. 4).” Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. November 2012.[4] M. Del Rios, and L. Leegwater, “Increasing student success at minority serving institutions: Findings from the BEAMS project.” Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP). March 2008.[5] X. Li, and C. D. Carroll, “Characteristics of minority-serving institutions and minority undergraduates enrolled in these institutions.” Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, NCES 2008-156 report. November 2007.[6] National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, “Some College, No Credential Student Outcomes Annual Progress Report
,including classmates and instructors [14]. MEAs are designed to facilitate such interactions andensure that the models students express through various representational media (e.g., diagrams,graphical representations, or verbal explanations) make their thought processes visible duringproblem solving [19]. Students’ conceptual systems also evolve over time, underscoring theimportance of integrating modeling activities from the early stages of engineering educationrather than delaying these experiences until advanced design projects [20].Frequently, problems in traditional mathematics education focus on students providing a singleanswer to scenarios defined by specific data, leading to sequences of facts and constraintspredetermined by the problem
Engineer Officer from the U.S. Military Academy in 1997, where he majored in Civil Engineering. He has served in a variety of assignments around the world, including Afghanistan, the Sinai Peninsula, Bosnia, and Croatia. COL Hill served in the department from 2006-2009 and from 2016 to the present. Along the way, he earned Master’s degrees in Engineering Management (Missouri S&T) and Civil Engineering (Virginia Tech) and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering (The University of Texas at Austin). He has taught several courses in the civil engineering curriculum ranging from structural engineering and steel design to infrastructure systems and construction management. Each spring, he co-teaches Project Management Professional
examinerelationships between DIT2 scores and selected variables.Future work on this project will include a repetition of the DIT2 survey for the same respondentsat the end of their second year in college, coupled with qualitative surveys and institutional datain a mixed-methods approach to facilitate identifying components of a liberal arts education thatinfluence changes in the ethical reasoning scores over the course of their college experience.IntroductionStudent development of moral/ethical reasoning is now an established part of the undergraduateengineering curriculum due to the publishing of ethics codes by professional engineeringorganizations, ABET’s Student Outcome 4, required for accreditation, and the complex waysengineering solutions interface
, highlight research gaps, and lay the groundwork for a futuresystematic review [17], objectives that align well with our project. Given the relativelyunderexplored nature of the sense of belonging in engineering and computing education, weconsidered a scoping review to be the most appropriate methodology to develop a deeper and morecomprehensive understanding of this concept. In terms of methods, a scoping review shares similarprocedures with other systematic reviews in that both employ structured, transparent, andreproducible methods to select relevant studies, answer review questions, and extract the necessaryinformation from the evidence [18],[19]. Research Objectives and QuestionsResearch Objectives To address
qualitative component provided depth and context to the quantitative data.The survey questions and values were developed based on a thorough review of relevantliterature, similar to the approach taken in previous work on this project, including [13], [14].These concepts informed the structure and content of the survey, ensuring alignment with knownchallenges in the field. By addressing gaps identified in prior research, the survey design aimedto capture a nuanced understanding of how values-based learning outcomes are perceived andimplemented in engineering capstone courses.2.2 Data analysisQuantitative data from Likert-scale items [15] were analyzed using descriptive statistics toidentify trends in faculty perceptions of the importance and
Capstone CourseOur capstone course is a year-long course taken by all seniors in the department, not justComputer Science majors. In this course, students are placed in groups of four to six tocomplete a major project across two semesters. We split the course into the first and secondsemester offerings: Capstone 1 and Capstone 2 respectively. The capstone courses had 65students complete it with 29 who had previously taken ToC. Occasionally non-EECS majorsare part of some groups due to the interdisciplinary nature of the projects, but most groupmembers are EECS majors. Deliverables include a project analysis, lab notebook, formalgroup presentations (such as sprint reviews), as well as written documents (such as a designreport and a continuity
knowledge to new disciplines. Thecourse culminates in a group project where students produce a conceptual design incorporatingbiological principles, encouraging a deeper understanding of both biology and engineering [12].While established instructional tools such as TRIZ, functional decomposition, and AskNature areoften integrated into formal BID teaching, this study intentionally adopted a more basic approach.Rather than delivering a full structured intervention, we provided students with minimal priming,using brief conceptual prompts and examples, to examine if even a brief exposure can activatebiologically inspired thinking.The textbook Biomimetics: Nature-Based Innovation, where Chapter 10, "Biologically InspiredDesign: A Tool for
complete the case studies, with a total of ten projects over the semester, each tiedto a specific math topic. This paper offers insights into how these case studies wereimplemented, providing a practical framework for instructors interested in adopting or adaptingthis method to enrich their own courses.About the CourseThis first-year university course is designed for students pursuing or aspiring to enterengineering programs. It provides a comprehensive foundation in mathematical concepts whilehighlighting their practical applications in engineering. Meeting five hours per week, the coursebalances theoretical instruction, guided practice, and hands-on learning. The mathematics andpedagogical strategies in the course are modeled after the Wright
group gender composition on girls’ motivation and engagement. Dr. Robinson is a PI and Co-PI on several NSF sponsored grant projects which focus on teacher professional learning and self-efficacy with implementing culturally relevant engineering education, connecting to place and community, and centering culture and Indigeneity within STEM education. Dr. Robinson has over twenty years of K – 12 teaching experience, including seven years as a teacher leader of professional development in the Next Generation Science Standards, the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics, and in elementary science and engineering pedagogy.Dr. Frank M. Bowman, University of North Dakota Dr. Frank Bowman is Thomas C. Owens Endowed
opportunity to analyze the relationship between class start time andstudent outcomes. This project will address three research questions: 1. How does class start time affect student engagement? 2. Is there a difference in student academic performance when considering the time the course is offered?A comparative analysis will be used to analyze data from two different engineering courses; oneis an engineering design course, and the other is an engineering mechanics course. The dataincludes attendance records, student participation measures, academic performance (like finalgrades), and course evaluations collected across multiple semesters. A correlation will beperformed to determine the relationship between class start times and student
competencies in both engineeringand design education, yet approaches to understanding them vary widely. In engineering,structured assessments like the Creative Engineering Design Assessment (CEDA) [1] andsimplified TRIZ methods [2] aim to systematize creative thinking, while industrial designpedagogy embeds iterative idea generation into studio-based project cycles [3]. Researchcomparing STEM and arts students reveals that cognitive differences may be less pronouncedthan cultural narratives suggest; when measured in structured settings, both groups exhibitsimilar divergent thinking capacities [4,5]. Despite this, persistent assumptions about engineeringstudents being less creative than design students [6,7] continue to shape educational experiencesand
Rico at Mayag¨uez (UPRM) as well as a M.Ed. degree in School Leadership from Southern Methodist University (SMU). Her current research interests are located at the intersection of science and engineering education, multilingualism and emerging technologies. Prior to starting her career in education, Greses was a project manager for engineering projects and hydrologic and hydraulic studies. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025Misinformation in Engineering Design: Plotting a Research and Teaching Agenda forEngineering EducationEngineering design is often taught as a purely technocentric process. However, a growingnumber of scholars in engineering education research recognize that
22% 30% 25%Projects 10% 15%Preparation quizzes 6% 5%Class participation 6%Instructor A taught a full-flipped class for sections 1, 2, and the distance education section. Thisclass involves short concept videos with a short quiz for students before each class. These sectionsinclude practice quizzes which are optional but serve to improve weekly quiz grades for studentswho take them. No on-paper homework was assigned and attendance was taken [2-4, 5]. Duringclass, students worked in assigned groups of three with a single white board and only one
simulations into 17 Cornell engineering courses. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Connecting Theory to Applications Through Simulations Using Industry- Standard ToolsIntroductionThe vision undergirding this work is two-fold. The first is the democratization of simulationwhereby every engineer is able to use industry-standard and other simulation tools effectively foranalyzing and developing designs. The second is to pioneer a new paradigm in engineeringeducation by combining simulation and online learning technologies to promote problem-basedand project-based learning grounded in practical applications.Democratization of simulation will enable design engineers and other
Delivery Self-discipline Confidence Content videos relevance length style on material recency Figure 2: Factors negatively impacting student completion of lecture videosThese findings underscore the importance of optimizing the design and delivery of lecture videos,which are a vital element of online education. Creating videos that are concise, relevant, andclosely aligned with course objectives can improve their effectiveness and better address theneeds of a diverse student population.Engagement FactorsThe factors that impact students’ engagement in an online course were also studied. Figure 3shows 55% of students identified assignments as the primary factor. Projects and deadlines
in Ethnic Studies and Women’s and Gender Studies and Director of the Office of Student Research at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She is affiliated faculty in Computer Science & Software Engineering andDr. Zoe Wood, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Whether it is creating computer graphics models of underwater shipwrecks or using art and creativity to help students learn computational thinking, Professor Zoe Wood’s projects unite visual arts, mathematics and computer science.Anagha Kulkarni, San Francisco State University Anagha Kulkarni is an Associate Professor of Computer Science at San Francisco State University. Her research investigates problems at the
Engineering since 2016.Dr. Logan Andrew Perry, University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dr. Perry is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. His work contains a unique blend of engineering education and civil engineering projects. Dr. Perry’s current work centers workplace readiness, broadening participation, and construction safety education.Markeya Peteranetz, University of Nebraska - LincolnDr. Trish Wonch Hill, University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dr. Trish Wonch Hill is an applied sociologist who collaborates with scientists across STEM disciplines to investigate how to spark STEM career interests during childhood and adolescence
;interdisciplinarity; prior grant performance; project spending; high impact publications; andexternal funding outcomes. Selected processes for automating scholar data collection aredescribed.Results from initial work were tailored for implementation within the Colleges of Engineeringand Medicine at Penn State University. This paper provides initial results from both case studiesand explores the data-driven decision-making process in the context of STEM programs.Challenges and operational bottle-necks to automating the data collection are discussed withpossible solutions outlined. The authors recognize the potential conflicts to privacy andpreference that can emerge during the dashboard-building phase. As communication becomesincreasingly visual, Power BI
broadly over 2-3 courses. It is generally assumed that the architecture classes use less math,but these conditions vary by instructor and program. Evaluation CriteriaThe forms of evaluation have not changed dramatically for either profession. Syllabi indicate amixture of tests, homework, participation, and sometimes a project. However, stating thelearning or performance objectives or outcomes in syllabi is evident in the last two decades. Theolder syllabi from before 2000 list the topics covered but are not phrased as active statements forwhat students should be able to do at the end of the semester. The active statements allow forclearer assessment of evaluation criteria, particularly in addressing accreditation criteria. One ofthe
Compute Modules cost more than $200 which is very prohibitive for our project. The power distribution and networking are handled by the Turing Pi board itself, reducing the need for additional networking components. o Disadvantages: The Turing Pi 2.0 board seems to be unavailable for sale but the newer Turing Pi 2.5 costs $279 [7], and each CM4 module costs approximately $45– $70 depending on the RAM and storage configuration. Thus, the total upfront cost could be higher for smaller-scale clusters compared to the Raspberry Pi 5 cluster.5.2. Scalability• Raspberry Pi 5 Cluster: o Advantages: The Raspberry Pi 5 cluster can be easily scaled up by adding more Raspberry Pi
parts of work easierand quicker to complete, allowing me to spend more time on other parts of projects”.One participant shared another recurrent aspect of efficiency: while students want to completework faster, they want to do so in a way that also improves their learning “Able to quickly send me back to the correct path to finding the right answer. Generally in math chat gpt is very inaccurate but can show you the steps you need to take in order to get the right answer when I am stuck on a problem”This fits the current literature that learning efficiency is related to improvement in performanceand time [29]. This evidence of a disconnect between academic and colloquial definitions ofefficiency prompted a need to ask about participants
of miscellaneous computer programs that are available to the public. As aforum for discussion on these programs and to champion further development, the NEA alsorecently started hosting the International School on Simulation of Nuclear Reactor Systems(SINUS). This new annual program seeks to develop modeling/simulation tools in conjunctionwith validation/verification methodologies. Participants in the program “engage in a dynamic,hands-on learning experience through self-paced project assignments that introduce them to thecutting-edge single- and multi-physics software packages” [1]. Furthermore, the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been committed to developing and distributing itscomprehensive power plant simulation software
Michigan.Ms. Kelly Durkin Ruth, United States Naval Academy Kelly Durkin Ruth is the United States Naval Academy’s engineering librarian. She is a recipient of an ATG Media Up and Comers Award and an SLA James M. Matarazzo Rising Star Award. Her work with SLA’s Physics-Astronomy-Math division and ASEE’s Engineering Libraries Division has led to research projects on the experiences of STEM librarians without STEM degrees and on STEM librarian professional motivations. In 2023 she was named an Institute for Research Design in Librarianship (IRDL) scholar. She received her Master of Information degree from the University of Toronto.Ms. Amber Janssen, California State University Maritime Academy Amber Janssen is an Associate
don’t know what the results are…But we’re going to review based on, do you have an important question?[1] (bold added).Being able to devise important – potentially transformative research questions (PTRQs) – isincreasingly expected. Yet, PhD and postdoctoral research training often insufficiently preparesresearchers to conceptualize the kinds of overarching research questions that foregroundimpactful, independent research careers. While emerging researchers become skilled in devisingspecific objectives, questions, or the tasks needed to guide specific research projects, they tend tohave less experience with foregrounding the potential impacts (scientific &/or societal) of aresearch program or framing PTRQs.[2] Our research
-STEM Majors while Closing Equity Gaps: Mentoring in a Multi-Disciplinary S-STEM ProgramAbstractThe S-STEM supported program ACCESS in STEM started at the University of Washington Tacoma as a Track 1 grant in 2018 andcontinued as a Track 2 grant in 2022. Since its inception, it has supported 124 students over 7 cohorts. Program scholars receive fullscholarships for their first two years, and partial scholarships for their third and fourth years. Students can participate in a summerbridge precalculus or research experience course, and project-based Introduction to Engineering or Introduction to Research coursesin their first year. Individual faculty mentoring, quarterly Success in STEM seminar courses, and an
Society chapter at UCD, where she serves as the graphics designer and actively contributes to the Outreach and Fundraising committees. Alongside her involvement in BMES, Angelika is an enthusiastic member of B-Hours, a student-run organization dedicated to projects benefiting clinics in Sacramento. Focusing her course studies in cell and tissue engineering, Angelika is currently seeking research opportunities to further explore her passion in bioprinting and regenerative medicine. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Work in progress: Preparing Biomedical Engineers to Tackle Biases in Machine LearningIntroductionFrom just 21 FDA-authorized (including
, data structures, and algorithms designed explicitly for non-computingcollege graduates. Additionally, during the first two semesters, the curriculum incorporates aninnovative excursions component that provides students with breadth in computing by readingand discussing CS research papers, participating in hands-on activities with core computingtools, and engaging with guest speakers in the field. The final semester serves as an off-rampfrom the iCAN program. The coursework includes a capstone experience (or individual study)and a graduate-level CS elective. Capstone projects can be research experience, a softwaredevelopment project, or an internship. iCAN students are paired with faculty mentors for thecapstone project. Overall, we have had 20
. Professor Azad has secured significant support for research and development projects and has published around 140 technical papers and five edited books. He holds leadership roles in various professional organizations and manages editorial responsibilities for several technical journals. Additionally, he reviews proposals for funding agencies in the US, Europe, and Australia and is actively involved in standardization initiatives for mobile robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), and learning engineering. He has also served as a program evaluator for the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 An Examination of the
management, energy, and the fundamentals of industrial processes at the School of Engineering, UNAB. She currently coordinates the Educational and Academic Innovation Unit at the School of Engineering (UNAB). She is engaged in continuing teacher training in active learning methodologies at the three campuses of the School of Engineering (Concepci´on, Vi˜na del Mar, and Santiago, Chile). She authored several manuscripts in the science education area, joined several research projects, participated in international conferences with oral presentations and keynote lectures, and served as a referee for journals, funding institutions, and associations.Prof. Camila Zapata-Casabon, Universidad Andres Bello Master in Marketing and