering students. Our team isconducting a continuing, longitudinal study to track the short-term (survey data, and IPapplications) and long-term (via exit survey and job placement data, awarded patents)performance of this clinical observations course.References:[1] A. E. Felder, M. Kotche, S. Stirling, and K. M. Wilkens, “Interdisciplinary Clinical Immersion: from Needs Identification to Concept Generation,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, vol. 2018-June, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.18260/1-2-- 30699.[2] B. Przestrzelski and J. D. DesJardins, “The DeFINE Program: A Clinical Immersion for Biomedical Needs Identification,” in 2015 ASEE Annual Conference &
://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002.[4] M. Wilkerson, V. Maldonado, S. Sivaraman, R. R. Rao, and M. Elsaadany, "Incorporating immersive learning into biomedical engineering laboratories using virtual reality," Journal of Biological Engineering, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 20, 2022/08/08 2022, doi: 10.1186/s13036-022- 00300-0.[5] S. Robert, "Biomedical Engineering Virtual Circuit Simulation Laboratories," presented at the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii, 2007/06/24, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/2171.[6] P. D. Ryan, M. Dominik, and T. G. Cheryl, "WIP: Pilot Study for the Effect of Simulated Laboratories on the Motivation of Biological Engineering Students
content. Students value that these authentic experienceshelp to answer “overarching scientific question[s] for most of the labs and we weredoing the lab for a purpose.” Course evaluations for Cellular Engineering report a4.83/5 overall evaluation score, with a 5/5 score for intellectually stimulatingcontent. Likewise, Molecular Engineering course evaluations report a 4.00/5overall evaluation score, with a 4.53/5 score for intellectually stimulating content.Additional questions on integrating these new gateway courses with advancedtopics and electives are pending, along with long-term success of the new courseson student engagement in primary research at Duke University, industryconnections and career success.Introduction Linsenmeier and
Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 606-632.5. Smith, K. A., Sheppard, S. D., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2005). Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom‐based practices. Journal of engineering education, 94(1), 87-101.6. Mandala, M., Schunn, C., Dow, S., Goldberg, M., Pearlman, J., Clark, W., & Mena, I. (2018). Impact of collaborative team peer review on the quality of feedback in engineering design projects. International Journal of Engineering Education, 34(4), 1299-1313.7. McAlpine, I., & Reidsema, C. (2007, January). The role of student peer review and assessment in an introductory project-based engineering design course. In ConnectEd, International Conference of Design Education.8. Carlson, P. A., Berry
Submittal(s) Timeline Introduction and team formation Week 1 Project ideation (incorporation of Project idea description including Weeks 1-4 biomimicry) the major reference article(s)) Project idea validation (optional) Interview notes, survey, etc. Weeks 4-10 Prototyping planning (optional) Prototyping plan Weeks 4-8 Prototyping (optional) Prototype and a short video Weeks 9-10 recording of the whole process Project report writing Final project report
Center for Education Statistics, 2021. [2] D. P. Banks and S. M. Vergez, “Online and in-person learning preferences during the covid-19 pandemic among students attending the city university of new york,” Journal of Microbiology &; Biology Education, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. e00 012–22, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://journals.asm.org/doi/abs/10.1128/jmbe.00012-22 [3] J. H. Corpus, K. A. Robinson, and Z. Liu, “Comparing college students’ motivation trajectories before and during covid-19: A self-determination theory approach,” Frontiers in Education, vol. 7, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2022.848643 [4] E. R. Wester, L. L. Walsh, S. Arango-Caro, and K. L. Callis-Duehl
here are approved by the University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignInstitutional Review Board under NHSR designation 23380. Capstone Innovations at Carle IllinoisCollege of Medicine are supported by The Henry Dale and Betty Smith Family.References[1] DianeR. Bridges, R. A. Davidson, P. Soule Odegard, I. V. Maki, and J. Tomkowiak, “Interprofessional collaboration: three best practice models of interprofessional education,” Medical Education Online, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 6035, Jan. 2011, doi: 10.3402/meo.v16i0.6035.[2] S. Chien, R. Bashir, R. M. Nerem, and R. Pettigrew, “Engineering as a new frontier for translational medicine,” Sci. Transl. Med., vol. 7, no. 281, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaa4325.[3] K. Alder, Engineering the
presentations, and this was not due to differences in anxiety using thesedifferent modes. Student understanding and learning outcomes for both the presenters andthe audience members were significantly higher for in-person presentations. Although itwas not possible with the number of student responses in this course (one undergraduatestudent and eight graduate students), in the future it would be interesting to see if some ofthese results are driven by degree program level or experience with different presentationtypes, as only two students had previous experience with pre-recorded presentations.References[1] S. K. A. Soong, L. K. Chan, C. Cheers, and C. Hu, "Impact of video recorded lectures among students," Who’s learning, pp. 789-793, 2006
of this study also taught the course understudy.Ethics approval: Research conducted retrospectively under IRB approval through Texas A&MUniversity.Consent to participate: Not applicable (exempted through IRB approval)Consent for publication: Publication was approved by IRB board.Availability of data and material: All student record data were de-identified and approved forFERPA compliance by Texas A&M University’s Office of the Registrar.References[1] M. Itani, S. Kaddoura, & F. al Husseiny. “The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on on-line examination: challenges and opportunities,” Global Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 105–120, 2022.[2] B. Ives, & A.-M. Cazan. “Did the COVID-19 pandemic lead to an increase in
students with VR. Future quantitative andqualitative (coded) evaluations of survey questions are required to understand student experiencewith VR. Completion of this study will help in furthering our understanding of how tosuccessfully integrate VR videos in traditional biomedical engineering labs.References[1] B. Marks and J. Thomas, "Adoption of virtual reality technology in higher education: An evaluation of five teaching semesters in a purpose-designed laboratory," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1287-1305, 2022/01/01 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10653-6.[2] A. Singh, D. Ferry, A. Ramakrishnan, and S. Balasubramanian, "Using Virtual Reality in Biomedical Engineering Education," (in eng), J
elaboration and peer learning strategies. Future work couldinvestigate these questions.References[1] A. W. Chickering and Z. F. Gamson, “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education,” AAHE Bull., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 3–7, Mar. 1987.[2] E. P. Driessen, J. K. Knight, M. K. Smith, and C. J. Ballen, “Demystifying the meaning of active learning in postsecondary biology education,” CBE—Life Sci. Educ., vol. 19, no. 4, p. ar52, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1187/cbe.20-04-0068.[3] S. Freeman et al., “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., vol. 111, no. 23, pp. 8410–8415, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319030111.[4] L. D. Fink, Creating Significant Learning
: 10.1007/s43683-020-00030-z.[10] R. E. Clark, “Reconsidering Research on Learning from Media,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 445–459, Dec. 1983, doi: 10.3102/00346543053004445.[11] M. E. Beier, M. H. Kim, A. Saterbak, V. Leautaud, S. Bishnoi, and J. M. Gilberto, “The effect of authentic project-based learning on attitudes and career aspirations in STEM,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 3–23, 2019, doi: 10.1002/tea.21465.[12] N. Falchikov and D. Boud, “Student Self-Assessment in Higher Education: A Meta- Analysis,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 395–430, 1989, doi: 10.2307/1170205.[13] J. Seifried and A. Rausch, “Applying the Experience Sampling Method to Research on Workplace Learning,” in Methods for
students have increased experience with a variety of prototypingtechniques is a foundational requirement for programmatic success.References:[1] Hamburg, Shanti D. "Flipped Lab: Introduction to Prototyping & Manufacturing ScalableInstruction in Making." IJAMM(2020).[2] Epstein, A. W., & Rudolph, S., & Einstein, H. H., & Reis, P. M. (2014, June), EnhancingDesign Students’ Comfort and Versatility in the Shop: A Project-Based Approach Paperpresented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--20415[3] Cook, T. V., & Lyle, J. A., & Kerestes, R. J. (2018, June), Board 73 : Work in Progress:Reinforcement of Engineering Education with Hands-on Learning of Technical Skills Paperpresented at