education research, Dr. Bao conducts research in the areas of bridge resiliency and sustainability, innovative construction materials and evaluation of aging infrastructure. She has extensive research experience in finite element modeling and lab testing of structures and published more than 30 research papers. She is an active member in ASEE, ASCE and AISC.Dr. Yewande S Abraham, Rochester Institute of Technology Yewande Abraham Ph.D., LEED AP O+M, is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering Technology Environmental Management and Safety at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). She received her Bachelor’s and Master’s in Civil Engineering from Cardiff University, Wales
. His successes include more than 30 refereed publications. In addition, he is a member of ISC2 and IEEE, and he holds CompTIA Security+, ISC2 CC and Cisco CCNA Certifications. He has participated in the KEEN ICE Workshop and the KEEN National Conferences. He has successfully incorporated EML into several courses and published several cards on EngineeringUnleashed (EU).Dr. Heath Joseph LeBlanc, Ohio Northern University Heath J. LeBlanc is a Professor and Chair of the Electrical and Computer Engineering and Computer Science (ECCS) Department at Ohio Northern University. He received his MS and PhD degrees in Electrical Engineering from Vanderbilt University in 2010 and 2012, respectively.Dr. Khalid S. Al-Olimat P.E
Paper ID #45643Work-in-Progress: Nurturing Innovation in Agriculture, Forestry, and FishingOccupational SafetyDr. Leigh S McCue, George Mason University Leigh McCue is Chair of George Mason University’s Department of Mechanical Engineering.Liane HirabayashiPamela J MilkovichEamon Geraghty, Northeast Center for Occupational Health and Safety Research AssistantDr. Julie Ann Sorensen, Northeast Center for Occupational Health and SafetyFarrell Davis ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Work-in-Progress: Nurturing Innovation in Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing Occupational
facilitation of cleanroom teaching and high school outreach in VINSE and helps researchers use nanoscale fabrication techniques to solve challenging nanoscale science and engineering problems.Dr. Charleson S Bell, Vanderbilt University Charleson Bell, PhD, overseeing the domain of Innovation, Enterprise, and Economic Development in the Vanderbilt Office of the Vice Provost of Research and Innovation, is a recognized leader administering the establishment of an innovation ecosystem across the Mid-South that will galvanize an innovation economy to impart shared prosperity across the region. Dr. Bell is the Hub Director of the NSF Mid-South I-Corps Hub and co-PI & State Director of the NIH Mid-South Research, Evaluation and
, quantitative analysis for both face validity and contentvalidity evidence can be evaluated using various metrics. Face validity evidence for theinstrument was evaluated using Item Face Validity Index (IFV-I), Universal Agreement ScaleValidity (S-IFV/UA), and Average Scale Face Validity (S-IFV/Ave) [27]. The IFV-I indicatesthe percentage of raters who assign an item with clarity of 3 or 4. The S-IFV/Ave is calculatedby averaging the IFV-I scores across all items on the scale, or alternatively, the mean clarity andcomprehension ratings from all raters. The proportion of clarity is determined by averaging theindividual ratings provided by each rater. The S-IFV/UA refers to the proportion of items on thescale that receive clarity ratings of 3 or 4 from
: Undergraduate Research Increases Self-Efficacy and Career Ambitions for Underrepresented Students in STEM,” J. Res. Sci. Teach. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21341.[3] Watkins-Lewis, K. M., Dillon, H. E., Sliger, R., Becker, B., Cline, E. C., Greengrove, C., James, P. A., Kitali, A., and Scarcella, A., 2023, “Work In Progress: Multiple Mentor Model for Cross-Institutional Collaboration and Undergraduate Research,” American Society for Engineering Education, Baltimore MD.[4] Dillon, H., Cline, E. C., Hadnagy, E., Rodriguez, S. L., Sesko, A. K., Sliger, R. N., and Wilson, N., 2024, “Work in Progress: Transformation Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience (T-CURE).” [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/work-in
is/are entrepreneur(s) among my relatives*denotes a positive change while **denotes a significant difference from pre- to post-surveyResponses to the two administrations of the survey were analyzed using inferential statisticaltests and descriptive statistics. Both approaches to the analyses were conducted to answer theresearch question whether students expressed a change from pre- to post-surveys in theirattitudes and beliefs about their EM in engineering fields. The five verbal responses of the Likertscale were transformed into numerical quantities such that Strongly agree = 5, Somewhat agree =4, Neither agree or disagree = 3, Somewhat disagree = 2, and Strongly disagree = 1. Only 1% ofthe total responses were “I do not understand,” and
- Moderately effective 4 - Very effective 7 5 - Extremely effective What value does your project provide, and to whom? Who are the potential users or beneficiaries of your project? (Open-ended response)Revenue Streams/Cost Structure: Did your team consider the financial aspect of your project, such as potential costs and revenues? Yes/No Briefly develop a cost structure for your project.Final Reflection: What were the most significant lessons you learned from this project? (Open-ended response)3.2 Project – Design and Fabricate an S-Binder with Additive Manufacturing forMaximum Strength-to-Weight Ratios (Additive Manufacturing)The
"assessment of risk." Through this framing, they exposedstudents to research as early as possible in their curriculum, emphasizing these EML concepts. InBurkey et al.'s [9] paper, they piloted an REU program integrated with EM, including placingstudents in research projects that had commercialization goals and introducing EM topicsthrough weekly seminars such as "Entrepreneurs and their Paths" and "Opportunity Assessment."Through this experience, two cohorts of students reported that they felt more knowledgeableabout commercialization of products, and were able to develop and conduct experiments,generate creative ideas, and recognize business opportunities [9].Direct integration of EM into undergraduate research experiences exists very minimally
Exploratory Case Study. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Development,3(1), 17-48. https://doi.org/10.18775/jebd.31.5002Fleck, E., Kakouris, A., & Winkel, D. (2020). Cultural traits of entrepreneurship education: Across-national study. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 13(5), 838- 863.https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-02-2020-0030González Canché, M. S. (2023). Machine driven classification of open-ended responses(MDCOR): An analytic framework and no-code, free software application to classifylongitudinal and cross-sectional text responses in survey and social media research. ExpertSystems with Applications, 215, 119265-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119265Guerrero, M., Urbano, D., & Gajón, E. (2020). Entrepreneurial
priorexperience with learning coaches. Additionally, it explores the unique contributions of learningcoaches in fostering undergraduate students’ innovative capacities, providing valuable insightsinto the differential impact of mentorship, and informing scalable practices for educationalinstitutions.MethodologyThis study was conducted in a biomedical engineering program utilizing an IBL framework. Thepre- and post-surveys were adapted from Gerber et al.’s [11] Innovation Efficacy Scale (IES), avalidated tool for assessing ISE. The adapted survey can be found in Appendix A. This scaleevaluates dimensions such as creative problem-solving, interdisciplinary thinking, andconfidence in decision-making. Minor modifications were made to ensure the surveys
search of Google Scholar yields over five million research documents using orpurporting to define “innovation,” many in very specific contexts or with certain connotations [5]. Whilethere are some papers using innovation and invention interchangeably, there is a significant trend toinclude bringing the idea to practice, or implementation, as necessary for innovation.In order to emphasize the consequences (positive or negative) of innovation and link it directly toeconomic development, we expand the definition to: Innovation = Idea + Implementation + Impact.This is the first set of three “I”s – those used in defining innovation succinctly. The purpose of thisexpansion is to add clarification as to the components that
. Colab Number 49 Stocking 3.306 Parameters Normala, b Deviation 0.664 Estd. Absolute 0.088 More Positive 0.078 Extreme Difference Negative -0.088 s Test Statistics 0.088 Asim. Sig (2
). Potential issues include the following:Selective Data ReportingResearchers involved in a startup or commercial activity might be tempted to present select dataor manipulate data, either intentionally or subconsciously (Cho et al., 2000). This can involvefocusing on specific datasets that align with the desired outcome for a venture, or altering data orits presentation. In extreme cases, this can lead to falsifying results, undermining scientificintegrity and trust in the individual researcher(s) and their research community.Suppression of Alternative HypothesesWhen the focus of research is closely tied to commercialization outcomes, there can be anunintended suppression of alternative hypotheses that might not support the new venture or itsbusiness
future role of generative AI in creativity and design, how you might utilize what you have learned in the course, and reflections on what you are learning in the course and the creative process. You should plan on writing at least a few paragraphs in this section every week.Figure 2. Descriptions for the sections that constitute the Foundational Creativity part of the Creativity Portfolio. Part 2: AI + Creativity Now is the time to use AI. For this section, please use your preferred generative AI tool (examples include Microsoft Copilot, Gemini, and ChatGPT) and write down which one(s) you used. Please record every prompt and output (yes, these sections will be long). Make sure your prompts are
. Thesurvey included 15 statements with response options of one. These questions measuredinnovation self-efficacy (ISE) using the Very Brief Innovation Self-Efficacy scale, innovationinterest (INI) using the Innovation Interests scale, and innovative work goals using the CareerGoals: Innovative Work scale (IW), all out of 7 points (adapted from [7] and [8]). The end of thesurvey prompted students to identify their gender identity, race/ethnicity, and whether or not theyidentified as Neurodivergent (ND). If the students answered either Yes or Maybe ND, they wereasked to list which type(s) of ND they identified with. 6 consenting students identified as YesND, 5 as Maybe ND, and 25 as NT.Overall, there were 37 students who consented to participate in
Paper ID #48995Be an entrepreneur: Empowering with Data-Driven DecisionsProf. Juan Sebasti´an S´anchez-G´omez, Universidad ECCI ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Be an entrepreneur: Empowering with Data-Driven Decisions Juan Sebastián Sánchez-Gómez1*, Luz Adilia Giraldo Vargas y Viviana Giraldo Vargas2 1 Universidad ECCI, Bogotá, Colombia 2 Politécnico Grancolombiano, Bogotá, Colombia *Corresponding author: jusesago@gmail.comAbstractIn the
to assess the frequency ofeducational technology use in the classroom and the instructors' beliefs related to learner-centered instruction. Houseknecht et al. [20] adopted Walters et al.’s [21] PostsecondaryInstructional Practices Survey (PIPS) to measure the teaching practices of university chemistryinstructors. Compared to the inventory, the survey instruments are designed over a theoreticalframework and can be organized into factors related to the assessed constructs. While inventoriescan characterize classroom teaching, surveys can be more specific and include constructs such asself-efficacy or teaching beliefs in their design. Classroom Observation: Classroom observation instruments referred to the set ofobservation protocols to
focused on developing innovative solutions from root cause understanding, improved pace of learning, and discipline in experimentation and configuration management. She was inducted into the National Academy of Engineering in 2016 for her leadership in the development of technologies to enable areal density and reliability increases in hard disk drives and was elected a National Academy of Inventors Fellow in 2018. Dr. Hipwell is currently the Oscar S. Wyatt, Jr. ’45 Chair II at Texas A&M University, where she has developed new classes on innovation and technology development as part of her leadership of the INVENT (INnoVation tools and Entrepreneurial New Technology) Lab. She is Co-PI on a National Science
[7] M. F. Schar, S. L. Billington, and S. D. Sheppard, “Predicting Entrepreneurial Intent amongEntry-Level Engineering Students,” ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, ConferenceProceedings, Indianapolis, Indiana, 2014. Available:http://epicenter.stanford.edu/documents/Predicting%20Entrepreneurial%20Intent%20among%20Entry-Level%20Engineering%20Students%202.pdf[8] L. Cole, S. Short, C. Cowart, and S. Miller, The High Demand for Durable Skills, AmericaSucceeds, Denver, CO, 2021. Available: https://americasucceeds.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/AmericaSucceeds-DurableSkills-NationalFactSheet-2021.pdf[9] M. Aly, D. B. Audretsch, and H. Grimm, “Emotional skills for entrepreneurial success: thepromise of entrepreneurship education and policy
of Oregon and across institutions. Although itmay be challenging for other programs to integrate the full suite of trainings into theircurriculum, individual modules may be able to be incorporated. With a little customization, theseactivities are likely to be useful in disciplines beyond bioengineering, especially for programsthat already have a focus on communication, innovation, or entrepreneurial mindset.References[1] L. Bosman and S. Fernhaber, “Applying Authentic Learning through Cultivation of the Entrepreneurial Mindset in the Engineering Classroom,” Educ. Sci., vol. 9, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.3390/educsci9010007.[2] L. R. Volpatti et al., “Quantitative Assessment of Students’ Revision Processes,” presented at
ability to understand the impact of theworkshops on undergraduate research mentoring. Due to the intentionally flexible nature of ourapproach, these workshops can be implemented at additional institutions, further increasing thegeneralizability of our conclusions.AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Dr. Kenneth van Treuren andfunding from the Kern Family Foundation.References[1] A. L. Zydney, J. S. Bennett, A. Shahid and K. W. Bauer, "Impact of Undergraduate Research Experience in Engineering," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 91, pp. 151-157, 2002.[2] E. Seymour, A.-B. Hunter, S. L. Laursen and T. DeAntoni, "Establishing the benefits of research experiences for undergraduates in the sciences
when creating the project and just use personal skills learned in classes before. The con for this method is not knowing how much to do to receive a higher grade.” “The lack of detailed instructions made me the most nervous at the beginning of the project, but as our group progressed, it turned out this was a non-issue and instead gave us more creative freedom to really let us make our project what we wanted it to be.”Discussion and Future WorkThe Engineering Museum Exhibit (EME) was overall a success. Students were encouraged to getcreative, and the resulting displays at the live showcase embodied the KEEN 3Cs. Using Guay etal.’s [24] pre-validated questionnaire
, emphasizing that entrepreneurial metacognition is rooted in theexternal environment, metacognitive awareness, metacognitive knowledge and experience,metacognitive strategies, and metacognitive monitoring [15]. This model highlighted howentrepreneurs develop a "higher-order" cognitive process in nature to navigate and succeed intheir entrepreneurial pursuits. This study adjusted Haynie et al.’s entrepreneurial metacognitionmodel to build the conceptual model (Figure 1). The model demonstrated how students’entrepreneurial metacognition awareness developed through the metacognitive monitoring andmetacognitive reflection processing (Figure 1).Figure 1Adjusted entrepreneurial mindset metacognition model External Environment Student
, along with triangulating other sources of evidence. Concerning findings, thismay be influenced by the fact that both engineering and bachelor students have courses onmath and basic science, in conjunction with this course, so there may be hidden effectsrelated to other curricular and extracurricular activities experienced by students.References[1] T. Byers, T. Seelig, S. Sheppard, and P. Weilerstein. The Bridge - Summer 2013 - v43n2. The Bridge, 43(2), 2013.[2] N. Duval-Couetil, A. Shartrand, and T. Reed. The role of entrepreneurship program models and experiential activities on engineering student outcomes. Advances in Engineering Education, 5(1), 1–27, 2016. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1090582[3] M. Van Gelderen. Developing
y audience mentors Before 2.1 1.2 1.7 2.4 1.8 1.4 1.0 2.0 After 4.8 3.8 4.2 4.8 3.4 3.4 3.6 5.0 Difference 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 1.6 2.0 2.6 3.0Figure 1. Innovation Fellows Pre- and Post-Program Perceptions with Average ChangeOverlay Plot.Fellows post-program score distributions were also weighted toward the 4’s and 5’s as shown inthe scoring distribution plot in Figure 2. Of note, all Fellows provided 5’s (Strongly Confident)in their ability to network with industry
first prompt asks Gemini 1.5 Flash to identifyand categorize entrepreneurial concepts appearing in university mechanical engineeringcurricula. The second requests associated keywords, and the third requires identification ofmotivations for incorporation of entrepreneurship. All prompts constrain Gemini to use peerreviewed sources. Unedited AI output appears in supplemental material (See Appendix A). Thissection summarizes Gemini 1.5’s primary responses and closes with commentary on thecredibility of the AI output.According to Gemini 1.5, entrepreneurial ideas appear in the mechanical engineering curriculumas project-based design courses, courses on creativity and design thinking, and dedicatedbusiness skills courses tailored to technologists
about their experiences in similar environments.The principles outlined above will help shape future curricular offerings and continuedexpansion and development of our bioengineering program, and the team remains a robustelement of the institutional strategy, contributing beyond course delivery and into shaping theculture and brand of the institution.References[1] D. Schaefer, J. H. Panchal, J. L. Thames, S. Haroon, and F. Mistree, “Educating Engineers for the Near Tomorrow,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 381–396, 2012.[2] D. Lopez, “Designing Training Activities for a New PhD Program in Engineering Education,” in 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Oct. 2021, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637153.[3
January 2025].[2] S. Atwood, M. T. Siniawski and A. R. Carberry, "Using Standards-based Grading to Effectively Assess Project-based Design Courses," in Proceedings of the 121st ASEE Anual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN, 2014.[3] M. Henri, D. Johnson and B. Nepal, "A review of Competency-Based Learning: Tools, Assessments, and Recommendations," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 106, no. 4, pp. 607-638, 2017.[4] B. M. Munoz and T. R. Guskey, "Standards-based grading and reporting will improve," Kappan, pp. 64-68, April 2015.[5] J. Gargac, "Failing Forward: A mastery-based learning learning approach in a theory of machine kinematics and dynamics course," in ASEE 2024 National Conference and Exhibition, Portland, OR
understanding of construction design. Similar results were observedin Shekhar et al.,’s (2018) study, where experiential learning improved students’ ability to integratetechnical knowledge with industry requirements.5.2 Creating Value through Client-Centered DesignStudents demonstrated creating value by designing homes that aligned with client needs,emphasizing factors such as family-friendly layouts, sustainability, and cost efficiency. Thesefindings support previous research on project-based learning, where students exhibited a greaterability to align engineering solutions with end-user priorities (Bosman et al., 2018). WhileSantiago & Guo (2020) reported that engineering students often struggle with considering long-term user needs, this study