students in terms of community, professional development, andpersistence. The combination of qualitative research data and quantitative evaluation dataprovide an unprecedented opportunity to understand what the impacts of the LLC have been,while also examining why and how students feel the different program components have beeneffective. The LLC best practices for building inclusive environments and retaining womenpursuing engineering majors are discussed.Theoretical FrameworkTinto developed a theory of departure from higher education institutions using the concept ofintegration as a basis for understanding the phenomenon.11, 12 This theoretical model provides anexcellent lens for understanding the impacts of a women’s engineering LLC. Tinto
, collecting and analyzing data, and effectively presenting the results1-7. Engineeringgraduates must be well-trained in theory as well as in experimentation. However, it is oftendifficult to provide useful, hands-on practical, modern and attractive experience for our students.One way to increase the student exposure to recent advances in technology, computing, IT,microelectronics, etc. is to research projects. Engineering and technology senior or capstonedesign courses fill a critically important role in the curriculum, forming a bridge between schooland the workplace and have been extensively researched. These courses bring to the forefront manyof the ABET outcomes such as lifelong learning, design, teamwork, and contemporary issues.The senior
Architecture and VLSI Design. His research interests include the areas of reconfigurable computing, mixed-signal and analog circuit design, and engineering education. Page 24.1023.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Promoting Undergraduate Research in the Electrical Engineering CurriculumAbstractEngaging undergraduate students in meaningful research experiences is considered a high impacteducational practice. Benefits for the students include development of critical thinking skills,career preparation, improved retention within STEM
Paper ID #9724Examining the Engineering Design Process of First-Year Engineering Stu-dents During a Hands-on, In-class Design Challenge.Ms. Jessica E S Swenson, Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach Jessica Swenson is a graduate student at Tufts University. She is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering with a research focus on engineering education. She received a M.S. from Tufts University in science, technology, engineering and math education and a B.S. from Northwestern University in mechan- ical engineering. Her current research involves examining the design process of undergraduate students
aspect of the peer evaluation process that was enforced by theinstructor was the requirement to actually do it. Those students who failed to submit their peerevaluations by the end of each quarter were given grades of “incomplete.” Once the lateevaluations were submitted, the incomplete was changed to a letter grade, with no penaltyimposed for late submission.When possible, each cohort took advantage of the work the preceding cohorts had done ondesigning and administering a peer evaluation instrument. Since the students in the first cohorthad no prior work on which to base the design of their instrument, they devoted time early in theyear to researching best practices in this area. Their first attempt clearly exhibited their lack ofexperience in
Distinction in 2010. Dr. Natarajarathi- nam’s research interests include coordinated decision making in stochastic supply chains, handling supply chains during times of crisis and optimizing global supply chains. Her research articles have won best paper awards at Association of Collegiate Marketing Educators Conference and Society of Marketing Advances Conference. She currently serves on the Editorial advisory board for International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management. Dr. Natarajarathinam has worked on several research projects funded by government agencies and industry. She has a strong passion for student development. She is the founding faculty of the Society of Women in Industrial Distribution
18 years, and currently does both research and instructional development in engineering education. Jim has taught courses on the development of reflective teaching practices, and has presented workshops on learning how to learn and developing metacognitive awareness.Dr. Cynthia J. Atman, University of Washington Cynthia J. Atman is the founding director of the Center for Engineering Learning & Teaching (CELT), a professor in Human Centered Design & Engineering, and the inaugural holder of the Mitchell T. & Lella Blanche Bowie Endowed Chair at the University of Washington. She also directed the national NSF-funded Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE). Her research centers
Durdella, California State University, Northridge Nathan Durdella is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Stud- ies at California State University, Northridge (CSUN). Over the last decade, Durdella has served as a project evaluator on multiple federally funded projects, including two Title V projects and a Veterans FIPSE project, and currently serves as co-principal investigator and project evaluator for CSUN’s Title V/HSI-STEM project in the College of Engineering and Computer Science. Durdella’s current research focuses on college impact and uses qualitative research methods to examine community college transfer students of color in STEM fields, female single parent students
Paper ID #10351What is Design for Social Justice?Dr. Jon A. Leydens, Colorado School of Mines Jon A. Leydens is an associate professor in the Division of Liberal Arts and International Studies at the Colorado School of Mines, USA, where he has been since 1997. Research and teaching interests include communication, social justice, and engineering education. Dr. Leydens is a co-author of Engineering and Sustainable Community Development (2010). He recently served as guest editor for an engineering communication special issue in Engineering Studies and won the James F. Lufkin Award for the best con- ference paper—on the
perspective on ambassador programs, and peer-mentoringobservations are one way to capture perspectives from students. As a major component ofambassador programs, peer mentoring is recognized as an impactful mechanism for academicsuccess and retention4,5.The perspective of ambassadors who are immersed in the day-to-day activities of mentoringcould provide significant value to our understanding of students’ needs. Ambassadors’perspectives may provide rich opportunities to design a comprehensive program that is directlymatched to the students’ needs, since ambassadors can be fully immersed in the program as it isdelivered. Additionally, ambassadors serve as trusted “indigenous” members of the peer-mentoring community and are able to observe student
and related concepts are essential guidelines in engineering practice that will enable the achievement of the ultimate goal of any engineering project, which is to enhance social welfare. I believe that professionals must: first, be aware of the high impact role they play in society and second, learn to derive professional satisfaction from practicing Appropriate Technology. During the development of my thesis, the assimilation of these concepts was not easy because I had not been exposed to this in my previous experience with as an engineer with a more “traditional” role. But now, my experience with the project helped me to choose a research area for my upcoming Ph.D. studies and it is definitely influencing my
level tohelp students develop a cohesive computational knowledge based on computing principles that iswell integrated with the engineering practice. Principally, it is very important to develop validand reliable assessment instruments for pedagogical or research purposes. We will build on ourexisting assessment framework to refine the design and further develop performance-basedassessment tools (formative and summative) and scoring rubrics to measure computationalcompetencies for engineers.Acknowledgments We would like to especially acknowledge the participation and collaboration of the facultyteaching the target courses; they have been instrumental during the implementation of theproject. This material is based upon work supported by the
one of the founding faculty of the U. A. Whitaker College of Engineering. As an assistant professor from 2007-2012, she helped develop the curriculum for the bioengineering design courses and was involved in teaching courses from the sophomore to senior levels. Dr. Csavina received a Bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering from University of Dayton in 1992 and a Ph.D. in Bioengineering from Arizona State University in 2003. Her research interests range from motion analysis of human motion in move- ment disorders, orthopedics and sports to engineering education research in student learning, pedagogical approach, and K-12 outreach initiatives.Prof. Lisa Zidek, Florida Gulf Coast University Lisa A. Zidek is
team proposal project was offered again in2013.There are multiple considerations for this type of project in terms of logistics and sustainability,especially for yearly participation of 220 students in this project. This paper will discuss thestrategies involved in adapting a community service learning project originally designed for 60students to a larger scale project for 220 students while maintaining the academic robustness ofthe proposal assignment and the good will of the partnering community organizations.1.0 IntroductionEngineering is a profession that holds high respect within the community. The design,communication, research, audience analysis, and business skills that engineers build and developthroughout their careers are
students, first-year engineering programs, mixed methods research, and innovative approaches to teaching. Currently, she teaches within the first-year engineering program at Ohio State while maintaining an active engineering education research program.Dr. Elizabeth G. Creamer, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Elizabeth G. Creamer is professor, Educational Research and Evaluation in the School of Education at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University where she teaches graduate level courses in mixed methods research. She is working on a manuscript for a new introductory textbook, Introduction to Fully Integrated Mixed Methods Research
framework for this study, as well as backgroundinformation about the EPICS program and data collection and analysis procedures.Theoretical FrameworkThe guiding principle of the present research is based on a truth- and reality-oriented theory ofempirical research. Patton (2002, p.91) describes this theory as “there [being] a real world withverifiable patterns that can be observed and predicted – that reality exists and truth is worthstriving for.”14 This framework impacts the research questions, design and analysis. Given thenotion that the “truth” is worth striving for, the question implies that there are truths out there,and through systematic research they can be uncovered. The research question for this studyassumes that by asking the
withsix faculty members involved. Three papers have been finalized at this point. One of thepapers is currently under review in the Renewable Energy Journal and another wassubmitted to the IEEE CCNC Annual Conference. Three projects were presented at the“5 de Mayo” creativity and research institutional conference.Outreach (Middle school-Friday Academy Event) Page 24.115.14Total of lecture/lab hours: 7 Fridays, 5 sessions each and 1.5 hours each session.Total students impacted: 759 in total, 385 male and 374 female.Others: • PI Server deployment at NNMC. • A mobile app for Android was designed and deployed at the Google store. • A kiosk was designed and
how the institution’sexpectations translate into practice, as well as pedagogical ideas for effective instruction.Reciprocal observation by the seasoned faculty member provides early feedback to the newfaculty member that is valuable in getting off to a good start. Details of the structure of theshadowing program are presented. Five case studies are offered by faculty who went through theprogram. They share their experiences in how the program was effective for them and in how itcould be improved.BackgroundIt is widely accepted that new faculty should be trained to teach.1,2 The structure of theengineering professoriate evolved over the 20th century to favor training in research for earlyPhDs.3 This does not mean that there are no efforts to
address calls for greater workplace and college readiness as well as increase thenumber of students who consider a career in a STEM-related field.Despite the rise in interest in providing students with learning experiences that foster connection-making across the STEM disciplines, there is little research on how best to do so or on whatfactors make integration more likely to increase student learning, interest, retention,achievement, or other valued outcomes. Indeed, there is considerable confusion about just whatintegrated STEM education is and how, if at all, it is different from STEM education that is notintegrated.This paper summarizes the findings and presents the recommendations from a recentlycompleted study of integrated K-12 STEM
develop an instruction and assessment plan, and define the learning environment and context for their course(s). 2. Contains a repository of current best pedagogical and assessment practices, and based on selections the user makes when defining the learning objectives of the course, the system will present options for assessment and instruction that align with the type/level of student learning desired. 3. Generates documentation of course design. In the same manner that an architect’s blue- print articulates the plans for a structure, the IMODTM course design documentation will present an unequivocal statement as to what to expect when the course is delivered. 4. Provides just-in-time help to the user
of Texas at Austin. His technical speciality is structural engineering with a focus on struc- tural concrete. He has taught a variety of structural engineering courses, freshman level introduction to engineering courses, and infrastructure education courses. His research interests include curriculum re- form, enhanced teaching and advising practices, improving retention of undergraduate students, and using learning analytics to improve institutional practice.Dr. Matthew W Roberts, University of Wisconsin, Platteville Matthew Roberts has been teaching at UW-Platteville since 2002. He is originally from Denver, Colorado and attended Brigham Young University for his B.S. in Civil Engineering. He then spent four
current re- search focuses on identifying impacts of different factors on ideation of designers and engineers (funded by NSF), developing instructional materials for 77 cards (funded by NSF), and designing innovation workshops for students without design or engineering background and teaching them design thinking methodologies (funded by Procter and Gamble). She received her PhD degree in Design Science in 2010 from University of Michigan. She is also a faculty in Human Computer Interaction Graduate Program and a research faculty in Center for e-Design.Dr. Kathryn Jablokow, Pennsylvania State University Dr. Kathryn Jablokow is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Engineering Design at Penn State
novice organization. 3. Operate in a Western country chiefly for the purpose of functioning as a vanity press for scholars in a developing country. 4. Do minimal or no copyediting. 5. Publish papers that are not academic at all, e.g. essays by laypeople or obvious pseudo- science. 6. Have a ‘contact us’ page that only includes a web form, and the publisher hides or does not reveal its location.”15 Essentially, predatory publishers deceive academics by faking the practices and policiesof top journals (e.g., peer review, editorial boards, impact factors). In doing so, predatoryjournals have the potential to degrade the quality of research in circulation and they reduce thelikelihood of scholars publishing in reputable
forth their best effort. These issues will be addressed during the remainder of thisstudy. Future work will involve exploring whether students’ problem solving performance willbe improved by enhancing their spatial thinking abilities or understanding of key concepts inmechanics. In addition, we are planning on extending this research to other areas of application,such as engineering design or other disciplines and recruiting participants at various levels ofacademia (i.e. graduate students, instructors, and faculty members) to examine the impact ofexperience/expertise. Although eye-trackers are becoming more accessible and affordable, theyare not widely used and it requires trained personnel to manage every stage of the study. Inaddition
Paper ID #9135A model for realizing human potentialProf. David O Kazmer, University of Massachusetts, Lowell David Kazmer is a Professor of Plastics Engineering at UMass Lowell. His teaching and research are related to product and machine design, systems modeling, and controls. He is an inventor with over twenty patents and the author of more than two hundred publications including two books. A Fellow of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and Society of Plastics Engineers, he is the recipient of over twenty different recognition awards including the Office of Naval Research Young Investigator Award, the
discussing future goals, Sugar Cone studentsgenerated detailed descriptions of their future possible selves and the steps needed to achieve theseselves: I’m going to stick with the undergraduate Bioengineering program, pursue a Master’s and then, my goal is to ultimately work for a medical device company in research and design so, yeah, that’ll be the ultimate goal. Probably a Ph.D. also after I start working too. (Jeremy, male bioengineer junior) I plan to do the five year Master’s program here. And then, I’m thinking about med school. I’ve taken the practice MCAT a couple of times, but I’m not sure that’s really something I want to do, but I know that I’m very interested in the imaging, bioimaging type
first mechanisms through which the campus beganexploring and articulating a cohesive STEM vision. For example, 41 faculty and staff in nearly Page 24.328.620 departments came together in fall 2008 in an ad hoc STEM Caucus focused on STEM education research and K-12 initiatives. This grassroots interest led to more formal facultylearning communities and symposia, and eventually to the integrative I^3 grant in 2010.A particular effort to specifically support STEM faculty development was begun in January2011. A “Best Practices in STEM Teaching Symposium” was held in which STEM faculty whohad already
responsibility (c) design to meet desired needs within realistic constraints (h) understand the social impact of engineering (d) function on multidisciplinary teams (i) need for life-long learning (e) identify, formulate, and solve problems (j) a knowledge of contemporary issues (g) communicate effectively (k) use the techniques, skills, and tools necessary for Note: Text has been condensed for formatting engineering practice. purposesExisting Assessment InstrumentsExisting assessment tools for design ability rely on self-assessment and analyze student gradesfrom design reports, presentations, and logbooks4-5. This type of assessment relies on studentsproviding
experience: Factoring in pre-work academic performance,” Journal of Engineering Education,97(2), 207-212.14 Fiori, C. and Pearce, A. (2009). Improving the Internship Experience: Creating a Win-Win for Students, Industryand Faculty. Construction Research Congress 2009: pp. 1398-1408.15 Tener, R.K. (1996). “Industry-University Partnerships for Construction Engineering Education.” Journal ofProfessional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 122(4), 156-162.16 Fiori, C. and Pearce, A. (2009), op cit.17 Venkatesh, M., Small. R.V., and Marsden, J. (2003). Learning in Community, Reflections on Practice, KluwerAcademic Publishers, Dordrecht: The Netherlands.18 Venkatesh, M., Small. R.V., and Marsden, J. (2003). op cit.19 Venkatesh, M
and social development,and deeper engagement5-6. The ambassador program at the University of Utah has been built upon best practices andthe success of similar programs at other large research universities. Various schools have alreadyfound success in recruiting students through K-12 mentor programs run by engineering studentsand faculty7-15. Furthermore, the program builds a community of engineering students. It hasbeen shown that when students feel that they are part of a community they are more likely to beretained16-21.The Ambassador Program Created by the College of Engineering The Ambassador Program was designed to give engineering students an opportunity toget involved with the College of Engineering. It was originally