outcomes. Additionally,transition issues from pilot to regular course and solutions to implementation difficulties aredescribed. Future work toward continuous improvement is also considered. This work extendsand expands upon previously published conference proceedings by following students after pilotcourses, and by describing the process, challenges, and efficacy of solutions in transitioning frompilot to regular course.Introduction and BackgroundWest Virginia University (WVU) uses a common first year engineering curriculum, includingtwo consecutive introductory courses in engineering problem solving, This has become commonfirst year engineering curricula in many institutions.1-4 Of interest in this work is the secondcourse, which is taught as a
-depth understanding of users, stakeholders, and their goals. This understanding is oftensummarized in a user profile or persona and leads to deriving specific designrequirements for the new product. Another core characteristic is the iterative integrationof user feedback throughout various stages of development, beginning with the earlyconceptual stages. In this paper, we explain how we adapted techniques from user-centered design to create a learner-centered curriculum.Step 1: Understanding Clients, Stakeholders, and the ProblemThe first step in the user-centered design process requires that we understand theproblem, the client, the stakeholders, and the users13. In this particular situation, we canthink of the higher administrative bodies
pprotective rellays and systtem design. This d as a basis forpaper willl describe th he efforts pu ut forth by faaculty and stuudents to deevelop the labb. It willdescribe some of the lab procedu ures. Finallyy, it will provvide the readder with som me informatioon todevelop their t own rellay lab. Fig gure 1 – Typ pical Relay L Lab StationIntrodu uctionThe electtric power geeneration an nd delivery in
mentoring, and summer bridge programs,6, 7 to be described in thenext sections. Page 26.1300.3 (a) (b)Figure 1: (a) A side-by-side comparison showing the extent of the mismatch in the demographics of the United States adultpopulation versus those of the STEM workforce.4 (b) A pronounced increase in the fraction of minority school age-children overa twenty year period highlights the urgency of raising minority participation and performance in STEM.5 Page 26.1300.4The Role of Community Colleges in
National Council of Examinersfor Engineering and Surveying (NCEES)—a national nonprofit federation that includes theengineering and surveying licensure boards from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam,Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.1 NCEES’s Model Law and Model Rules facilitateprofessional mobility, promote uniformity of licensure processes across the U.S., and advancethe qualifications for licensure to protect the public interest.State licensure boards are composed primarily of practicing licensed professional engineers, whotypically have two to five decades of practical experience. However, most board members donot have the expertise to evaluate the details of an individual candidate’s educational credentials,as reflected in
significant part of static analysis and design was done using the tools ofGraphical Statics. Graphical Statics is based on the graphical method of adding vectors; briefly,when vectors are drawn to scale, the sum of the vectors, a resultant, can be measured on thedrawing. The roots of using graphical methods to solve engineering problems can be traced backto Leonardo da Vinci and Galileo Galilei. German engineer Karl Culmann, however, is generallyconsidered the father of graphical statics.1 Early works formalized these methods forengineering,2 and the topic is of on-going interest in teaching structural design to architecturestudents,3,4 and in emphasizing the significance of form in design to civil engineeringstudents.5,6,7The methods existed as a
used here to model environments. Students useseveral pre-made models, within which various environmental parameters can be adjusted. Students canplay with the parameters, transform the environment, and see the consequences as they run the simulation.Activity #1: Stream TablesThe first activity has students use stream tables to investigate the erosion of a streambed and the associatedgeologic features it creates. Students make observations about the erosional features that appear in thestreambed. A class discussion about their observations follows, embedded in the larger context of thecourse. This is the only activity that uses an actual stream table.Activity #2: Introduction to NetLogoThe first computer-based erosion simulation is a virtual
completion of this course, students should have the ability to: 1. Create preliminary vertical and lateral structural systems that are integrated with a comprehensive architectural design. a. Develop structural framing configurations based on Page 26.1407.5 conventional systems. b. Develop preliminary designs, integrated with studio projects, for vertical and lateral load resisting systems including preliminary sizes for slabs, beams, columns, walls and braces
. According totheir model, there are three primary influences on student outcomes: student pre-collegecharacteristics and experiences, organizational context and peer environment (Table 1). Page 26.1431.4 Table 1: Terenzini and Reason Conceptual Framework of College Impact: Primary Influences inStudent Learning (adapted from Terenzini and Reason (2005)8.Primary Influence ExamplesStudent Pre-college Characteristics Socio-demographic traitsand Experiences Academic preparation and performance Personal and
to increased self-efficacy in STEM fields and increased interest in pursuing a career in science or technology.Additionally, girls participating nationally in Tech Trek camps report large increases in comfort,enjoyment and interest in pursuing a career in programming as a result of taking core classes inmobile app development using App Inventor from MIT.1.0 Introduction The American Association of University Women (AAUW) research report ”Why SoFew? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)”[1] found thatwomen are vastly underrepresented in STEM majors and fields compared with their male peers.But “Why So Few?” also showed that those numbers can change when girls realize theirpotential in STEM at an early
, the focus shifts downthrough the survey questions. The responses on the survey did not affect the students score onthe survey. They received full credit for completing the survey.Results:The RADD results in Table 1 shows data for the past 10 years. From Fall of 2004 to Fall of 2014the results show an improvement demonstrating that as an assessment tool, RADD is working.Table 1. RADD Results. YEAR Require Stdev 3i Analysis Stdev 3k Design Drawing Sample -ments Sample 3k (Ave) Sample 3d (Ave) 3g (Ave) Size 3i (Ave) Size Size 2004-5, Fall 60.0 67.0 51.0 39.0 13 2005-6, Fall 73.0
security. She currently volunteers on the BYU red team, and is the CCDC coordinator for the school. Page 26.437.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Cyber War is not Gender War: Experiences of Creating a Productive Heterogeneous Environment in Cybersecurity ResearchAbstractWhile degree enrollments continue to see an increase in female enrollment, there remains adistinct gender gap in STEM disciplines 1. In particular, the Technology and Computing spacehave always struggled to recruit and retain women. A similar trend is seen
programs. Developing our understanding about this unique group ofstudents, while learning how to best educate and motivate them.Writing proficiency is an area that has been discussed for some time.1 Employers have indicated Page 26.1777.2that engineering technology students are unable to articulate clearly, in particular they arelacking in writing skills..2 Regardless, the work place demands the ability to convey thoughts andconcepts in writing.2 While this is the case, and is often known, academia is not consistent in thedevelopment of writing proficiency.1,3-5The authors believe that well-crafted exercises used throughout the curriculum provide
but not solarge as to invalidate the tools. Steps should be considered to educate students about potentialbias.IntroductionTeamwork is an integral part of Engineering and Engineering Education.1 Well-designed groupand team projects can help students gain valuable teaming skills, and accrediting bodies requirethese skills of engineering graduates.2,3 But teamwork is not without its problems. Social loafingand “I better do it myself, if I want an A” syndrome are part of many peoples experiences withgroup and teamwork.4 A well-designed peer evaluation process can improve the studentexperience and lead to more powerful learning outcomes.Peer evaluation can be used to foster a better team experience and to equitably recognizeindividual student’s
industries that had a great sense oftraditional values and environmental awareness, and explored Taiwan's culture through the eyesof local students. The cohort was a resounding success, with overwhelming positive studentfeedback. Overall, the SJSU GTI program has been very successful and has met the objectivesset for it. Embedding continuous assessment and improvement into this program has allowed usto adapt to changes and provide the participants with an intensive global experience.1. Purpose of the GTI ProgramIn the globally competitive 21st century, corporations have been aggressive in expandingmarkets and their workforces across the globe. In order for engineers to thrive in such anenvironment, they need to understand and prepare for this new
Satisfaction Table 4 Data collection procedures and schedules Phases Contents Duration(1) Pre-tests Demographics , computer experience, GPA Two weeks Knowledge on selected subjects through Concept Inventory Learning disposition measured through MSLQ(2) Collaborative learning Online discussion for collaborative learning Ten weeksthrough online discussion Students' Self-report on collaborative learning process Instructors
Children’s Hospital, and the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago.Dr. Sheryl Elaine Burgstahler, University of Washigton Dr. Sheryl Burgstahler founded and directs the DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) Center and the Access Technology Center. These two centers promote (1) the use of main- stream and assistive technology and other interventions to support the success of students with disabilities in postsecondary education and careers and (2) the development of facilities, computer labs, academic and administrative software, websites, multimedia, and distance learning programs that are welcoming and accessible to individuals with disabilities. The ATC focuses efforts at the UW; the DO-IT
as compared to first-year students. The lower expectation of seniorstudents suggest that engineering instructors should consider ways to engage upper level studentsin creative behaviors. Future research includes a longitudinal study to examine how creative self-concept changes in progression through the engineering curriculum.Introduction The concept of creativity has been an important research topic since the 1950’s and1960’s.1 Educators and scholars with diverse domains of expertise have studied creativity, theskills associated with creativity, and techniques to increase creativity in their respective fields.2-6However, even in the field of psychology, where the most research pertaining to the topic hasbeen produced, researchers
through the NSF sponsored Engineering Coalition of Schools for Excellence in Education and Leadership (ECSEL) program. The main effort made under the ECSEL program was centered on creating a projectdriven approach to teaching engineering design to incoming students 1 . In 1992, seventeen students participated in the pilot section of ENES 100, which was anchored around the design and construction of a swing set. Afterwards, five design projects were developed to form a design project cycle. Those projects were based on the development of a wind mill, a solar desalination still, a weighing machine, a postal scale, and a humanpowered water pump. The motivation was that the design project cycle would ensure that the projects remained fresh for
and HCI practitioners.IntroductionNumerous studies have identified reflection as an essential element in learning, development ofexpertise, and supporting motivation.[1,2,3,4] As Rodgers put it “reflection is identified as astandard toward which all teachers and students must strive” and “the cry for accomplishment insystematic, reflective thinking is clear”.[5] While reflection is generally understood as animportant part of learning, it is emerging as a critical area of scholarship in engineeringeducation.[1] Operationalizing the concept of reflection in classrooms in order to help engineeringstudents engage in reflection has been a challenge and educators are seeking ways to best addressthis issue.[6,7,8]Similar to educators in engineering
currently no easy methods tosynthesize research results, share research data, and indeed validate research studies effectively.In general, topics related to data and data sharing are largely treated as taboos in the engineeringeducation research space. Data sharing mechanisms to enable fundamental research inengineering education that has the potential to address systemic problems have not yet beenclarified. The research goal of this paper is to identify and understand patterns for data sharingmechanisms in order to inform design requirements for data sharing practices and infrastructurein engineering education.1. IntroductionThe scientific community is increasingly recognizing the necessity for sharing scientific databeyond the initial purposes
(system).The general system analysis steps to problem solving are outlined in Figure 1.The initial step is producing a diagram illustrating the system and clearly delineating all theinput/output variables (V) that affect the behavior of the system and listing all the pertinentindependent equations (E) between the variables. The difference in the number of variables andindependent equations establishes the number of degrees of freedom (DoF) in the system. TheDoF value can be used as a check point on the mathematical reasoning or formulation of theproblem. If the DoF is zero, the solution of the problem is determinate with only one solution;but if V > E, there may be several alternative solutions, which defines the problem as a designcase
six learning outcomes in more detail:1. We refrain from addressing “Describe the difference between centralized and distributed software configuration management. [Familiarity]” 4 due to the constraints posed by teaching in the first year: software configuration management is beyond the scope of programming-in-the-small.2. We achieve the same mastery level on “Demonstrate the capability to use software tools in support of the development of a software product of medium size. [Usage]” 4.3. We exceed the recommended mastery level on “Describe how available static and dynamic test tools can be integrated into the software development environment. [Familiarity]” 4 by letting students have hands-on experience with testing tools such as
recession, tuition prices are skyrocketing, student loan debt has surpassed$1 trillion, parents, who have leveraged their homes through equity loans and first loans - for thesecond time, are losing faith in the value of education, state funding is dwindling, federal grantsare shrinking, and donor dollars are smaller5”. These are the times in which we live. Change isinevitable. We can continue to do what we do, until such time when we can’t, then, we must dosomething else. This is the prevalence of the literature today.There is a growing trend toward college and university mergers. Marcus6 states “…it’s a kind ofprivate sector-style consolidation that is becoming increasingly common, not only for publicinstitutions, but also for nonprofit
of responsible science and social science writing. What is less often Page 26.1564.2addressed by even the most thoughtful researchers, however, is the available field of existingresearch options, as such; the universe of possible, credible methodological choices orevidentiary standards.1, 2 We believe that reflection on those parameters would support a morerobust inquiry into STEM education subjects, as would explicit contextualization of researchers’chosen methods or standards along societal terms: that is, attention to the question of whichsocietal conditions may determine researchers’ embrace of quantitative or qualitative methods
students are motived by their engineering mentor’s engagement in their learning and driveto seek improvement. The authors were also enthused by the desire to make a difference, makingtheir learning experience more meaningful. Design projects that address problems posed by realclients, especially those that involve third-world problems, provide that opportunity. Through anevaluation of the design curriculum the authors made recommendations to strengthen studentengagement in engineering education.1 Introduction and BackgroundContext based education methods, where students are presented with application before science,are proven to be significantly more effective than traditional approaches that teach science first,then apply it to real life.1,2 The
the German Institute ofEconomics, the country currently needs 117,000 engineers, scientists, IT experts and technicians. Page 26.337.2U.K is also faced with a chronic shortage of science graduates and especially engineers, whereseveral industries are struggling with a shortage of engineers in the area of power generation,aerospace and manufacturing. Sub-Saharan Africa alone needs 2.5 million new engineers andtechnicians if the region was to achieve the UN Millennium Development Goal of improvedaccess to clean water and sanitation [1].The number of engineering graduates enrolled in Asian countries and their population trendshows that the
terms of theundergraduate and graduate degrees they earn at colleges and universities. Yet, in spite ofsuch advances, most science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields stillremain sharply gender segregated, with men making up the majority.1 This is nowheremore evident than in engineering. According to statistics, women earn 57% ofundergraduate degrees, but only 18% of baccalaureates in engineering.2-3 These trendsare a cause for concern because occupational gender segregation fuels the wage gapbetween men and women, which perpetuates gender inequalities.4 Additionally, a dearthof women in engineering represents the potential loss of human capital that could help toadvance scientific and technological discovery.5In response to this
Jacobs Excellence in Education Award, 2002 Jacobs Innovation Grant, 2003 Distinguished Teacher Award, and 2012 Inaugural Distinguished Award for Excellence in the cate- gory Inspiration through Leadership. Moreover, he is a recipient of 2014-2015 University Distinguished Teaching Award at NYU. In 2004, he was selected for a three-year term as a Senior Faculty Fellow of NYU-SoE’s Othmer Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies. His scholarly activities have included 3 edited books, 7 chapters in edited books, 1 book review, 55 journal articles, and 109 conference papers. He has mentored 1 B.S., 16 M.S., and 4 Ph.D. thesis students; 31 undergraduate research students and 11 under- graduate senior design project teams
have access to this technology. The remainder of this paper details the approach taken and lessons learned implementing 3D printers into a firstyear engineering design course. First, implementation details including specific tools, techniques and equipment used in the labs are provided. Next, the instructional approach developed to introduce the concepts and techniques linking CAD with 3D printing is presented. Preliminary results of this effort are then discussed by presenting (1) the print log data collected throughout the semester that provides an indication of the use and success rates associated with the printers and (2) data collected from a survey designed to determine the perceived effectiveness of the system and student