of women in engineering programs.30In contrast, this research builds upon work calling for a greater understanding of the gender “in”and “of” engineering.31 It “bends the silos” (of individual academic disciplines) by utilizingtheories, concepts, and methods from various disciplines to show that being successful in theengineering disciplines involves more than just mastering curriculum and technical competencies.It also involves learning how to be an active part of a learning community and negotiating one’spersonal psychosocial identity as one’s “engineering identity” is also being developed.The purpose of this study is to ask distinctive questions in order to gain greater understanding ofthe importance of the individual and how they develop
corresponding lab. This paper provides adescription of the course, its teaching strategies, the classroom setting, the characteristics of theparticipants and the academic results. We also offer our conclusions and proposed steps for thefuture. Page 23.766.2Course descriptionOur integrated physics and mathematics course for first-year engineering majors (Fis-Mat) usesthe physics curriculum as its backbone, with mathematics giving support for idea-building andoperations. In developing this course, we considered the findings of previous researchresearch7,8,9,10 and added modeling as a principal teaching strategy, along with an innovativeclassroom that
specific classes at themore advanced level devoted to nanotechnology. For example Pai et al. discuss the introductionof two graduate-level classes that cover the growth and characterization of emergingnanomaterials.4 Uddin and Chowdhury describe a comprehensive plan for integrating a set ofcourses into the undergraduate engineering curriculum.5This paper advocates an approach that integrates nanoelectronics material into an existingintegrated circuits design course. This is a viable approach for several reasons. First, it is anattractive approach for a smaller-sized institution that may not have the resources forimplementing a full set of separate nanoelectronics courses. Second, it is often not easy to makewholesale changes in the curriculum to
Paper ID #5842Enhancing Engineering Ethics Curriculum by Analyzing Students’ Percep-tionMiss Brittney Hope Jimerson, North Carolina A&T State University Brittney Jimerson is a Ph.D. student at North Carolina A&T State University. She graduated from North Carolina A&T State University with a M.S. in Industrial and System Engineering in 2013. She was an undergraduate research scholar and earned her B.S. in Industrial Engineering and Management from the University of North Carolina at Asheville in 2009. She is an Alpha Pi Mu Engineering Honor Society Member, NSBE member, and IIE member.Dr. Eui Hyun Park, North
Paper ID #6092Transforming Undergraduate Curriculum for Green Plastics ManufacturingTechnologyDr. Spencer Seung-hyun Kim, Rochester Institute of Technology (CAST) Dr. Spencer Kim is an associate professor in Manufacturing, Mechanical Engineering Technology/Packaging Science Department (MMET/PS) at RIT and serves as associate director of American Packaging Corpo- ration Center for Packaging Innovation at RIT. He previously worked in the semiconductor industry. Dr. Kim, as a PI or co-PI, received grants and sponsorships from NSF, SME, SPE, universities, and industries. In 2009, he was nominated for the Eisenhart Award for
- nois. She completed her undergraduate degree in General Engineering at Illinois with a concentration in Sustainable Development. Keilin is interested in international experiences in engineering and how to better integrate project-based learning into the engineering classroom.Dr. Russell Korte, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Russell Korte is an Assistant Professor in Human Resource Development and a Fellow with the Illinois Foundry for Innovation in Engineering Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His research investigates how engineering students navigate their educational experiences and how engineer- ing graduates transition into the workplace. He is especially interested in the
Paper ID #6311Transforming a Middle and High School Robotics CurriculumMs. Mercedes M McKay, Stevens Institute of Technology (SES) Mercedes McKay is Deputy Director of the Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education (CIESE) at Stevens Institute of Technology. She has led several national and statewide K-14 teacher professional development and curriculum development programs in STEM education. McKay is co- PI and Project Director for the NSF-funded Build IT Scale Up project to develop and disseminate an innovative underwater robotics curriculum for middle and high school students. She is a former practicing
Colorado in May 2011 and began doctoral work in the Higher Education Student Affairs Leadership program there in fall 2011.Dr. Daniel Knight, University of Colorado, Boulder Daniel W. Knight is the engineering assessment specialist at the Integrated Teaching and Learning Pro- gram and Laboratory. He holds a BS in psychology from Louisiana State University, and an MS degree in industrial/organizational psychology and PhD degree in counseling psychology, both from the University of Tennessee. Prior to joining the University of Colorado at Boulder, he gained extensive experience in assessment and teamwork in an engineering education context through the development and evaluation of a team facilitation training course
the results from Viswanathan and Linsey[34], Christie, et al.[38] andMoe, et al.[16] for optimizing the prototyping process. These flowcharts can be applied to eachconcept.There are three independent flowcharts. The scaling flowchart encourages scaling only if it willsimplify the problem, a scaling law is known or can be estimated, and sufficient accuracy existsto predict the design requirements. This approach works well when there is an uncertainty in theextrapolation that can be predicted[37]. If there is a higher uncertainty in the scaling extrapolation,then the directive is to not use scaled prototypes, or to scale them only to a reduced extent.The second flowchart, subsystem isolation/integration, examines whether the designer should
discipline-focused initiativesfall short in terms of providing a more holistic experience of Engineering as a unified discipline.The main reason for this is that the inherent complexity involved in integrating multipledisciplines into a project over a relatively short period of time is a major challenge. Socolloquially speaking, oftentimes students don’t get to see the forest for the tree. As a resultmany students lose their curiosity to learn more about the engineering profession and decide tochoose a different career path.To address these concerns, an innovative teaching model based on a structured curriculum isproposed to not only introduce students to multiple engineering disciplines but also allow themto be part of a unified engineering
developed byLouisiana Tech University. The course consists of discussion sessions, hands on labs,cryptographic problems, film sessions, and a final cyber challenge each of which integrate thehistory, ethical issues, applications, and theory behind cyberspace, security, and cryptography.Developing a cyber curriculum that is truly interdisciplinary in focus – cutting across both thesciences and the liberal arts – demonstrates a national model for implementing similar programsat other institutions. This integrated approach to teaching strives to educate new scholars whounderstand not only the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics but also the political,social, historical, ethical, and legal aspects of this evolving discipline.Results of
engineering curriculum.The solid modeling courses provide a unique opportunity to work with many of the corecomponents of the engineering design process much earlier in the curriculum. For instance, thedevelopment of a solid model of a complex part requires identifying criteria (such as necessarydimensions), brainstorming, generating ideas, developing a plan to produce the solid model in anefficient manner, and actually constructing the solid model. Additionally, there can be someiterations in the plan as the designer attempts to develop a creation path and runs into an obstacleand has to revise the plan.Unlike full-scale engineering design, Mathematics and Physics are not obstacles in the designprocess involved with the creation of 3D solid models
) and a Master of Science in Curriculum and Instruction from Penn State University (2010). He is course coordinator for the Senior Capstone Design program. He has directed project-based programs for undergraduates with an interest in space-related fields as well as service-learning programs for those interested in community service.Ms. Mary Lynn Brannon, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Page 23.540.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Enhancing the quality of senior design projects: The introduction of a coordinated sequence of design courses to
a whole and the value of participating in each phase of an integrated engineering designproject. While many of the student designs were not developed in depth, introducing students toa complete design experience early on in their design curriculum allowed the students to betterunderstand the need for a clear problem definition, quality requirements, rigorous decisionmaking, and clear communication. As student buy-in at various stages was highly affected by thetype of product they were working on, changing the product types at each stage ensured that nostudent was forced to work in an area they did not enjoy for the entirety of the project. Studentperformance at all stages of the activity was not hindered by the timeline. Average student
process in the freshman year through theENGR 101 (Introduction to Engineering) and ENGR 102 (Engineering Design Practice) courses.A design experience is integrated into many sophomore, junior, and senior engineering scienceclasses and engineering design is an essential component in the senior capstone courses.The Introduction to Engineering (ENGR 101) course consists of two hours of lecture and twohours of laboratory meetings per week. An honors section of the course (ENGR 101H) meets foran additional hour each week. The course is part of the University of San Diego’s PreceptorialProgram and it combines a regular course with topics intended to ease the students’ transitioninto the college environment. Preceptorial courses are taught by
Paper ID #7975Designing an Introductory Entrepreneurial Thinking CourseMr. Daniel Michael Ferguson, Purdue University, West Lafayette Daniel M. Ferguson is a graduate student in the Engineering Education Program at Purdue University and the recipient of NSF awards for research in engineering education. Prior to coming to Purdue he was Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship at Ohio Northern University. Before assuming that position he was Associate Director of the Inter-professional Studies Program and Senior Lecturer at Illinois Institute of Technology and involved in research in service learning, assessment processes
it is more than just an engineeringexperience.Core curriculumApplicants can choose from twenty possible disciplines. The disciplines range from astronomy toarchitecture and from engineering to environmental issues to name some. All the twentydisciplines have similar curriculum structure but different approaches in delivering the same. Thecore curriculum for the governor’s scholars programs is threefold: Focus Area: a “major” subject of study, assigned according to scholar preference as indicated on the application. General Studies: an area of study assigned by staff to challenge the scholars. Courses frequently include service-learning components in the community. Seminar: a discussion-based small group session
interests include product family and product platform design, trade space exploration and multi-dimensional data visualization, and multidisciplinary design optimization, and he has co-authored over 200 peer-reviewed journal and conference papers to date. He is the recipient of the 2011 ASEE Fred Merryfield Design Award and has received numerous awards for outstanding teaching and research, including the 2007 Penn State University President’s Award for Excellence in Academic Integration. He is a Fellow in ASME and an Associate Fellow in AIAA. He received his Ph.D. and M.S. degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Georgia Tech, and his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Cornell University.Mr. Marcus Shaffer, Penn State
. Page 23.776.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Integrating Liberal Studies at the Assignment Level – A Case StudyAbstract:The definition of liberal arts has evolved from its Roman origins, and its renaissance expansion.While there are many modern interpretations of what constitutes a liberal arts curriculum, onedistinction has remained throughout; a focus on and value of intellectual rather than vocationalskills. This paper demonstrates an approach to integrating those intellectual skills to enhancevocational ones.As a result of industry feedback, a community college adopted four Workforce Skills to beintegrated into the entire curriculum
Information Security Program and affiliated with The Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security (CERIAS) at Purdue University. He has a B.S. in Computer Science from Chaminade University of Honolulu. His research areas include global policy, ethics, information security and assurance, technology adoption, biometrics, education, pharmaceutical supply chain, and energy. Page 23.205.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Approaches to Integrating Public Policy into Engineering EducationAbstractPolicy education has been deemed an important
). Page 23.784.8 Figure 8: Identification of matching front viewFinally, a small group of students was asked to try the AR integrated CAD system at the end ofthe semester. After they successfully completed the activities, their feedback was very positive.Most of the students found AR interesting, easy and enjoyable (see Figure 9). The only negativecomment was that the students were confused by the mirrored images on the screen, but afterpractice they were getting used to that feeling. Figure 9: Students trying AR integrated CAD system5. ConclusionsThis paper examined the potential of an augmented reality system as an educational tool in anengineering graphics course. The students of that course were
present in textbooks.11 Page 23.780.2The current investigation has aimed to integrate some aspects of research into a geotechnicalengineering laboratory course with limited impact on the existing content of the course (i.e.,maintaining emphasis on conventional geotechnical engineering testing). This experience is notintended to be production-level research, but instead an introduction to research methodologyand perspective for undergraduate students. Various teaching methodologies have beenincorporated to the introductory geotechnical engineering laboratory at California PolytechnicState University, a primarily undergraduate institution. The
convinced,from the start of our research, that such a course must also be tangible to students. We feel thatin such an introductory course, students must be aware that they are dealing with real circuitsand that logic signals are represented with physically measurable quantities. We found that inusing a CPLD with a breadboard, the CPLD is identifiable to students, and that with modestwiring they constructed demonstrative circuits that they felt were satisfying and engaging.This paper outlines our more recent experience to further integrate our use of the CPLD in ourintroductory course. Given the potentially wide reaching impact on the curriculum, we aretaking incremental steps, each with measurable goals. In the Fall 2012 semester, new
, TLC is closest to Udacity and edX,except these other systems do not provide individualized content.5, 6TLC is similar to Udacity and edX in that each provides the means to integrate variedtypes of content together for a sequential presentation to the user. For example, lecturecontent can be interspersed with active learning exercises. Homework style questions canfollow lecture, and be automatically graded. Hence these systems are quite different thana Content Management System such as Moodle17 because the varied types of content arenot presented in a sequential fashion. As an analogy this would be the difference betweena standard book versus one in which the pages are cut out a spread across a table. Withloose pages there is no control over
teachers are excited and engaged in the data analysis process. Others strugglewith quantitative skills, leading to the presentation of some of the modules as a recipe fordownloading and graphing data rather than an inquiry into climate change problems or solutions.Similar wide ranges of quantitative skills have been observed in our undergraduate students.19These observations point to the need for students at any level to have strong fundamental STEMskills in order to approach engineering analysis projects. At the same time, our design of suchexperiences must recognize the breadth of capabilities with built in alternative approaches forteachers to integrate real-world earth and energy system projects in their class rooms in a waythat they are
engineering curriculum of an engineering department (Biological Systems Engineering) using Jerome Bruner’s spiral curriculum theory. Currently, Dr. Lohani leads an NSF/REU site on ”interdisciplinary water sciences and engineering” which has already graduated 45 undergraduate researchers since 2007. He also leads an NSF/TUES type I project in which a real-time environmental monitoring lab is being integrated into a freshman engineering course, a senior-level Hydrology course at Virginia Tech, and a couple of courses at Virginia Western Community College, Roanoke for enhancing water sustainability education. He is a member of ASCE and ASEE and has published 65+ refereed publications.Mr. Daniel S Brogan, Virginia Polytechnic
(2012) hands-on approach and last year’s (2011) lecture-based approach.Conclusions A hands-on, project-based approach to teaching introductory Mechatronics to undergraduatestudents in a Mechanical Engineering curriculum was shown. This course is mainly structuredaround a multi-stage team project which is mostly mechanical in nature but requires enoughelectro-mechanical integration to effectively introduce the scope, reach and potential ofMechatronics. Every student obtained their own Arduino Uno microcontroller and a set of basicelectro-mechanical components, which greatly facilitated hands-on learning at an individuallevel. A particular emphasis was placed on a group design process similar to that in a small-company, where
Association ofPhysics Teacher’s “Statement on Computational Physics” says, “Computational physics hasbecome a third way of doing physics and complements traditional modes of theoretical andexperimental physics.” 1 Computation should be an important component in the physicsundergraduate curriculum, and ideally it should merge seamlessly with the rest of the curriculum.Throughout the past 15 years, the University of St. Thomas physics department has beenimplementing an integrated physics curriculum where students gain the theoretical, experimental,computational, and communication skills they will need to succeed in their careers. Thecomputational work in our department began with an NSF-sponsored effort (DUE-0311432) todevelop computational modules in
well.I. IntroductionIn our 2007 paper1 we reported on an assessment study we had conducted that resulted in asignificant change and reorientation with the curriculum and subsequent course progression ofour physics program. At that time, our physics program was integrated with a single departmentalong with two other disciplines in the department of Computer Science, Audio Technology, andPhysics (CAP). Shortly after our study was conducted, each of these programs separated and 3independent departments were created.As part of our study, we looked at comparative data from 22 national undergraduate programsfocusing on those that were in universities without graduate programs in physics as well as thosein liberal arts colleges. The results of our
simulators with graphical user interfaces were introduced: Aspen/SPwith its SPEXPERT system (JSD Simulations, Inc.), Aspen Plus (Aspen Technology), andProSim/ProVision (Simulation Sciences, Inc.). As these tools became available to those in theacademic community, the question arose as to how best to educate students in the use of thesevery powerful tools. Various approaches of incorporating the design experience across thecurriculum have been reported in the literature.1,2,3 Many of these articles address the need forintroducing design at earlier stages in the curriculum and describe how to best integrate theseexperiences across the curriculum. The use of process simulators in select courses todemonstrate concepts and reinforce fundamental