award a full score of 5 points for participation, with an extra1 bonus point given to students who ranked in the top 50% of the participants. The effectivenessof this rubric in fostering active participation and encouraging greater effort on the pollingquestions is also discussed in this paper.IntroductionStudent engagement has been recognized as an essential factor in promoting academicachievement [1] and has gained a lot of research interest [2]. Gamification is one of the popularapproaches to student engagement and can be described as the incorporation of game designelements into nongame environments to engage individuals and promote desired behaviors [3, 4].Computer-based technologies are widely involved to support gamification in education
ofgreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Natural disasters further exacerbate this impact by causingwidespread destruction, resulting in material waste, increased resource consumption, andemissions during reconstruction. Therefore, achieving environmental improvement andpromoting sustainable construction practices, including circular construction and life-cycleassessments (LCAs), is critical for reducing the industry’s environmental footprint and fosteringa more responsible built environment. To achieve sustainability goals in the constructionindustry, it is essential to equip the future construction workforce with knowledge and skillsrelated to sustainable construction practices. The goals of this study are to (1) understand theimpact of natural disasters
Wind TurbinesProject DescriptionA large body of literature suggests that self-directed projects enhance student learning. Studentsare often enthusiastic about the experiences that they gain through class projects [1], and studentsand faculty alike often feel that collaborative team experiences are essential to their developmentas engineering professionals [2, 3]. Student projects also aid in student identity development [4]and are particularly useful for student exploration of topics that are important but very recent andhave not yet been integrated into standard curriculum [5, 6]. This is especially true when theprojects relate to topics that the students perceive as culturally important, such as projectsaddressing climate change and
one.Robotics can be incorporated in engineering curricula through dedicated courses or capstoneprojects. To make it a specific engineering program, courses from the ME, EE, and CEdisciplines can serve as the foundation on which robotics and integration skills can be developed.Problem-based and Project-based Learning (PPL) has been implemented since 2001 in the EEand CE at our university. We saw an opportunity to use this teaching method to address theintegration challenges and skill development in robotics.Our RE program is designed to train engineers with a focus on two specific professionalsituations: 1) be able to design robotic systems integrating mechanical, electrical, and computingcomponents for a given application context; 2) manage robotics
) Award for his contributions to engineering education. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 The Role of Mathematical Modeling in Integrating Disciplinary and Societal Knowledge: An Epistemic Network Analysis StudyIntroductionMathematical modeling is a critical component of the engineering design process [1]. Since thedesign process distinguishes engineering from other disciplines, mathematical modeling plays afundamental role in engineering practice, allowing engineers to describe, analyze, and predicttheir designs [2]. These mathematical models contribute in addressing questions that arise duringthe engineering design process [3]. Mathematical modeling is essential for
-awareness, academic success and retention,motivation, and access for students who are academically talented but may face additionalbarriers related to accessing resources, materials, courses, and programs for preparing students forpostsecondary education. In recognition of the need for, and effectiveness of, summer bridgeprograms, they are prevalent throughout postsecondary institutions, and their effectiveness andchallenges have been studied [1].Summer bridge programs can motivate students while preparing them for their future studies.Research has been done to study how a summer bridge program impacts students’motivation-related perceptions, and how those perceptions vary across different groups ofstudents [2]. A two-week residential summer bridge
, drawing on theprinciples, processes, and strategies inherent in nature to devise innovative and sustainablesolutions [1, 2]. By employing natural analogies, BID effectively tackles engineering challengesand holds the potential to nurture the knowledge and skills required for developing cost-effective, efficient, and sustainable solutions to complex human issues [3]. The incorporation ofBID into both graduate and undergraduate engineering curricula is endorsed by ABETaccreditation, which acknowledges collaborative skills within multidisciplinary teams asessential for today’s engineering students [1, 4]. Furthermore, as emphasized in the Engineer of2020 report, undergraduate education must prepare students to address engineering problems
programs not only offer beneficial opportunities for students,but for the instructors who facilitate them. These programs vary in duration and destinations,allowing them to be adapted to specific courses or offer unique opportunities [1]. Recent studieshave shown that understanding instructors’ motivation and goals is vital for advancing study-abroad programs [2]. Similarly, according to [3], faculty must be globally competent to engageeffectively in the classroom. Various methods and frameworks have been studied in thesecircumstances [4], [5]. Research suggests that instructors that lead study abroad programsacquire new cultural learning, travel skills, pedagogical growth, and professional development[2]. International education programs are
primary metric of interest isthe accuracy of MFD. Transcription models, or recognition models, take a localized image of anequation and transcribe it into LaTeX. To narrow the scope of this paper, only models that weredeveloped or updated in the past 3 years are considered. The general performance of the modelsare evaluated using a representative sample of 9 slides from classes that participated in theproject. The classes include 3 computer science courses, 2 electrical engineering and computerengineering courses and 1 industrial engineering course. Name Type (Detection/Transcription) Year Capabilities Pix2Text Both 2024 Equations, tables PDF-Extract-Kit
considerations should be embedded into the design of educational tools for industrialengineering. The results provide insights for educators and game developers on how toincorporate these elements into 3D simulation-based learning environments to promoteinclusivity and foster more eq uitable learning experiences. The findings also offer broader oimplications for integrating incl usive digital elements into engineering education, specifically in othe design and development of educational games.1 IntroductionEducational games have emerged as an effective means to enhance engagement and learning inengineering education. Games can bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and real
week: on Tuesday and Thursday, the class meets for an 80-minute lecturetaught by a professor, where new concepts were introduced; on Friday, the class met for a 50-50-minute-long discussion session, which was led by a Teaching Assistants (TA), whereproblem-solving about same week’s content was practiced. There were two 50-minute longquizzes, one in week 3, one in week 8, and a 3-hour long final exam. The Intervention The course-integrated learning strategies intervention was introduced to students in thename of the “Learn Smart” program. A program introduction lecture was given in week 4(lecture 9) after quiz 1. Then, a series of supplemental learning strategy training materials andassignments were given throughout the rest of
. These study results provide valuable insights into how students’ view theentrepreneurial mindset integration depending on the structure and resources of the course.IntroductionEngineering education that prioritizes theory and includes very few practical applications makestransitioning to industry difficult for everyone. Employers have increasingly voiced theirpreference for engineers who have a solid entrepreneurship education [1]. Many employers arewilling to pay more for people with good business skills such as good communication,problem-solving, and complex thinking [2]. Research and design engineering has moved tosmaller, entrepreneurial companies where engineers are often asked to take on more businessroles along with their engineering
download the information and implement the game intheir classrooms.1. IntroductionMaterials play a pivotal role in advancing the technologies that shape modern society, both fromunderstanding the connection between a material’s structure, properties, processing, andperformance in the field of materials science and selecting the correct materials for a particulardesign. Despite their significance, materials science as a field is often introduced later inengineering education – generally in the second year of university studies, following first-yeargeneral engineering courses. At that point, students have already established their academic focusand are less likely to appreciate how the study of materials science can play a role in their
that are multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary,general, and/or integrative in nature [1]. This was based on the conviction that to be equipped forprofessional work in the 21st century, engineering students require curricula that provide breadthbeyond what might be available within traditional disciplinary engineering programs [2], [3]. Asthe knowledge bases related to engineering analysis and design within traditional disciplinescontinue to grow, while the amount of space available in a 4-year bachelor's degree programremains the same, engineering programs are challenged to balance the desire for disciplinarydepth with the desire for interdisciplinary breadth. Breadth in technical as well as non-technicalsubjects can be pursued within the
, expeditionary, staff, and garrison engineering roles. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Including Leadership in Civil Engineering EducationLeadership in engineering is an important skill. The demands of engineering have changed due torising global challenges and the need for leadership skills [1]. Global competence has beenstudied through a global mindset and social skills [2], [3] At the same time, the demand forengineers with leadership and technical skills is increasing. In a field where technicalcompetence is traditionally valued over interpersonal and leadership skills, the deliberatedevelopment of engineer leaders is needed [4], [5], [6].Although there has been debate about the
engineering education scholars and researches quality in mixed methods research methodologies. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Identifying response trends across mental health help-seeking beliefs in first- year engineering students using Latent Class Analysis (LCA)IntroductionTraditional variable-centered quantitative methods that are often used in engineering educationresearch, such as regressions and correlations, struggle to adequately represent the beliefs ofengineering students who do not fall into the majority, typically cisgender White men [1]. Usingperson-centered quantitative methods, researchers can avoid superficial characterizations ofgroups and issues caused by assumptions of
among students raises questions about their accuracy andpotential to enhance learning outcomes. For instance, studies have demonstrated that while LLMsexcel at automating repetitive tasks and providing structured outputs, they often exhibit limitationsin handling complex and context-dependent tasks such as CPM and PERT calculations. Accordingto Nenni et al. (2024), AI's ability to analyze large datasets and assess risks significantly enhancesproject management, yet challenges remain in its adaptability to nuanced scenarios [1]. Similarly,Taboada et al. (2023) highlighted application of AI on PMBOK’s eight performance domains,including planning and delivery, but emphasized the need for educators to ensure these tools areused to complement, not
identities correlate with their explicitidentities?Engineering identity has been established as a relevant factor in student persistence and success[1], [2]. While existing research has developed explicit self-report measures of engineering identity[3], [4], [5], [6], social psychology research suggests these instruments may miss critical aspectsof identity development [7], [8]. Of particular relevance is the concept of implicit self-concept—automatically activated self-evaluations or self-associations outside an individual's consciousawareness or control [9], [10], [11]. Recent studies in STEM education demonstrate that implicitmeasures can reveal identity conflicts not captured by traditional surveys [12]. While explicitmeasures can capture
Chemical Engineering students across gender, year of study, and social, academic, and identity factorsIntroductionThis full paper describes an empirical study of growth mindset among undergraduate chemicalengineering students. We specifically looked at how students differ in their growth mindsetacross gender and year of study (year) and how growth mindset correlates with social, academic,and identity factors. Growth mindset differentiates people who believe that intelligence is fixedand nonmalleable (fixed mindset) vs. people who believe that intelligence can be changed anddeveloped and can therefore improve over time and effort (growth mindset) [1]. This mindsetcan change the way students respond to challenges (like a hard engineering test
Engineering Sciences from Dartmouth College, and PhD in Mecha ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Work-In-Progress: Exploring Knowledge, Skills, Attributes and Technical Learning in a Work-Integrated Learning Engineering ProgramIntroduction Throughout the history of engineering education there have been continued calls for theneed to educate and prepare engineering students for the “future of work” [1]. According toscholars, these calls can be traced back to the 1918 Mann Report [2] and continue through therecent Transforming Undergraduate Education in Engineering reports [3]-[6]. Additionally, therehave been tensions between academia and industry on competency development and what itmeans
, Purdue University NorthwestSidike Paheding, Fairfield University Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Engineering.Devinder Kaur, The University of Toledo ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Introducing an Interactive Hands-On Educational Module for an Embedded Systems Course focused on Embedded Security Ashish Kharel1, Ahmad Y Javaid1, Quamar Niyaz2, Sidike Paheding3, Xiaoli Yang4, and Devinder Kaur1 1 The University of Toledo, Toledo, OH 43607, USA {ashish.kharel, ahmad.javaid, devinder.kaur}@utoledo.edu 2 Purdue University
manufacturing, new product development, and research in related fields. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 An Engineering Faculty Scholarly Teaching Professional Development Program: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Accelerator1. IntroductionCollege retention rates have historically been volatile, among both two- and four-year colleges.In 2023, retention attrition rates in four-year colleges from first to second year were, on average,23%, although this varied greatly between different institutions. From second to third year, theattrition rates were more stable, on average at 10% [1]. However, in engineering, retention ratesare much lower, with people commonly citing that 50% of
thegraduate research training experience.By fostering growth as researchers and professionals, graduate education in engineering preparesstudents for careers in either academia or industry. In addition to providing technical trainingand knowledge, graduate education should help students build confidence in their capabilities,develop specialized research skills, and feel connected to both the academic and professionalcommunities [1]. While these broad goals generally align with established student outcomes,such as those specified by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) orthe Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB), they also reflect the unique challengesof advanced research training.Works that empirically assess the
engineering technology (ET) capstone course. The ProfessionalIdentity Status Questionnaire - 5 Dimensions (PISQ-5d) [1] instrument was adapted for ETstudents in a 4-year program and administered to all students in the capstone course at thebeginning and end of the term. Then it was analyzed as a diagnostic tool to inform practice.Students provided self-reported ratings to indicators measuring five dimensions of professionalidentity formation: Affirmation, In-depth exploration, Practices, Identification with commitment,and Reconsideration of commitment. Based on these results, cluster analysis determined aprofessional identity status by grouping students into Achievement, Foreclosure, Moratorium,and Diffusion statuses. Comparisons were made between
monotonous.To address this, a project-based learning (PBL) approach was introduced as supplementaryinstruction. Literature suggest that PBL has emerged as a transformative educational approachthat significantly enhances student understanding, student engagement, knowledge retention, andthe development of stronger interpersonal and communication skills ([1], [2], [3], [4]). Accordingto [4], PBL motivates students to take more responsibility of their own learning as it helps tobridge the gap between theory and practice [4]. Some other studies [5], [6] reported that PBLplays a significant role in developing critical thinking and problem solving skills, which areessential for engineers. The study on engineering education [6] also reported that PBL helps
always praised him for his outstanding teaching and research excellence. He has been involved in numerous professional societies to supplement his teaching and research, including ASCE, ACI, ASEE, ASC, ATMAE, and TRB. His research output has been well disseminated as he has published 100+ journal papers and conference papers. His research interests are 1) Creating Innovative Sustainable Materials, 2) Digital Construction, 3) BIM and VDC, 4) Virtual Testing Lab, 5) Construction Education, and 6) Sustainability.Narmada Vadlamudi, Kennesaw State University ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Transforming Construction: Challenges and Opportunities in
1and more accessible understanding of the function, moving away from abstract ex-planations. Instructors may choose to incorporate these materials into their lessonsto achieve similar outcomes. This paper should be viewed as a work in progress. The material presented is notintended to replace any existing curriculum or textbook chapters but rather to serveas a supplementary resource, offering a deeper and more intuitive understanding ofthe concepts. The content was introduced to students in three classes, followed by a detailedquestionnaire: 25 students in the undergraduate course ”Circuits 1,” 43 students inthe undergraduate course ”Stochastic Models for CS,” and 8 students in the graduate-level course ”Modern Control.” The feedback
-specific fine-tuning and the long-term impact of AI-assisted grading on student learning and educator workload.1. IntroductionThe integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) into education offers transformativepotential, especially in crafting and applying grading rubrics for engineering courses. Thesecourses, with their complex assessment demands, ranging from technical proficiency to creativeproblem-solving, stand to gain from GenAI’s scalability, consistency, and efficiency. However,this potential comes with challenges, including preserving academic integrity and aligning withsound pedagogical principles. As educators adopt GenAI, they must balance its benefits withcareful attention to rubric quality and responsible
is atraditional adage to say that “students are not like they used to be.” Such assessment is true, asgenerational shifts affect the way our students live and learn [1]. The majority of college studentsnowadays belong to Generation Z, who are technology natives, ethnically diverse, that are ontrack to become a most educated generation [2]. However, they are also the generation that hasstruggle the most with their mental health; surveys have documented that their sources of stressleading to such struggles include mass shootings, money and work stressors, the political climateand discrimination [3]. Not surprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic and the racial reckoning in theU.S. has also negatively influenced the mental health of Gen Z’s [4], [5
be heavily impacted by incoming student preparednessand highly correlated to performance in first-semester technical courses such as math, physics, chemistry, andprogramming. Recent years have seen changes in the types and predictive power of incoming studentpreparedness information, as a result of the movement toward test-optional admission criteria. This paperpresents a quantitative study of current and longitudinal data regarding success in the University of KentuckyPigman College of Engineering as a function of first semester performance, including how that performancehas changed post-Covid overall and within key demographic groups.Three analyses are presented: 1) 6-year graduation within the Pigman College of Engineering as a functionof