,making education more accessible, efficient, and effective for students, like the introduction ofthe calculator. However, there are concerns that generative AI tools can also be misused and leadto unethical behavior. For example, students could use these tools to plagiarize essays, cheat onassignments and exams, and thereby devalue the learning experience for themselves and others.A mixed-method survey was developed to answer the following research questions:1. How many first-year ME students use generative artificial intelligence tools?2. How do first-year mechanical engineering students utilize generative artificial intelligencetools?3. What are the perceptions of first-year mechanical engineering students about the utilization ofgenerative
decades or so since the TELPhE division was founded from workshops held by theNational Academy of Engineering it seems, I would not wish to be dogmatic about this, tohave gone through three phases [1]. The first, was in the provision of engineering courses fornon-engineering students, and in particular as ‘minors’ [2]. This lasted, although excellentpapers continue to be submitted in this area of technology, until about 2014 when theDivision published a monograph on “Philosophical Perspectives on Engineering andTechnological Literacy” following the inclusion of ‘philosophy’ into its activities in 2013 [3].There was then a flurry of activity in the philosophy of engineering education, and three morevolumes were produced. Subsequently, while papers
(RAG) and model fine-tuning are part of this training, equippingstudents with the necessary skills to enter the final application stage. In this stage, studentsparticipate in designing and developing generative AI-based solutions to address real-worldproblems. Our partnerships extend to the law and social science faculties, where we buildcustomized chatbot solutions.The framework was implemented and evaluated at the Tam Wing Fan Innovation Wing(a.k.a. HKU Inno Wing) [1], a facility within the Faculty of Engineering at the University ofHong Kong dedicated to improving students' practical abilities. Students demonstrateincreased awareness of ethical, responsible, and lawful practices in generative AItechnologies under the careful guidance of
answer four research questions to help guidestakeholders: 1) To what extent do current research articles address the spectrum of AI literacy,and how thoroughly do they cover the AI4K12 concepts? 2) What ethical considerations areaddressed? 3) How inclusive is the current body of research concerning all stakeholders involvedin developing, implementing, conducting, and evaluating AI education? 4) What arestakeholders’ perceptions toward AI?The preference for hands-on learning in AI education suggests an impactful approach toengaging students. Integrating such methodologies into instructional design can significantlyenhance student interaction and comprehension of AI concepts. For stakeholders, this implies aneed to develop curricular resources
development (including nuclear energy) demonstrates that theprocess of designing, developing, and using energy technologies creates significant inequities –extractive and waste management facilities are typically sited around communities of color andlow-income communities whereas the power-producing facilities are sited around affluent(predominantly white) communities.[1] In neither case do communities actually have a say in thetype of facility being built in their community and seldom have a say in the decision to even sitethat facility. If we are to equitably develop our energy systems of the future, there is an urgentneed to reverse this worrying trend. To that end, we aspire to train future developers of nuclearenergy technologies – fission and
, engagement, and retentionof knowledge.Keywords: Visual Literacy, Educational Infographics, Cognitive Tools, Teacher Education,Engineering Education.IntroductionIn the digital era, the dynamics of how individuals’ access and process information have shifteddramatically. No longer are libraries the primary starting point for inquiries; instead, the ubiquityof internet access and advancements in mobile communication technology have made onlineplatforms, through search engines and web pages, the mainstay for acquiring up-to-dateinformation [1][2]. This evolution reflects the emergence of “digital citizens” who prioritizeconcise, visually appealing information formats over traditional text-heavy content, marking asignificant shift in information
Distinguished Achievement Award in Teaching and Distinguished Achievement for Petroleum Engineering Faculty, Society of Petroleum Engineers-Middle East & North Africa Region. Dr. Retnanto is an active Program Evaluator (PEV) with the Engineering Accreditation Commission (EAC) of ABET. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Enhancing Petroleum Engineering Education Through Active Student Engagement, Hands-on Experience, and Technology Integration Mohamed Fadlelmula1, Nayef Alyafei1, Albertus Retnanto1 1 Texas A&M University at QatarAbstractThe oil and gas industry is continuously changing; therefore, it is essential for
and responsibilities via presentation of technical course material. Overall, this casestudy investigates nuclear engineering for its curricula-embedded epistemological foundationsand offers reflections on the relevance of beliefs about knowledge to engineering problemsolving.2 Introduction The term “engineering”, linked in origin to both “ingenious” and “engine”, describes aprofession linked to the virtues of originality and innovation as well as the artifacts and processesdeveloped to enhance human flourishing. We take these elements (production of tools, originalinnovation, and the commitment to human welfare) to be foundational (though incomplete) dueto their ubiquity and use this as a starting point for our analysis [1], [2
necessary, little has been said about whatthey are expected to accomplish” [1]. Although much important research has been done since thepublication of that paper in 2005 on the methods of engineering laboratories, research continuesto be scarce on the purposes of engineering laboratories and the kinds of knowledge students areexpected to acquire in laboratory settings; however, literature from adjacent fields like physicsand chemistry is more developed in this regard.Zwickl et al. present an instrument known as the Colorado Learning Attitudes about ScienceSurvey for Experimental Physics (E-CLASS) [2]. In the E-CLASS, student responses tostatements like “scientific journal articles are helpful for answering my own questions anddesigning experiments
, discuss lessons learned, implications and future prospects for (1)the Annals of Research on Engineering Education (AREE), (2) the Engineering EducationResearch and Innovation Networking (EER&I) sessions, and (3) Research on EngineeringEducation for Practice (REEP). Here are more details on these projects:Helping Build the Engineering Education Research Community: The Annals ofEngineering Education Research (AREE)Over twenty years ago momentum was building for the advancement and formalization of theengineering education research community. Evidence of the growth included, for example, (1)the National Science Foundation funded the Rigorous Research in Engineering Education(RREE) project, (2) the Journal of Engineering Education changed its
technology-lifebalance in an increasingly technological and digital media-focused environment.Keywords: technology-life balance, physiological and psychological health, technology use,undergraduate engineeringMotivationIn the rapidly evolving landscape of the 21st century, the integration of digital technology intoour daily lives has reached unprecedented levels, with further acceleration generated by theCOVID-19 pandemic [1]. The resulting surge in technology usage popularized a critical field ofresearch: technology-life balance. Technology-life balance, also referred to as digital wellness ordigital health, can be defined as the pursuit of an intentional and healthy relationship withtechnology and digital media. This emerging discipline seeks to
educational ideasand practices” [1]. By extension, social foundations of engineering—a field that does not yetexist, but should—would seek to understand the institutions, processes, practices, beliefs, values,and ways of knowing that underlie engineering education and practice. The fundamentals of thesefoundations have emerged in critiques of engineering grounded in several different perspectivesincluding science, technology, and society (STS), engineering ethics, and engineering and socialjustice. Thus far, however, these perspectives have not coalesced into a coherent intellectualframework. In this paper, we draw parallels between engineering and social foundations ofeducation as the field has evolved over time and argue that social foundations of