Paper ID #6899Gender Differences in the Long-Term Impacts of Project-Based LearningProf. Richard F. Vaz, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Richard F. Vaz received the PhD in electrical engineering from Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), specializing in signal analysis and machine vision. He held systems and design engineering positions with the Raytheon Company, GenRad Inc., and the MITRE Corporation before joining the WPI Electrical and Computer Engineering faculty in 1987. Rick is currently Dean of Interdisciplinary and Global Studies at WPI, with oversight of WPI’s Global Perspective Program, a worldwide network
Paper ID #7159Long-term Impacts of Project-Based Learning in Science and EngineeringProf. Arthur C Heinricher, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Arthur Heinricher is Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Professor of Mathematical Sciences at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Dr. Heinricher joined the faculty of WPI in 1992, with a B.S. in Applied Mathe- matics from the University of Missouri-St. Louis and a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon. His primary responsibility as Dean of Undergraduate Studies is to assess and ensure the quality of under- graduate programs at WPI. He helped guide the development of WPI’s Great
. Page 23.1325.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Using Linguistic Analysis Tools to Characterize Engineering Design Project DocumentationAbstractWhen creating novel and creative artifacts, engineering students and professional engineers alikemust come up with novel and innovative ways to describe their innovations and inventions.Linguistic analysis can be a useful tool for providing information about engineering projectdocumentation to show characteristics that accompany creation of just such a new artifact.Previous work demonstrated that the number of noun phrases in a written report had a positivecorrelation with the grade of the project – a proxy for
Paper ID #7930Faculty and Student Perceptions of Project-Enhanced Learning in Early En-gineering Education: Barriers, Benefits, and BreakthroughsProf. M. Razi Nalim P.E., Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis Prof. Razi Nalim has over 25 years of practical and analytical experience in combustion, explosions, engines, and non-steady flow related areas in industry, academia, and government. His career began in internal-combustion engine emissions control, cogeneration systems, and engine testing. After his doc- torate, Dr. Nalim went to NASA Glenn Research Center to study unsteady flow devices for propulsion
examples of feedback related to professional skills and investigates the influence of thatfeedback on student teams’ subsequent engagement in professional skills activities. It usesepisodes as an analytical framework to examine meetings, termed coaching sessions, between afaculty member and student teams. We focus on using episodes to identify the major themes ofdiscussion and to specifically identify the role of that guidance in the students’ subsequentengagement in activities.We found that feedback in the project studied was given on the following professional skills:teamwork, communication (written and verbal), project management, impact of engineeringsolutions on the economic and societal context, symbols of legitimacy, and
strategies and didacticcurriculums, integrated design technologies and developing technologies; to simulation, qualityin higher education, and distance learning; to information communication technology,assessment/accreditation, sustainable technology and project-based training; and to engineeringmanagement, women engineering careers, and undergraduate engineering research.Trends in Engineering EducationThe trends in engineering education have been reported over several periods of time by differentauthors. Meisen6 mentions that the global trends in engineering education in the 90s were agreater emphasis on experiential programs supported by industry work experience, decliningemphasis on laboratory instruction, internationalization of engineering
in academia he worked as Assistant, Associate, Full Professor, and Departmental Head at Kazan Aviation Institute, and Visiting Full Professor at Mechanical, Aerospace and Biomedical Engineering De- partment at University of Tennessee, Knoxville. In 2007 he joined CCSU School of Engineering and Technology as an Associate Professor. He taught about 30 undergraduate and graduate courses; was sci- entific advisor of multiple Ph.D. and Dr. of Science Dissertations. Area of research and teaching interests - Propulsion, Aerothermodynamics, Combustion and Heat Transfer. Instrumentation. Performed research projects for Russian and French Aerospace Agencies, NASA, DOE, DOD, and Automotive Company SAAB. Author of 3
resources, like Scratch, PhET, and theMobile Studio, hint at the promise cyberlearning holds for facilitating the development of 21stcentury skills. While National Science Foundation (NSF) Program Officers (POs) are interestedin continuing to support cyberlearning research and developments that promote excellence inundergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education, there is aneed to understand elements of existing resources that have already achieved positive outcomes.An exploratory sequential mixed methods research design1 was used to explore this topic. Of the1,000 NSF-funded projects POs have highlighted in the NSF Highlights over the past 10 years,nearly100 were cyberlearning awards. After applying selection
, and design and evaluation of learning environments informed by the How People Learn framework.Dr. Mehmet Ayar, TUBITAK Dr. Mehmet Ayar is a scientific programs expert in the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK). He received his PhD. in Curriculum and Instruction with specialization in STEM education at Texas A&M University in 2012. His research is in ethnographic studies of science and engineering practice, curriculum development, design of learning environments and robotics activities. Dr. Ayar worked for the Live Energy Project during his PhD studies at Texas A&M University. Prior to his PhD studies, he worked for three years as a science teacher at a private school in
Conversion project lead with the iFoundry and on the steering committee of the College of Engineering’s Strategic Instructional Initiatives Program.Dr. Shane A. Brown P.E., Washington State University Dr. Shane Brown conducts research on cognition and conceptual change in engineering. He received his bachelor’s and Ph.D. degrees from Oregon State University, both in civil engineering. His Ph.D. degree includes a minor in science and mathematics education. His master’s degree is in environmental engineering from the University of California, Davis. Dr. Brown is a licensed professional civil engineer and has six years of experience designing water and wastewater treatment facilities in central California. He was the
. Page 23.883.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Making Sense of Design: A Thematic Analysis of Alumni PerspectivesAbstract:In this paper, we present the findings of a thematic analysis on how alumni make sense of designin light of their undergraduate experiences in the Engineering Projects in Community Service(EPICS) program. These findings are part of a larger embedded, sequential mixed-methods studyon the overall alumni experience in EPICS and how this experience prepared them to enter theworkplace. In this large-scale study, we interviewed a diverse range of alumni (n = 27), whichwere purposefully sampled from participants of a previous survey (n
College at Buffalo; a MEd from Bowling Green State University in Ohio; and a PhD from the University of Minnesota.Dr. Malinda S Zarske, University of Colorado, Boulder Malinda S. Zarske is the Director of K-12 Engineering Education at the University of Colorado Boul- der’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. A former high school and middle school science and math teacher, she has advanced degrees in teaching secondary science from the Johns Hopkins Univer- sity and in civil engineering from CU-Boulder. She is also a First-Year Engineering Projects Instructor, Faculty Advisor for SWE, and on the development team for the TeachEngineering digital library. Her primary research interests are on student identity
distinctionbetween cooperative and collaborative learning or between problem-based learning and project-based learning. To decrease confusion, there should be agreed upon characteristics for eachRBIS that ensures it is being used optimally. These characteristics can also help define whichcharacteristics are needed for increased learning and engagement.Also, RBIS are “research-based” and, therefore, developed by researchers and discussed asresearch elements. Efforts need to be made to ensure that discussions of these RBIS are not onlydiscussed within research circles, but also in ways practitioners can understand and make use of.Again, developing and defining specific activities to be done in the classroom can help bridge thegap between researchers and
input parameters, and how the inputparameters influence the characteristics of the product.Our research questions are: What are the characteristics of model iteration as it is practiced by teams of engineering students as they engage an authentic engineering design task? What types of models do students develop? Which of models persist through out engagement in the task? Page 23.287.2 What information do students apply in the development of the models? What motivates changes students make in the models?This research contributes to the long term goal of our project to understand how engagingengineering
of Wisconsin, Madison. She is Co-PI and Research Director of Purdue University’s ADVANCE program, and PI on the Assessing Sustainability Knowledge project. She runs the Research in Femi- nist Engineering (RIFE) group, whose diverse projects and group members are described at the web- site http://feministengineering.org/. She is interested in creating new models for thinking about gender and race in the context of engineering education. She was awarded a CAREER grant in 2010 for the project, ”Learning from Small Numbers: Using personal narratives by underrepresented undergraduate students to promote institutional change in engineering education.” She received a Presidential Early Ca- reer Award for Scientists and
UniversityDr. Ibraheem A. Kateeb, North Carolina A&T State University Dr. Ibraheem Kateeb is the section chair of Central NC section and a Senior Member of IEEE with over 25 years of experience in academia and industry. He received his Ph.D. from NCA&TSU. He is currently at NCA&TSU as Assistant Professor of Computer Systems Technology Department. His current research is on power and green energy, and control/robotics. In the last two years, he published more than 27 journal and conference papers and has many projects and grants in Power, Renewable Energy and Smart Grid related issues. Dr. Kateeb was recognized as the recipient of Academic Excellent Award from CARTS International 2012 (ECIA Electronic Components
- building in instructional technology.Alana Unfried, North Carolina State University Alana Unfried is a Graduate Research Assistant at the Friday Institute for Educational Innovation at North Carolina State University. She works on the Data Analytics team for the MISO Project (Maximizing the Impact of STEM Outreach through Data-Driven Decision Making), funded by the National Science Foundation. Alana’s responsibilities include the development of statistically sound evaluation instruments for teachers and students involved in these campus outreach programs. She also analyzes survey results and related data to understand the collective impact of these pre-college outreach programs. Alana is also a full-time Ph.D. student
Innovations in Software Engineering Education: An Experimental Study of Integrating Active Learning and Design-based LearningABSTRACTSignificant advancements have been made in engineering education in recent years. An importantoutcome of these advancements is the integration and extension of fundamental pedagogies as part ofengineering curricula, as well as the need for continued research into the effectiveness of thesepedagogies on students’ learning within engineering knowledge domains. In this paper, we focus on anengineering educational research study in the domain of software engineering. This study considers theimportant research question of the efficacy of traditional lecture-homework-project teaching approachescompared to peer-to
motivation affects student learning. She is also involved in projects that utilize Tablet PCs to enhance and assess learn- ing, and incorporating engineering into secondary science and math classrooms. Her education includes a B.S. in Bioengineering from the University of Vermont, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Bioengineering from Clemson University.Dr. Beshoy Morkos Beshoy Morkos is a newly appointed assistant professor in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the Florida Institute of Technology. Dr. Morkos was a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Engineer- ing & Science Education at Clemson University performing NSF funded research on engineering student motivation and its effects on persistence and
practice engineering technical andprofessional skills while engaged in competitive, design/build projects. Increasingly, SELECTare fore-fronted as the hallmark of engineering programs and are commonly featured in materialsshared with prospective students and donors. Teams, especially successful ones, featureprominently in alumni newsletters, recruiting brochures, outreach and recruiting tours, andpromotion of college activities. For example, when a SELECT member interviewed for thisproject was asked, “(D)o you believe your department, the College of Engineering and theuniversity value SELECT,” the student responded "Oh yeah, yeah. For sure, it makes ’em lookgood. The college always likes to throw out statistics, like, ‘Oh, we're number this or
Paper ID #7256Multisource feedback for STEM students improves academic performanceDr. Jesse Pappas, James Madison University Jesse Pappas studied self-insight, intentional self-development, and the role of emotion in self-perception at the University of Virginia, where he received a Ph.D. in social psychology. His dissertation project involved adapting established professional development tools to facilitate the personal and academic suc- cess of college students and others. As a research fellow in the School of Engineering at James Madison University, Jesse currently leads efforts to equip future scientists and
Students in Undergraduate Biomedical Engineering Research ExperiencesAbstract This study investigated a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) program at aMidwest research university that had two community college student participants in the summerof 2012. In the 10-week summer program, under the supervision of a faculty member, thecommunity college students were paired with a graduate student and an experiencedundergraduate researcher to work on a biomedical engineering research project. The researchquestion of this study was, “What do community college students’ gain from an undergraduateresearch experience?” As this was the first year community college students participated in theREU, a case study approach was used
skills.Framework and Situation in Current LiteratureOverall our research project is broadly situated in social cognitive career theory (SCCT) 6. Thistheory suggests that a variety of factors contribute to career choices. Of particularly importancein the SCCT model is the role of self-efficacy beliefs. In accordance with SCCT, self-efficacybeliefs are an individual’s beliefs with regard to their capability to succeed in a particular career6 , in this case engineering. People with positive self-efficacy beliefs regarding engineering aremore likely to pursue a career in engineering. However, before we can begin to understandengineering self-efficacy beliefs as they relate to career choice, we must understand what itmeans to be an engineer what types of
and deliver a two with rubrics in class. minute and a ten minute presentation 5. Use video feedback- 3. Students will appraise the presentations of their peers peer & self-appraisal.Comments Task: 6. Pair up students inMisconceptions 1.Use creativity/idea generation techniques for finding class practices to getabout presentation and selecting their course project topics more individualskills and best 2. read text: Winning Presentations in a Day attention through peerpractices in 3. Provide script drafts and
Paper ID #6699A structural equation model correlating success in engineering with academicvariables for community college transfer studentsDr. Marcia R Laugerman P.E., University of Iowa Dr. Laugerman is a PE in Industrial Engineering with over 20 years of University teaching experience. She is currently working as a research fellow in the Department of Teaching and Learning at the University of Iowa on an Institute for Education Sciences project to increase critical thinking skills in science through an inquiry-based instructional method. Her teaching and research interests are in STEM.Prof. Mack Shelley, Iowa State
across disciplinarycurricula.A frequently used method for integrating computing into the engineering curriculum has beenthrough the development of introductory programming courses e.g., 11,12-16 introduction toengineering courses, 17,18 or numerical analysis courses 12 designed for all engineering majors. Asecond more-focused scheme has integrated computing through projects and exercises as part ofdisciplinary courses 19-21. And a third approach has focused on developing specific courses incomputational science and engineering 22. Other forms for integrating computation have centeredon the use of tutorials and online modules 23-25. Some instances have infused computing modulesin more than one course 26-28, vertically integrating problem-based
different uses of tablet technology, led by the faculty member,make an impact on students’ innovative thinking skills. The methodology being used for this project will avoid a media comparison study10; weare not comparing the use of instructional technology versus the lack of instructional technology.Studies that resort to media comparisons have consistently shown no significant differencebetween groups11. Our research is meant to explore how active and engaging learning strategies,primarily those that use slate enabled technology and its related features, impacts students’innovative thinking skills in large lecture courses and in doing so address a gap in the literature.Previous studies have already identified active and engaging learning
, faculty time, and support staff labor. With tuition costs risingfaster than inflation, the trends have undesirable results for both universities and students.This paper reviews the relevant literature in order to begin developing a study design to modelstudent progression through engineering degree acquisition as a complex system. Elements areexpected to include transition probabilities, identifying critical factors, predicting time tograduation, estimating costs and benefits of potential interventions, and projected throughput ofengineers earning bachelors’ degrees. The main goal of the research is to achieve an actionable,applicable, and accurate decision modeling method for a student’s progress to an engineeringdegree and a university’s
Paper ID #7562Studying Factors that Influence Scholar Retention in Engineering EducationResearchHanjun Xian, Purdue University, West Lafayette Hanjun Xian is a PhD candidate in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He holds master’s and bachelor’s degrees in Computer Science and started to pursue his doctoral degree in engi- neering education in 2009. He is currently working as the student team leader with Dr. Madhavan on the Deep Insights Anytime, Anywhere (DIA2) project, where he develops data mining algorithms and visual- izations to allow interactive navigation of large-scale bibliographic data in
. In other words, the projected regression line based on thebaseline data for t=7 is 39.99% (b0+b1 (T)) and based on the post-intervention data is 54.96%.The difference between the two phases, then is 14.98% (54.96-39.99%). Similarly, from Table 3,it can be seen that the level change for Student Group 2 was 18.14%The slope change coefficient from Table 3 for Student Group 1 is 0.91. This value indicates thatthe value of the slope between the baseline and post-intervention phase changed by 0.91. Thismeans that the slope in the post-intervention phase is equal to the slope in the baseline phase andthe observed slope change which is equal to 1.26 (0.352+0.91). This indicates that with eachsubsequent test, the proportion of hazards recognized