AC 2012-5235: THE IMPACT OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING RESEARCHEXPERIENCES ON UNDERGRADUATES UNDERSTANDING OF RESEARCHPRACTICES AND CAREER TRAJECTORIESMegan E. Faurot, Illinois Institute of TechnologyDr. Eric M. Brey, Illinois Institute of Technology Eric M. Brey is an Associate Professor of biomedical engineering and Director of Undergraduate Re- search.Allison Antink Meyer, Illinois Institute of TechnologyDr. Norman G. Lederman, Illinois Institute of Technology Page 25.1308.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012The Impact of Biomedical Engineering Research Experiences onUndergraduate
mathematics in the Chicago Public School system at Orr Academy High School, an AUSL school. Arastoopour is currently working on the Nephrotex project and is interested in how new technologies are effective and increase student engagement in STEM fields.Dr. Naomi C. Chesler, University of Wisconsin, Madison Naomi C. Chesler is an Associate Professor of biomedical engineering with an affiliate appointment in educational psychology. Her research interests include vascular biomechanics, hemodynamics, and car- diac function, as well as the factors that motivate students to pursue and persist in engineering careers, with a focus on women and under-represented minorities.Dr. Cynthia M. D’Angelo, University of Wisconsin, MadisonProf
engineering and doing well. Understanding the livedexperiences of these students is key to learn about their journey to engineering. One element oftheir lived experiences is the influences that prompted these students to want to studyengineering. These influences are not well-researched, yet the findings from their richdescriptive stories may provide insights that could help key stakeholders in guidance counselingoffices, classrooms, families, mentoring programs, engineering, politics, and governmentfunding programs. They may also be helpful to other low-SES first-generation students whowant to pursue engineering.Making career decisionsSome theorists believe that making career decisions is a developmental process that lasts alifetime. 5 Super’s
AC 2012-3860: GRADUATE STUDENTS: INFLUENTIAL AGENTS OF SO-CIAL CAPITAL FOR ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCHERSDr. Julie P. Martin, Clemson University Julie P. Martin, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of engineering and science education with a joint appoint- ment in the School of Materials Science and Engineering. Her research interests focus on social factors affecting the recruitment, retention, and career development of under-represented students in engineering. Trenor is a recent NSF CAREER award winner for her research entitled ”Influence of Social Capital on Under-represented Engineering Students Academic and Career Decisions.”Matthew K. Miller, Clemson University Matthew K. Miller is a Ph.D. student and
AC 2012-4295: HOW AWARD WINNING COURSEWARE IS IMPACTINGENGINEERING EDUCATIONDr. Flora P. McMartin, Broad-based Knowledge, LLC Flora P. McMartin is the Founder of Broad-based Knowledge, LLC (BbK) , a consulting firm focused on assisting educators in their evaluation of the use and deployment of technology assisted teaching and learning. Throughout her career, she as served as an External Evaluator for a number of CCLI/TUES and NSDL-funded projects associated with community building, peer review of learning materials, faculty development, and dissemination of educational innovation. She is PI for the project ”Where have We Come From and Where are We Going? Learning Lessons and Practices from the Projects of the NDSL
. National Science Foundation-sponsored SUCCEED Coalition. He has also been active in promoting qualitative research methods in engineering education through workshops presented as part of an NSF project. He has received several awards for his work, including the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, the Ralph Teetor Education Award from the Society of Automotive Engineers, being named a University of Florida Distinguished Teaching Scholar, and being named the University of Florida Teacher of the Year for 2003-04. He is a member of the American Society for Engi- neering Education and the American Educational Research Association and is currently Editor-in-Chief of Polymer Reviews.Dr. Mirka
directly out of high school to work in engineering-relatedfunctions such as assembly. In the recent past, it was common to have a career path that led toengineering positions within the same company or industry for these individuals. Today, themajority of entry-level engineering positions require a BS degree, and technical experience aloneis not enough to be competitive for such jobs.4Additionally, adult student and graduate student enrollment traditionally increases during periodsof financial recession, with some programs seeing adult education applications double over thelast few years (Master’s programs in Education at Texas State University). These studentsrepresent a growing segment of the population. They are often unable to attend classes
’ development as ECPs and their conceptionsof and preparations for their specific careers; 2) identify the educational and workplace factors,or combinations of factors, that most influence the development of engineering students intosuccessful ECPs; and 3) illuminate the pathways of early ECPs in terms of planning andpreparing to meet future career goals and overcome challenges. Framing the purpose andobjectives of PEARS in ways that would resonate with alumni was critical in the design of allcommunications with survey respondents.Benefits and Limitations of Surveying AlumniThe design of the PEARS deployment plan was informed by perspectives from scholars ininstitutional research and alumni relations. Ewell (2005) documents the history of surveying
mentoring program at a large state university. Each undergraduate student was expectedto attend a weekly one hour seminar to learn more about the process of engineering research andwork three to five hours per week in a research lab, supervised by a graduate student mentor, inorder to earn one course credit. Pilot implementation of the program targeted underrepresentedminorities and female undergraduate students in the hopes that hands-on research experienceguided by a graduate student would improve undergraduate retention of these populations, apriority of the engineering college. The mentoring program also strived to increase interest inengineering careers and research for all students while providing graduate students withexperience mentoring
the complexity of issues and theinterrelatedness between their service experiences and larger social issues such as classism orracism. At this phase the individual is engaged and often becomes a strong advocate for theparticular population that they are working with. In the final phase, Internalization, theindividual has fully integrated their community service experience into their lives, to the point atwhich they adjust their lifestyle and possibly their career, to match the values system they havedeveloped through their service.Together, these three models of development and service are used to form the ProfessionalSocial Responsibility DevelopmentModel as a way of explaining thepersonal and professionalprogression through
. Page 25.1190.4Course content. Clear explanations that connect to students’ prior knowledge foster students’ability to integrate new knowledge and skills into their mental frameworks of a discipline27, 28.As students come to courses with various levels of proficiency, professors are tasked withmeeting students at their level of understanding; one approach to this is to provide extra materialor exercises for students who lack essential background knowledge or skills10. Students’perceptions of the usefulness of content affect their motivation to engage with course material,and therefore their desire to persist in STEM majors29, 30, 31. Establishing the relevance of coursematerial to students’ potential future careers, applications of the material
include the role of motivation in learning engineering, construction of engineering identities, and faculty development.Dr. Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is an Associate Professor of engineering education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC). Her research focuses on communica- tion in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and design education. She was awarded a CAREER grant from NSF to study expert teaching practices in capstone design courses nationwide, and is Co-PI on several NSF grants to explore identity and interdisciplinary collaboration in engineering design.Dr. Brett D. Jones, Virginia Tech
experimental IM discussion sections. These TAs changed their teachingactivities and grading activities to focus on supporting students’ autonomy rather than any oneparticular learning outcome. Since these TAs also want to become faculty, this increasedresponsibility for the TAs created a secondary benefit of training these TAs to become agents ofchange in their future careers. To create an IM supportive environment for the TAs, the faculty gave the TAs greaterautonomy to choose the structure of their discussion sections and to choose grading procedures.This autonomy was supported by a weekly one-hour coaching and peer-support TA meeting.This meeting consisted of training in grading schemes, listening skills, team building skills, anddiscussions
that little or no attention has been paid to thissub-discipline, despite its many possible benefits. However, recently the interdisciplinary effort towardsresearch in this area is reaching a high level of academic standard. K-12 EngE could act as a catalyst foryouths‘ interest, increasing the number of children wanting to pursue careers in science, technology,engineering and mathematics (STEM) [1]. Despite, its many possible benefits, there are currently nonational K-12 EngE standards in place [2]. According to the National Academy of Engineering and theNational Research council, ―…K-12 engineering education may improve student learning andachievement in science and mathematics; increase awareness of engineering and the work of engineers
designed as a pre-test instrument for additional CIRP surveys administered at keypoints during the undergraduate career. Sections of the freshman survey include behaviorsestablished in high school, academic preparation, college expectations, peer and facultyinteractions, values and goals, and financial concerns. Social engagement measures areincluded in questions about frequency of social interactions and activities, e.g., socializing withfriends and participation in student clubs during high school, importance of college’s reputationfor social activities in selection of college, and expectations for participating in extracurricularactivities in college
emergent themes which were continually checked for intercoder reliability. Theemergent themes sprang from a parent code of emotion, specifically as related to cross-disciplinarity, career, and in relation to others. Under these child codes included concerns oftransition (whether deliberate, forced, and/or unconscious), conflict (between self- and other-perception of one’s identity), and definition (self in relation to others). Emotion emerged as the Page 25.371.10parent code because participants generally displayed emotion when they were indicating theirawareness of something unusual—for instance, they were uncomfortable with being categorizedin a
their careers. In this study, we describequalities that are essential to innovative design and determine which of these qualities first-yearengineering students emphasize in their design ideas.Model of InnovationInnovation is often listed synonymously with creativity3, with common definitions of bothsuggesting elements of novelty and usefulness4, 5, 6. While some distinguish the two bydescribing innovation as the output of creativity (e.g., Ferrari and colleagues3), this distinctionalone is insufficient. Novelty and usefulness are essential components of innovation solutions—an innovative solution must in some way differ from existing solutions and must also solve a
in P-12 career and technical educa- tion for the Illinois State Board of Higher Education/Illinois State University; research and evaluation for the Illinois Assessment and Accountability Project (Illinois State Board of Higher Education/University of Illinois); and the Entrepreneurial Leadership in STEM Teaching and Learning (Project EnLiST - Na- tional Science Foundation/University of Illinois). Her research focus and area of expertise is personal development, sustainable transformative learning environments, and curricular change. She has worked with curriculum/programs in a variety of areas, including teaching centers, engineering, business, honors, national scholarship advising, animal sciences, human
Virginia Tech Engineering Communication Center. Her research includes interdisciplinary collaboration, commu- nication studies, identity theory, and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foun- dation include interdisciplinary pedagogy for pervasive computing design, writing across the curriculum in statics courses, and a CAREER award to explore the use of e-portfolios to promote professional identity and reflective practice. Her teaching emphasizes the roles of engineers as communicators and educators, the foundations and evolution of the engineering education discipline, assessment methods, and evaluating communication in engineering.Dr. Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is
about the alumni’s career paths (for example, full-time employment orgraduate school), the importance of certain skills and abilities in their current jobs, how wellprepared they perceive themselves to be in these skills and abilities, and how satisfied they werewith their engineering education3. Page 25.1062.3This study is part of a larger, multi-year study that seeks to understand the undergraduateengineering experience and how the University’s College of Engineering is preparingundergraduates for their future careers. To do this, quantitative and qualitative methods will beused to study both alumni’s and current undergraduates’ experiences
Society for Engineering Education, 2009.[6] Ernest T. Smerdon, “An Action Agenda for Engineering Curriculum Innovation,” presented at the 11th IEEE-USA Biennial Careers Conference, Nov. 2000, San Jose, CA, pp. 1-10.[7] Earl Dowell, Eleanor Baum, John McTague, “The Green Report - Engineering Education for a ChangingWorld,” American Society for Engineering Education, 1994.[8] Review of Engineering, et al., Changing the Culture: Engineering Education into the Future, Institution ofEngineers, Australia, 1996.[9] National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the NewCentury, National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2005.[10] Barry Johnson, Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable
future semesters,variations in problem solving strategies will be evaluated for gender and ethnicity. The ultimategoal of this project is to better design and present problems in introductory engineering coursesto capitalize on strategies that lead to successful building of problem-solving skills.References1. Ohland, M.W., Sheppard, S.D., Lichenstein, G., Eris, O., and Charchra, D., Persistence, engagement, and migration in engineering programs. Journal of Engineering Education, 2008. 97(3): p. 259-278.2. Adelman, C., Women and men of the engineering path: a model for analysis of undergraduate careers. 1998, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.: Washington, D.C.3. Bruner, J.S., Going beyond the information
high school faculty recruitment experiments 43 workshops recruitment nue department 44 concepts graduates careers introductory 45 hands-on fellows departments summer 46 participants sustainable nanotechnology projects 47 award support activities degree 48 stem industrial majors testing 49 workforce programs interactive participants Page 25.96.13 50 professional
scores, credit hours taken, workexperience, future career plans (e.g., industry, grad school), etc.This study shows that students are reasonably good at correctly assessing their answers, butfuture studies should evaluate how this method affects their learning and understanding of thematerial. Whether or not they learn the material better, this method provides them additionalopportunities to practice assessing their own abilities, which is a practical skill that is oftenoverlooked in engineering education.AcknowledgmentsThe author thanks Gigi Yuen-Reed, Ismet Handzic, and Samuel McAmis for their insights andfeedback.References1. Bandura, A. (1977), 'Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.', Psychological review 84(2
part of a larger investigation on the impacts of diversity harnessing in ECE 10111.Diversity harnessing refers to the process of incorporating current students’ personal interests,educational backgrounds, and career interests into the content of ECE 101 as it runs during thesemester. The semi-structured interviews presented in this paper were conducted as a baselineassessment of students’ outcomes of ECE 101. The students interviewed took ECE 101 beforediversity harnessing was implemented in the fall of 2011. Starting in the spring of 2012, we planto conduct longitudinal interviews with students who took the course after diversity harnessingwas implemented.AcknowledgementsThis work is supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant
- dergraduate Education at the National Science Foundation. She recently held a 2010-2011 AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellowship at the National Science Foundation. Borrego’s engineering education research awards include PECASE, CAREER, and two outstanding publication awards from the American Educational Research Association for her journal articles. Her research interests include engineering fac- ulty development, specifically how faculty members decide to apply the results of educational research, and interdisciplinary graduate education in STEM. She is an editorial board member for Journal of Engi- neering Education and chair of the American Society for Engineering Education’s Educational Research and Methods
classrooms.Mr. William F. McKenna, University of Texas, Austin Bill McKenna received his master’s of mathematics from the University of North Texas about 10 years ago, and, after a brief career in acoustical test enclosures, he is working towards a doctorate in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. McKenna’s current research focuses on high school engineering students. In this work, he strives to connect student participation in authentic discourse prac- tices, student understandings of the content under study and the process of effective communication, and the products they are designing. He is also pursuing the relationships between professional engineering practices and the ecology of high school
student perceptions towards a positive attitude was because of: a) the deeper understanding and higher skills in problem solving b) the realization of the benefits CPBL can offer c) the increase of self-confidence to achieve better result Therefore, majority of the students confirmed that CPBL has contributed for: a) self-independent and group work engagement b) improvement of their reading and learning skills c) optimizing their efforts in learning d) offering better understanding of their mistakes through open class discussions e) learning new approached in problem solving for future career f) improvement of interpersonal skills and communication among friends
AC 2012-5094: EXPLORING THE EFFECT OF DESIGN EDUCATIONON THE DESIGN COGNITION OF SOPHOMORE ENGINEERING STU-DENTSDr. Christopher B. Williams, Virginia TechDr. Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is an Associate Professor of engineering education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC). Her research focuses on communica- tion in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and design education. She was awarded a CAREER grant from NSF to study expert teaching practices in capstone design courses nationwide, and is Co-PI on several NSF grants to explore identity and interdisciplinary collaboration in engineering design.Mr
even otherarenas as they intersect with the lives and careers of engineers (e.g. the federal budget allocationto NASA – too much, too little, or enough?). An engineering department need not farm this taskout to instructors in every course, but rather can benefit from designating one instructor to handlethe delivery and assessment of the module (where feasible according to the size of the studentbody). In this way, students and assessment both benefit from consistency, and the presentationdelivery is refined. Each year, a new presentation should be created to keep things fresh andsuitably “contemporary”, while those online quiz questions from the second set described here(the J1 set on general awareness of issues) may be re-used and refined