Paper ID #12365Work in Progress: Providing Diverse Opportunities for Capstone Projects inBiomedical EngineeringDr. Mansoor Nasir, Lawrence Technological University Dr. Mansoor Nasir received his B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from University of Cincinnati and Ph.D.in Bioengineering from University of California-Berkeley. He worked as a research scientist at US Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC before joining Biomedical Engineering department at Lawrence Technological University. He has several publications in the areas of microfluidics, chemical and biolog- ical sensors and MEMS technology. He is also passionate
Award in 2012.Mr. Matthew S Bollom Matthew Bollom is a 2013 graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison with a degree in Biomedical Engineering. He currently works for National Instruments in Austin, Texas. Page 26.457.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Design and Implementation of Web-based System for Client-based Design Project ManagementIntroductionBiomedical engineering (BME) students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison participate inhands-on, client-based, real-world, team-based design projects for six semesters (sophomore-senior year
Paper ID #13578Microfluidic Medical Diagnostics Devices: Instructive Student Projects forProduct Development in the Coming DecadeDr. Michael G Mauk P.E., Drexel UniversityDr. Richard Chiou, Drexel University (Eng. & Eng. Tech.) Page 26.1152.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Work in Progress: Microfluidic Medical Diagnostics Devices- Instructive Student Projects for Product Development in the Coming Decade1
Paper ID #12790Work in Progress: Mini Projects - Using News Articles to Promote LifelongLearning and Expose Students to Engineering BreadthDr. Chris Geiger, Florida Gulf Coast University Chris Geiger is an Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Bioengineering in the U.A.Whitaker College of Engineering at Florida Gulf Coast University. He received his M.S and Ph.D.degrees in Biomedical Engineering from Northwestern University in 1999 and 2003, respectively,and his B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Northwestern University in 1996.Prof. James D. Sweeney, Oregon State University JAMES D. SWEENEY is Professor and Head
Paper ID #13973Using Project-Based, Experiential, and Service Learning in a Freshman Writ-ing Intensive Seminar for Building Design and Technical Writing Skills (Workin Progress)Dr. Bilal Ghosn, Rice University Dr. Bilal Ghosn is a lecture in the Department of Bioengineering at Rice University. A native of Louisiana, he received his doctoral degree in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin in 2009 with his doctoral research in the areas of drug delivery, biomaterials and diagnostics. He then spent 4 years as a post-doctoral fellow in the department of Bioengineering at the University of Washington where
c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 A Learning Module Involving Point-of-Care Testing and Team- Based Design Implemented in an Upper Level Biomedical Engineering Elective CourseAbstractA learning module was developed and implemented in an upper level biomedical engineeringcourse to provide students experience with practical aspects of point-of-care testing (POCT)through a team-based design project. The module, which included lectures and project work,involved the development of a container that could protect a POCT device from extremetemperatures when used outside of a hospital setting (e.g., by medical responders during disasterrelief). In order to assess the impact of the new
. Page 26.1762.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Work-In-Progress: Clinical Immersion and Team-Based Engineering DesignINTRODUCTIONA clear need exists to streamline healthcare to reduce costs while enhancing patient care anddevelop more cost effective and safer medical devices. To meet this need, we must increase thenumber and the quality of bioengineers trained to identify and solve healthcare problems, anddevelop solutions through biomedical engineering education experiences.Improving team-based design experiences driven by new projects drawn from unmet clinicalneeds is a strategy to train engineers while simultaneously addressing healthcare
active and cooperativelearning could better motivate the students and help to transform them from passive recipients ofother people's knowledge into active constructors of their own and others' knowledge. Twoeffective methods of student-centered teaching include active/collaborative learning andinductive teaching and learning (ITL). Based on my experience of supervising 16 undergraduateson a collaborative biomedical research project over the past four years, a research-based learning(RBL) model has been developed that makes important addition to current ITL methods.The proposed RBL model shares some of the common features of ITL in that it is a student-centered and process-centered inductive approach. It also has the following features
in a Bioinstrumentation Laboratory CourseAbstractMany lecture courses use muddy points as an instructional assessment technique that allows theinstructor to gather information about the topics that are not clear to the students at the end ofeach class. Using this information, the amount of lecture time allocated to a specific topic can beincreased or decreased to match students’ feedback and emphasize the areas where the studentsneed more support.A modified version of this technique was recently implemented in a junior level, project-basedbioinstrumentation course that focuses around the design, construction and testing of biomedicaltechnology. At the end of each class, students take an on-line survey where they are asked toidentify the
and a Chemistry Concept Inventory for assessing conceptual knowledge and change for intro- ductory materials science and chemistry classes. He is currently conducting research on NSF projects in two areas. One is studying how strategies of engagement and feedback with support from internet tools and resources affect conceptual change and associated impact on students’ attitude, achievement, and per- sistence. The other is on the factors that promote persistence and success in retention of undergraduate students in engineering. He was a coauthor for best paper award in the Journal of Engineering Education in 2013
Paper ID #13984Evolution and Assessment of a Master’s-Level Multidisciplinary Regenera-tive Medicine ProgramDr. Lily Hsu Laiho, California Polytechnic State University Lily Laiho is an associate professor in the Department of Biomedical and General Engineering at Cal- ifornia Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She also serves as the College of Engineering’s Director of Interdisciplinary Projects. She received her Ph.D. from M.I.T. in 2004. She teaches biomed- ical engineering design, biomedical imaging, and multidisciplinary senior design courses. Her research interests include the design of biomedical devices
Paper ID #12283Bioengineering Global Health: Design and Implementation of a Summer DayCamp for High School StudentsDr. Dianne Grayce Hendricks, University of Washington Dr. Dianne G. Hendricks is a Lecturer in the Department of Bioengineering at the University of Wash- ington. She earned a BS in Molecular Biology at the University of Texas at Austin and a PhD in Genetics at Duke University. Dr. Hendricks’ teaching interests at the University of Washington include develop- ing and teaching introductory and honors courses in bioengineering, tissue and protein engineering lab courses, and capstone projects. She is committed
engagement, experience, and retention within our newprogram.Our program has an introductory course (BIOE 2001) that is used to acquaint students to thebroad and varied field of bioengineering. Initially this course designed as a typical ‘survey’presentation style, where guest lecturers from a variety of backgrounds in BioE would presenttheir research to the class via a lecture-style format. The students were given examinations on thepresented material and did group final projects (written and oral portions) on a bioengineeringtopic of their choice.However, student feedback indicated that many of the lectures were too “high level,” requiringmore foundational knowledge than the students had in order to understand the presentedmaterial. The students
benefit to thestudents’ retention.4 We strongly encouraged participation since, as the name suggests, activelearning elements (worksheets, presentations, discussions, debates) are most effective whenstudents actively take part in them. As instructors, we consistently encouraged our students bothverbally and through emails to participate in class and allotted 10 percent of the final coursegrade to participation. We encouraged students who are introverted to find another way to showus that they were interacting with the material and making an effort. We designed one project toprovide some breadth, but the main focus of the course was to have students truly understand themost important concepts. In other words, rather than being able to remember
, students will participate in the Frontiers in Cancer Research discoverycourse in which TED-style talks on cancer research are delivered, followed by facilitateddiscussion. Through this course, students will (1) gain an understanding of the current themes incancer research, (2) be introduced to faculty members who mentor undergraduate researchers, Page 26.1774.3and (3) develop skills in reading and discussing scientific articles. In their second semester,students will begin a research project with a faculty mentor and continue expanding on thisproject through their time in the program or until completion (similar to typical undergraduateresearch
students’ development of effectivecommunication skills along with technical skill development. The senior capstone report oftenplays an instrumental role in this development, since it comprises both the final assessment ofstudent communication performance and also students’ most significant opportunity for activelearning of in-discipline communication skills. Peer review has been proposed as an ideal meansto provide students with much-needed feedback toward this communication learning. Peerreview also has the potential to increase students’ interpersonal communication skills andmetacognition, provided that the review activity is structured to encourage constructivecontributions and reflection[1]. The goal of this work-in-progress project is to
Technology had on theparticipants’ career paths. Over the nine years, there have been 131 undergraduate students whoparticipated. Ninety nine (76%) of these students were supported via funding from the NationalScience Foundation Research Experiences for Undergraduates program. The other 32 (24%)were supported through institutional funds. More than half of the students (56.5%) were female,26.7% of the students were from underrepresented groups, and 52.7% students without previousresearch experience. The undergraduate research program understudy is a 10-week engineeringresearch project working in research laboratories at the University or a collaborating MedicalSchool. A tiered mentoring structure was developed within the participating laboratories
, workshops, and field trips (Appendix C). Specialcare is given in selecting participants who can function in a highly independent and technicalenvironment. YSP participants are monitored closely, but encouraged to contribute to furthering Page 26.415.5research projects, and actively taking part in all aspects of the program.Program ResultsBRAIN GamesThe following charts contain questions asked of those participating in BRAIN games. Students learned alot from this activity 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% Response Rate
Society for Engineering Education, 2015 The DeFINE Program: A Clinical Immersion for Biomedical Needs Identification I. IntroductionThere is a need for biomedical engineering students to more fully engage in the problemidentification and needs-finding stages of the biomedical device design process throughexperiential learning and immersive experiences. Many publications have documented theimportance of immersion outcomes in design, technology commercialization, and overall studentlearning.Kline et al. documents eight best practices for technology commercialization projects that fosterinnovation education and fit a variety of innovation stages that might vary per student design.1Zappe et al. agrees
. The rubrics have a different number of performance indicators (or dimensions) toallow for a comprehensive tool that describes multiple facets of the outcome to be assessed. Theperformance indicators of each rubric were built in view of the performance indicators of eachengineering course in the program. Each outcome specific rubric was agreed upon the facultyand calibrated on a “senior level” of intellectual maturity since ABET’s evaluation is based onattributes achieved by students upon graduation. The assignments were designed specifically tosatisfy each dimension of the rubric and consisted in questions or problems presented to thestudents in midterms and final exams/projects. The four levels of the rubrics are: Unsatisfactory,Marginal