and by leveraging aconstructivist theory framework, students are able to shape their own learning and gain confidencein their creativity, problem-solving skills, and engineering design abilities.Trainers also received benefits from participating in Ignite. As one senior undergraduate Trainerin the 2021-2022 Ignite program majoring in biomedical engineering shared, “[Ignite] hasreinforced the importance of biomedical engineering to me personally and also shown me just howmuch variety there is in biomedical engineering.” This reflects how even senior undergraduatestudents with multiple years of experience of BME coursework have been able to solidify theirinterests across BME by participating in curricula development as well as serving as
education and career phases.All 38 HEEE invitees were asked to complete the pre-event survey, and we received 24responses, reflecting a response rate of about 63%. Given the nature of the event and invitationlist, all participants had some level of interest or experience related to promoting or studyingengineering ethics in university or workplace settings. Of the 24 respondents, 14 were mainlyaffiliated with academic institutions, including faculty, instructors, staff, and graduate students.Another seven were employed in or recently retired from the private sector, and two heldpositions in the public sector. Disciplinary backgrounds and affiliations ranged widely amongthis group, including individuals with engineering and non-engineering degrees
expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect theofficial policy or position of USMA, the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, orthe U.S. Government. Reference to any commercial product, process, or service by trade name,trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, neither constitutes nor implies endorsement,recommendation, or favor. 12[a] [b] [c] Figure 7: [a] Dr. Klosky sharing his excitement for the exercise as Cadets diligently solve the problems in the “classatory”; [b
sizes.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.DUE-IUSE-2116226. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References [1] Autodesk Inc., “The Essentials of IoT for Modern Engineers,” https://www.autodesk.com/industry/manufacturing/resources/mechanical-engineer/iot- internet-of-things-essentials-for-engineers, 2016. [2] W. Mahmoud and N. Zhang, “Disrputive technologies: An educational prespective.” 2018 ASEE Mid-Atlantic Section Spring Conference, Washington DC. [3] A. Huderson, E. Peiffer, S. Shamsi, F. Plazaand, and E. Collins
constructivist role of the teacher has increased in prevalence in teacher trainingprograms, improvements in student engagement and learning have been observed[9].Researchers have explored the integration of technology to create constructivistlearning environments. Students' comprehension and involvement are improved byinteractive multimedia courses, demonstrating how constructivist ideas can bemodified for use in contemporary educational settings [10].According to published research, individual problem sets help students develop andengage with the course material in a way that is consistent with their past experiencesand knowledge [11]. In another paper which seeks to explain this, constructivistlearning is supported when problem sets reflect realistic
. Additionally, using scaffolding techniques helpslearners progressively develop programming skills. However, determining the appropriate size ofeach conceptual unit depends on factors such as the learners' aptitude and experience.In this paper, we present a data-driven approach to designing auto-graded activities in our online,interactive STEM textbooks, focusing on effectively breaking down complex concepts intosmaller, more achievable steps for learners. We analyzed two types of activities: 1) activities onchallenging topics as reflected by high struggle rates and 2) activities on introductory topics withlower struggle rates, but where students still needed assistance based on their feedback andincorrect submissions as they began learning programming
% which reflects that many studentsscored a perfect score on this exam. Table 2: Descriptive Statistics for Course A, Exam 2 Group N Median % Interquartile Range % Group A1 (Control) 157 69.00 50.00 Group A2 (Review) 157 77.00 50.00 Group A2 (Only Submissions Prior to 9 PM) 87 87.00 45.00Course A, Exam 2’s results are shown in Table 2 and the right of Figure 2. The control group(A1) had the lowest median score (69%) followed by the review group (A2, 77%), and reviewgroup only considering submissions before 9 PM the day prior to the exam (87%). Interquartileranges were the same
achievement required for the CEBOK ● Including extensive appendices describing the outcomes and various other aspects of the CEBOKThe number of outcomes ( see Table 2) increased from 15 to 24 and were organized into threecategories: Foundational, Technical, and Professional. The increase in outcomes reflected thecommittee’s desire to improve clarity and specificity, rather than to increase the scope of theCEBOK. CEBOK2 outcomes did signal a greater emphasis on some topics including the naturalsciences, the humanities, sustainability, globalization, risk and uncertainty, and public policy [3].Table 2 CEBOK2 Outcomes [3, 5] Outcome Outcome Statement Level1
actively affirm the many unique identities andbackgrounds present. This includes acknowledging their own positionality, both in relation to theacademy and the profession. Affirming students’ identities and the associated subjectiveexperiences can be as simple as allowing students to share something about their backgrounds,and having the class collectively reflect upon it. Another idea is for faculty to reimagine theirrole in providing feedback. Design pedagogy often positions the professor as the all-knowingexpert, but the faculty member can also create classroom scenarios to facilitate peer feedback oruse other creative approaches to break down hierarchies.A recent study found that design instructors use juries and critique to uphold what they
adapt this combination ofengineering and entrepreneurship to increase its efficacy. The National Science Foundation(NSF) has initiated an Innovation Corps (I-Corps) program to train scientists and engineers withentrepreneurial skills to market their discoveries and innovations [4]. On the private side, theKern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN), funded by the Kern Family Foundation, hasbeen instrumental in promoting the integration of entrepreneurial principles within engineeringeducation [5]. These programs emphasize the growing recognition of entrepreneurship as anessential component of engineering curricula, which reflects a shift toward producing graduateswho are not only technically adept but also entrepreneurial in their approach
threepartners to the future commercialization efforts of the product. If the Ideator is not contributing anyfurther effort, and the entire commercialization process is going to be managed by the other twopartners, then the allocation of ownership should reflect that ongoing contribution. In this scenarioownership of the company may then shift to 10% to the Ideator and 45% to the other two originalmembers of the group.Second, even if all partners are proceeding equally with continued effort toward commercialization, byallocating 100% of ownership they do not create any reserve of interest to allow for onboarding of futureinvestors or other needed skillsets not present in the current partnership.Another variation of not planning for expansion occurred in
-yearengineering course by the start of the third year (2026-2027). The outcomes from the first yearhave laid the foundation for successful transitioning into a partially modularized second year anda fully modularized third year.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.2337003. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1.] X. Chen, C. E. Brawner, M. W. Ohland, and M. K. Orr, “A taxonomy of engineering matriculation practices,” American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA., 2013.[2.] K. Reid, D. Reeping
, demonstrating “a feeling for the organism” [29], and knowing how totroubleshoot when things invariably go wrong [30]. These are affective skills that take time, laborand experience to build up, and reflect deep intellectual and often emotional attachments thatscientists develop with their work.While tacit skill and care in lab work is certainly recognized, in practice it is often gendered anddevalued [31], [32]. Tending to animals and microorganisms in the lab, maintaining vital pieces ofequipment, and sustaining collaborations across team members and research groups are all vital tothe production of knowledge, but are all-too-easy to render invisible in pursuit of publishable dataand findings. Indeed, the very notion that scientific facts stand
) modify existing competitions to encourage cross-disciplinary student participation because the collaboration and communication required to complete this type of project would be reflective of the CE industry and align with how engineers will need to solve future, complex challenges faced by society.Future work should be conducted to characterize student perceptions of the competitions thatthey deem the most impactful and inspirational to their education, interests, and the future ofsociety. This could include collecting data from student surveys or focus groups to determine ifthe competitions available provide an adequate path to inspiration, engagement, and persistence.For example, do students perceive they have a high quantity
, frame rate, distortion, and providing only planar data capture. However, it had thebenefit of being portable, familiar to use, and readily available. The video captured was analyzedusing open-source software1 to extract information about the position or orientation of objectsvia optical tracking. Variation two used a precision motion capture system consisting of eightVicon Vero 2.2 cameras and reflective markers for position tracking with a mean error of 0.017mm, as per the manufacturer2. The tracking data captured by this system was provided tostudents as a set of position coordinates and orientation of the rigid body or rigid bodies for laterprocessing. The benefits of using the Vicon system were that it provided high-precision data withfewer
that the rising anti-DEI sentiment and recent executive orders and legislation bring additional obstacles not addressed in this study. Acknowledgement This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 2121950. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] D. J. Nelson, “Diversity of science and engineering faculty at research universities,” in Diversity in the Scientific Community Volume 1: Quantifying Diversity and Formulating Success, ACS Publications, 2017, pp. 15–86.[2] O. M. Longe and K. Ouahada, “A Literature Review
(CCDC) exemplifies this methodology,employing multidisciplinary strategies to bridge the gap between technical expertise andcommunity engagement. Its emphasis on green infrastructure, such as living shorelines, raingardens, and restored wetlands, reflects a growing recognition of nature-based solutions assustainable, cost-effective alternatives to traditional gray infrastructure (Bowes et al., 2019;Karegar et al., 2016).2.2 Coastal Community Design Collaborative (CCDC)Our academic program, the CCDC has developed and followed a program focused on identifyingand developing design solutions based on suites of flooding interventions for urbanneighborhoods to increase resilience in the face of escalating flooding. The program has beendeveloped as a
ecosystem model presents a holistic perspective,viewing education as an interconnected system where multiple factors influence student success.Instead of assuming a fixed route, the ecosystem model accounts for both bottom-up and top-downinteractions that shape student experiences. Bottom-up interactions reflect students’ choices,engagement with their institutions, and interactions within their networks. Top-down interactionsinclude institutional structures and policies, both formal and informal, that influence studentmigration, retention, and overall experiences [10, 11].By situating students within an ecosystem, this approach helps institutions identify patterns ofstudent progression, better understand the diverse experiences of non-traditional
outreach, and program planning. Over the years, she has worked hard to be recognized as a leader in excellence and impact in a rural setting. Mrs. Perkins-McClellan serves as the Co-Director of the Ohio Code Scholar program, an initiative by the Ohio Department of Higher Education that is aimed at developing electronic and coding skills for K-12 students in southern Ohio. When not immersed in her professional pursuits, Amy enjoys watching her daughter play competitive softball, golfing, and cruising, reflecting on her well-rounded and compassionate approach to life.Dr. Ayanna Howard, The Ohio State University Dr. Ayanna Howard is the Dean of Engineering at The Ohio State University and Monte Ahuja Endowed Dean’s
teachingundergraduate courses at the research sites formed the potential participant pool. They wereemailed explaining the purpose of the study and inviting them to participate. All who expressedinterest in participating were recruited. IRB approval was obtained before emailing theparticipants. Data were collected in the form of semi-structured interviews. The interview protocolprobed the participants to reflect on the mathematical concepts used in the engineering coursestaught by them, the readiness of students to apply these concepts, and how they respond tostudents’ math readiness. They were also asked for general recommendations on improvingstudents’ math readiness. These interviews were conducted by the first author. As of writing thispaper, we have
methods used to deliver the content to non-majors, reflections on the course’s success and failures, and results of student surveys that alsoindicate areas of success and failure.IntroductionOne of the main elements of the common curriculum at the University of Denver (DU) is a seriesof elective courses which cover “Scientific Inquiry: The Natural and Physical World” (SI-NPW).If a student is not an engineering or science major, they must choose one series while attendingDU. Many of these electives are given by the School of Natural Science and Mathematics(NSM), but one series of courses was offered by the Ritchie School of Engineering andComputer Science (RSECS). This paper describes the first course of a three-part series ofcourses that was
on the data reported in Part A it is unlikely that many of these students had adedicated space in which to work.When looking at where students obtained materials for building projects, students eitherpurchased the materials new themselves (14 of 42 students ranking as #1) or by salvaging,repurposing, or upcycling materials from non-college sources (11 of 42 students ranking as #2).The significant reliance on upcycled or salvaged material may reflect both resourcefulness andfinancial constraints. While environmentally beneficial, this approach might limit the quality orprecision of prototypes compared to using new materials. This again looks to equity as 60% ofstudents reported self-funding their projects with an average of $50 spent per
courses have positive relationships with ECE 301, suggesting that strong performancein these courses is associated with success in ECE 301. Notably, cumulative GPA exhibits thestrongest correlation with ECE 301 performance. In contrast, the relationship between students’high school information (e.g., SAT Math scores and AP count) and ECE 301 is weaker. This is un-surprising, as high school academic information is temporally distant from ECE 301 and reflects amore basic level of knowledge. Consistent with this, subsequent feature importance analyses (Fig-ures 6 and 8) confirm that these two high school features are among the least influential predictorsof ECE 301 performance.Prediction and AnalysisFor this analysis, we sampled students with
, stories, by design, are full of interesting dialogs, different characters, plot twists,and cultural elements, making them quite interesting and engaging. This aspect was mentioned bystudents repeatedly in the post-survey and students also expressed they enjoyed the virtue andethics teaching modules in the anonymous end-of-course evaluations (administered by theuniversity). Many students also noted the stories helped contextualize the virtues and gave themgood examples that they can reflect on when they need to make ethical decisions in their futurecareer. Stories from traditional culture have the added benefit of teaching students interculturalcompetencies (i.e., the ability to function effectively across cultures, to think and actappropriately
) identifying any behaviorally ingrained actions that leadto that behavior, and (3) consciously switching to a new, more effective behavior. Practice withnew behaviors in the classroom, along with conscious reflection, can prepare students to morereadily adapt to the workplace environment.3. RealnessAs discussed above, differences in the school and workplace environments present challenges forstudents making the transition from one to the other. Relevant differences exist, for example inthe nature of problems addressed [9] and the socio-technical performances required [4]. These,and other differences, contribute to the issue of “realness” in the educational experiences.Realness is defined here as the degree to which assigned work has a direct and
or learn,exploration and questioning, openness, and innovation. The provided definitions reflect atraditional understanding of curiosity as a drive for knowledge, primarily centered on individualgrowth and intellectual exploration.The themes that presented in post-workshop responses were quite similar to the pre-workshopresponses, but they tended to be more in-depth. Discovery, exploration, and openness themespersisted. Responses also included a shift toward appreciation curiosity in relation to broadersocietal or collaborative contexts.Connections - Themes between the pre and post-workshop responses remained consistent.Themes included collaboration (relationship connections, diverse perspectives), integration andsynthesis (connections
wide range of potential applications andterminologies related to digital twins, reflecting their interdisciplinary nature and varyingimplementations across engineering fields. For example, terms like “cyber-physical systems” and “model-based systems engineering” were included to capture research that might not explicitly use the term“digital twin” but aligns conceptually. Lastly, to ensure temporal relevance, we reviewed scholarly workspublished between 2014 – 2024. When searching the databases, various methods were applied to identify the most relevant articlesbased on the search strings and the coverage of initial results. For Google Scholar queries, the databasesearched the entire article for the presence of the search string
STEM) Univ. of North Dakota – B.S. Fully remote with Required “Dozens per Mechanical, Civil, Chem, Elec occasional lab discipline” (exact data Eng. (Distance) [10] intensives not published)3. Results SummaryIn summary, various references show that instructors can elevate the quality of fully remotecapstone courses by establishing consistent communication practices, thoroughly integratingsponsors, adapting assessment rubrics to reflect ABET’s culminating design outcomes, andaddressing motivation challenges. Sclater et al. [5] demonstrated that online collaborativedesigns is feasible if instructors pay special attention to tool readiness
school. On average one of every three Early Discovery participants(34%) enroll in a graduate program, a result that is slightly greater than the national average at20-30% of all engineering undergraduate students [14]. The experiences and reflections sharedhere on the three program formats provide a foundation to increase access to graduate educationthrough sustainable programmatic structures, including centering the current program format oncommunity building through mentoring. Understanding programmatic nuances will not onlyinform administrators but also has the potential to increase the achievement of all undergraduatestudents, especially students from different backgrounds.References[1] M. Newsome, “The odds are stacked against Black, Latino
frequently used byinvestigators to assess teaching practices in the STEM field. The TPI was initially designed tocover a broader range of STEM teaching practices in a time-effective way [14], and this time-effective characteristic of the TPI can be the reason for its wide application in STEM highereducation teaching practices assessment research. Considering that time is frequently reported asone of the most essential resources for faculty [15], identifying an instrument that provides aquick determination of STEM teaching practices can be critical to implementing an assessmentinvestigation. Besides the time argument, papers that used TPI justified their decision based onits self-assessment characteristic that could allow participants to reflect on