science calculations and design considerations. We hypothesize that theprocess of reflection and iteration inherent to hackathon competitions will strengthen theparticipant groups’ perceived EJ skills. Finally, engineering leadership (EL) skills relate to theleadership style(s) used by individuals to lead groups of engineers to achieve a common goal. Aneffective leader exercises influence at interpersonal, team, and organizational levels, whilesimultaneously building strong relationships. We hypothesize that in the absence of a well-structured project, the need to delegate tasks among team members and develop solutionsquickly will increase the perceived EL abilities of participant groups.To frame this study, we will use the Buck Institute of
understand the reasons/rules 6. Disagree behind my* suggestion 7. Strongly disagree. *the tutor’s *the tutor’s 2. To what extent do you agree to the following statements 7-level scale: about student(s) interest in your* suggestions about: 1. Strongly agree a) Grammar 2. Agree b) Style 3. Somewhat agree c) Content 4. Neither agree nor disagree d) Format 5. Somewhat disagree e) Citations
C C C C N C A A A C A C C C Student 2 C C C C C C C C C C C C A C A A Student 3 C C C C C C C C C C C C A A C A Student 4 N S C C C C A C C C C C C C S A Student 5 N C A A C C C C C C C C C C C A Student 6 C C C C C C C C C C C C A A C A Student 7 C C C C C C C C C C C C A C A A Student 8 C S C C C C N C A C C A A A A A Student 9 C C C C C C C C C C C C S C C A Student 10
necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.References[1] C. Singleton, C. DeBeck, J. Chung, D. McMillen, S. Craig, S. Moore, C. Hammond, J. Dwyer, M. Frydrych, O. Villadsen, R. Emerson, G.-V. Jorudan, V. Onut, S. Carruthers, A. Laurie, M. Alvarez, S. Wuttke, G. Prassions, J. Zorabedian, M. Mayne, L. Kessem, I. Gallagher and A. Eitan, "X-Force Threat Intelligence Index 2022," IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, 2022.[2] S. M. Loo and L. Babinkostova, "Cyber-Physical Systems Security Introductory Course for STEM Students," ASEE 2020 Annual Conference, 2020.[3] J. Ekong, V. Chauhan, J. Osedeme, S. Niknam and R. Nguyen, "A framework for Industry 4.0 workforce training through project-based and experiential learning approaches," ASEE Annual
©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Math to Makerspace: Evolution of a bridge program to support cohort developmentIntroductionThis paper shares the evolution of a summer bridge program designed to support NationalScience Foundation S-STEM scholarship students as they transition to college. The bridgeprogram, taught before the start of the fall quarter, is a week-long intensive course designed toprovide incoming first-year students with a strong and focused start to college life. The aim is toprovide a venue to help students socially and academically integrate into the campus community.Over the course of 4 years, the summer bridge program evolved from a lecture-heavy math-focused course to a project
(3–5). Teacher with student team. Teams Students act across or between teams. Teacher with multiple teams. Class Students act as whole class. Teacher with whole class. Code Student Action or Teacher (Instructor) Action Answer Answer question(s) posed by other(s). Ask Ask question(s) and wait for other(s) to answer. Discuss Talk back and forth (more than one question and answer). Speak Talk by one person with no interaction. Manage Pass out or collect papers, assign groups, take attendance. Distracted Distracted or off task. Watch/Listen Watch or listen (e.g., to lecture or presentation). Work Write, take notes, work on
. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10999 4. National Academy of Engineering (2005) Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11338 5. Surovek A, Rassati GA. Is Structural Engineering Education Creating Barriers to Innovation and Creativity? In: 6th Structural Engineers World Congress. Cancun, Mexico: EERI; 2017. 6. Kazerounian K, Foley S. Barriers to creativity in engineering education: A study of instructors’ and students’ perceptions. J Mech Des. 2007;129(7):761-768. doi:10.1115/1.2739569 7. Sola E, Hoekstra R, Fiore S, McCauley P. An Investigation of
gratefully acknowledge the alumni participants in this study and the contributions ofour research team. Finally, we acknowledge the generous support of this work from theHasso Plattner Design Thinking Research Program.References1. National Academy of Engineering, U. S. (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.2. Wigner, A., Lande, M., & Jordan, S. S. (2016). How can maker skills fit in with accreditation demands for undergraduate engineering programs?. In 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.3. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. John Wiley & Sons.4. ABET Student Learning Outcomes, Retrieved from
is a paradox of knowingwhat exactly wholly “Scientific” and “Non-Scientific” is and where everyone’s teaching,learning, and research practices lie on this spectrum. Deciding on important technological andpedagogical/philosophical underpinnings for “Indigenizing the curriculum” may help situate therole of AI more transparently and equitably. Using AI programs to thematize the perspectivesand experiences of individuals, groups, and organizations, and using them as a starting point toaddress Indigenous-related concerns in the curriculum may also be useful.References[1] M. Fee, “The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Canadian Literature,” 2012.[2] M. Belarde-Lewis, S. Cote-Meek, M. Parkhurst, N. A. D., Duarte, M. Dutta
engineering transfer partnership when we began our S-STEMproject. We now know our preconceived notions only lightly orbit the current reality.” Thissaying has become symbol of our NSF DUE (Division of Undergraduate Education)-funded S-STEM project, the Kansas City Urban Renewal Engineering (KCURE) scholarship program.Now in its third operational year, the KCURE program supports the transfer of low-income civiland mechanical engineering students. When our research team applied for S-STEM funding, weassumed we had a solid engineering transfer student partnership between MetropolitanCommunity College (MCC) and University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC).However, the MCC engineering coordinator’s retirement three years into KCURE programoperations
inelectrical engineering and information technology [20]. In September 2022, we presented aworkshop and paper at the Southern Association for Institutional Research (SAIR) Conference inNew Orleans, LA [21 , 22]. In October 2022, we presented a paper about international anddomestic students in the five most popular engineering disciplines, chemical, civil, electrical,industrial, and mechanical, at the Frontiers in Education (FIE) conference in Sweden [23].AcknowledgmentsWe are grateful for the support of the National Science Foundation through Grants 2142087 and214903.References[1] M. W. Ohland, S. D. Sheppard, G. Lichtenstein, O. Eris, D. Chachra, and R. A. Layton, “Persistence, engagement, and migration in Engineering,” J. Eng. Ed., vol. 97
design their class.Among the multiple ways to reveal collaborative problem-solving processes, temporal submissionpatterns is one that is more scalable and generalizable in Computer Science education. In thispaper, we provide a temporal analysis of a large dataset of students’ submissions to collaborativelearning assignments in an upper-level database course offered at a large public university. Thelog data was collected from an online assessment and learning system, containing the timestampsof each student’s submissions to a problem on the collaborative assignment. Each submission waslabeled as quick (Q), medium (M), or slow (S) based on its duration and whether it was shorter orlonger than the 25th and 75th percentile. Sequential compacting and
definition highlights the depth and complexity of successful mentoring. After a close review of theliterature, we opted for sticking to [31]’s identification of 4 latent variables that were validated by [32] in 2009 forthe College Student Mentoring Scale. The variables underlying the mentor-protégé relationship at the collegiatelevel involve (a) Psychological and Emotional support, (b) Degree and Career Support, (c) Academic SubjectKnowledge Support, and (d) the Existence of a Role Model. While more testing is needed to validate theseconstructs in a variety of settings, it provides an important starting point for a contextually sensitive mentoringstudy. A definition with this level of theoretical specificity can be helpful for assessing program
candidates for teacheDr. Scott R. Bartholomew, Brigham Young University Scott R. Bartholomew, PhD. is an assistant professor of Technology & Engineering Studies at Brigham Young University. Previously he taught Technology and Engineering classes at the middle school and university level.Ms. Wonki Lee, Purdue University, West Lafayette Wonki Lee is pursuing a PhD in Curriculum and Instructionˆa C™s Literacy and Language program at Purdue University. She received her B.A and M.S in Korean Language Education from Seoul National University, South Korea. She served culturally and linguisticalJessica Marie YauneyMr. Scott Thorne, Purdue University, West Lafayette Scott Thorne is a doctoral candidate at Purdue University in
missed some important articles published before 2017, which could haveprovided some more critical insights into this study. A potential direction for future researchwould be exploring the use of all social media platforms in engineering and its impact on studentlearning.REFERENCESThe articles included in the preliminary review are marked with an asterisk (*).[1] N. S. Hawi and M. Samaha, "The relations among social media addiction, self-esteem, and life satisfaction in university students," Social Science Computer Review, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 576-586, 2017.[2] I. C. Drivas, D. Kouis, D. Kyriaki-Manessi, and F. Giannakopoulou, "Social Media Analytics and Metrics for Improving Users Engagement," Knowledge, vol. 2, no. 2, pp
responsibility, and practical skills through a student-centred pedagogy[75]. Thus, these teaching methodologies can be considered like one another.PBL is a pedagogical approach that has gained popularity in academic circles due to its emphasison integrated and cohesive learning activities [76]. Barber [77] contends that PBL, as a newteaching model, places students at the forefront and redefines the role of the teacher. Mills [71]reports positive outcomes of PBL in engineering education, demonstrating its effectiveness forboth students and teachers over a decade-long evaluation. In engineering education, PBL hasemerged as one of the most frequently used teaching methods, known for promoting designthinking. According to Van 's [79] study, an 'engineering
,including during their pre-college careers. Radunzel et al.’s recent study [7, p. 1] found that“students with both expressed and measured interest in STEM were more likely to persist andcomplete a STEM degree than those with either expressed or measured interest only, as well asthose with no interest in STEM.” Furthermore, research is investigating the troubling phenomenaof extended time to finish college and higher drop-out rates for STEM programs as compared toothers [e.g., 8].STEM by the numbersPines [9] writes that “one of the greatest and most enduring strengths of the United States hasbeen its ability to attract global talent in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics(STEM) to bolster its economic and technological competitiveness
. Mosterman et al., “Virtual engineering laboratories: Design and experiments,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 279–285, 1994, doi: 10.1002/j.2168- 9830.1994.tb01116.x.[3] M. Abdulwahed and Z. K. Nagy, “The impact of the virtual lab on the hands-on lab learning outcomes, a two years empirical study,” Proc. 20th Annu. Conf. Australas. Assoc. Eng. Educ. Eng. Curric., no. March, pp. 255–260, 2009.[4] M. D. Koretsky and A. J. Magana, “Using technology to enhance learning and engagement in engineering,” Adv. Eng. Educ., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1–53, 2019.[5] R. Heradio, L. De La Torre, D. Galan, F. J. Cabrerizo, E. Herrera-Viedma, and S. Dormido, “Virtual and Remote Labs in Education: a Bibliometric Analysis
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
successful program.References[1] E. National Academies of Sciences, Building America’s Skilled Technical Workforce. 2017.Accessed: Apr. 18, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/23472/building-americas-skilled-technical-workforce[2] T. R. Craig and T. A. Wikle, “Perceptions and Practices: Employers, Educators, and Studentson GIS Internships,” Transactions in GIS, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 948–961, Apr. 2016, doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.12201.[3] S. Ridha, E. Putri, P. A. Kamil, S. Utaya, S. Bachri, and B. Handoyo, “The importance ofdesigning GIS learning material based on spatial thinking,” IOP Conference Series: Earth andEnvironmental Science, vol. 485, no. 1, p. 012027, May 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/485/1/012027
Paper ID #37422Board 398: The Effects of COVID-19 on Students’ Tool Usage in AcademicMakerspacesMr. Samuel Enrique Blair, Texas A&M University Samuel Blair is a Graduate student in Mechanical Engineering program at Texas A&M University in College Station, TX. His research interest include bio-inspired design of complex systems for human networks.Claire CroseDr. Julie Linsey, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Julie S. Linsey is a Professor in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technological. Dr. Linsey received her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at The University
based learning environment. She was previously an engineering education postdoctoral fellow at Wake Forest University supporting curriculum development around ethics/character education.Dr. Diana Bairaktarova, Virginia Tech Dr. Diana Bairaktarova is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Through real-world engineering applications, Dr. Bairaktarovaˆa C™s experiential learning research spans from engineering to psychology to learning ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Empathy and mindfulness in design education: A literature review to explore a relationshipAbstractLearning to design in undergraduate
) creating examples and projectsis one delivery mechanism but there could be a steep learning curve student will encounter [27], 6) currentdemands from larger employers who may not all use these techniques, and lastly [28]; 7) Creating newtracks is possible but requires new resources and faculty to teach them. Given these benefits and challenges,many engineering students are still often pushed to take computer science course(s) to compensate for theirlack of in-department offerings. This research looks to help overcome several aspects of these barriers inthe discipline specific domains of architectural engineering (AE) and material science and engineering(MATSE). Both fields were selected given their renewed emphasis and need for more data skills as
, S. J. Mallo, S. O. Ismaila, J. O. Dada, S. Aderounmu, ... & E. Oyetunji. “Engineering students' virtual learning challenges during covid-19 pandemic lockdown: A case study.” In 2020 IFEES World Engineering Education Forum-Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF-GEDC), pp. 1-5. IEEE. 2020.[4] A. Dworak. “United States university enrollment numbers during the COVID-19 pandemic recession.” Perspectives on the New Normal: Post COVID19, vol. 67, 2020.[5] E. Belanger, C. Bartels, & J. She. “Challenges and Strategies in Remote Design Collaboration During Pandemic: A Case Study in Engineering Education.” In International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in
and the landscape of engineering in K‐12 state science standards," Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 296-318, 2015.[5] R. Hammack and T. Ivey, "Elementary teachers' perceptions of K‐5 engineering education and perceived barriers to implementation," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 108, no. 4, pp. 503-522, 2019.[6] R. Hammack, P. Gannon, C. Foreman, and E. Meyer, "Impacts of professional development focused on teaching engineering applications of mathematics and science," School Science and Mathematics, vol. 120, no. 7, pp. 413-424, 2020, doi: 10.1111/ssm.12430.[7] E. R. Banilower, P. S. Smith, K. A. Malzahn, C. L. Plumley, E. M. Gordon, and M. L. Hayes
locations. The centralized platform will capture multimedia data (audio, video, text)from the two locations listed above for display and analysis on monitor(s) in the chosen locationand will be used to store the data at regular intervals such as hourly, daily, and weekly recordsfor future retrieval and analysis.Product RequirementsThe product requirements are: 1) Primary or main display monitor setup to provide (a) the overview of each remote location (b) key real-time multimedia data captured. 2) Secondary display of room-level, workbench-level, device-level status from each remote location. 3) Controls to navigate across primary and secondary displays at different visual resolutions/zoom features
, pp. 151–185, 2011.[6] Elementary science teachers’ sense-making with learning to implement engineering design and its impact on students’ science achievement[7] C. M. Cunningham and G. J. Kelly, “Epistemic Practices of Engineering for Education,” Science Education, vol 1010, no. 3, pp. 486–505, 2017.[8] T. J. Moore, A. W. Glancy, K. M. Tank, J. A. Kersten, K. A. Smith, and M. S. Stohlmann, “A Framework for Quality K-12 Engineering Education: Research and Development,” Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), vol. 4, no. 1, 2014.[9] American Society for Engineering Education and Advancing Excellence in P12 Engineering Education. Framework for P-12 Engineering Learning, 2020
. Raghavan serves as a Professor and Associate Dean of Research and Graduate Studies at Embry Rid- dle Aeronautical University. Her research interests are in the areas of Mechanics of aerospace structures and materials. She joined UCF in Fall 2008 after completing her doctoral studies at Purdue University, Indiana, School of Aeronautics and Astronautics in the area of Structures & Materials. She obtained her M.S., Aeronautical Engineering in Structures at ISAE-SUPAERO, Toulouse, France where she also worked with Messier Bugatti in Velizy, Paris (S-92 wheels and brakes testing). Prior to this, she com- pleted her B.Eng in Mechanical Engineering at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. She has 7 years of
essential that this work is done intandem, as it would be unethical to recruit women into an environment that is known tosystemically disadvantage them. Though chemical engineering has made great strides in genderparity compared to other engineering disciplines, the results of this study reinforce the idea thatdiversity is not the same as equity.References [1] NSF. Bachelor’s degrees awarded to women, by field, citizenship, and race/ethnicity: Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering, 2008. [2] C. E. Brawner, S. M. Lord, and M. W. Ohland, Undergraduate women in chemical engineering: Exploring why they come. ASEE Conference Proceedings, 2011. [3] J. Trapani and K. Hale, “Higher education in science and