ofcollaboration technologies. Although there has been great emphasis on developing collaborationcompetencies in the engineering curriculum, empirical evidence of successful strategies fordistributed team settings is scarce. As an attempt to fill this gap this study investigates theimpact of a scalable intervention in developing virtual collaboration skills. The intervention,based on instructional scaffolds embedded with collaboration technologies, is aimed atsupporting specific processes including planning, goal setting, clarifying goals and expectations,communication, coordination and progress monitoring. A quasi-experimental design was used toevaluate the impact of the intervention on student teamwork skills. Data from 278 graduate andundergraduate
) Develop a plan of action, along with identifying potential consequences (“Plan” phase) (5) Implement the plan (“Implement” or Prototype phase) (6) Verify that the solution is working, with no unintended adverse consequences, and update as needed (“Improve” phase which may link back to the Ask, Imagine, or Plan phases) (7) Document solution to inform/train users [suggest adding a “Tell” phase for sharing results following self- or group-reflection]Additionally, the methodology for analyzing thinking proposed by Paul and Elder29 is used atthe foundational level of the capstone course, specifically with regard to the students’ finalproduct report and presentation guidelines. These eight “Elements of Thought” are
down selected teams integrate into the selected team orteams. As a consequence the teams get larger which requires that student team leadershipdevelop good task planning and management skills. A fall-out of the approach is to simplifyclass administration and grading. Second semester lectures focus on more advanced design andanalysis topics required to support over twenty (20) technically rigorous milestone reviews.Student teams are responsible for task planning required to prepare for and satisfy milestonereview entry criteria. The instructional staff role is to evaluate whether entry criteria arecompliant and exit criteria satisfied (a minimum grade of 7 for every criterion on a 0-10 ratingscale).Our 2nd semester A&D development model
reference.The records and deliverables associated with the progress of the project collected through ashared Google drive as well as personal observation during the competition period were used ascomplementary sources for the current analysis and discussion. Figure 3. Sample of the survey used to assess the learning experience of students in the SD competitionResults and DiscussionThe results of the surveys are presented according to the three phases considered in the analysis:beginning (the design and planning phase of the project), middle (development phase of theproject), and end (final phase of the project and contest week). The survey response rates were 5students, 27 students, and 22 students for the
has a single Electrical Engineering Instructor whoadvises all groups and oversees all projects. Lectures are once per week and serve the purpose ofreinforcing the design process by introducing techniques for project management, research,design process management, prototype planning, and effective presentations and writing skills.The Computer Engineering capstone course consisted of 8 projects. Three were sponsored byindustry and a fourth was a collaborative effort between the CE capstone class and the UCSBDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Marine Biology. Other projects were student defined.One of the industry sponsored projects was the CE contribution to the SpaceX Hyperloop Podcompetition described above. The technical focus of this team
Founder and Owner of Integrated Resilience, LLC, he is a former Fluor Fellow, Director of Resilience Solutions, and Secretariat of the World Economic Forum – Disaster Resource Partnership (WEF DRP). He founded and spearheaded development of Fluor’s Business Continuity and Disaster Management Services which helped Clients build resilience by mitigating risk to natural disasters. He has more than 25 years of project management experience in diverse industries, including pharmaceuticals, chemicals, oil and gas, steel mills, microelectronics, water treatment, and contingency operations. His experience in rapid deployment, planning, disaster management, and reconstruction is a culmination of his work in support of the U.S
Engineering; Requirements Development; Functional Analysis; System Design; Integration, Verification and Validation; Trade Studies and Metrics; Modeling and Simulation; Risk Management; and Technical Planning and Management.The course outcomes were specified as follows. At the completion of this course, students will be able to: 1. Explain what a system is, what systems engineering (SE) is and what is meant by the SE development process. 2. Explain the classical SE Vee diagram, and be able to elaborate on different phases of system development activities along different points of the diagram. 3. Explain what a good requirement is and provide examples of good requirements. 4. Explain what is meant by validation and verification
merely for individual students. This establishes whether the project isclear to move forward, needs intervention by organizational staff, or should end soon. Onecritical criterion for continuation is an ongoing relationship with an identified client. Policiesregarding implications of the green, yellow, red status are made known to the students.Project Course Grade Component BreakdownIn our revised and simplified approach, engineering project students are graded in three maincategories: progress against plans (30%), reporting & documentation (40%) and contribution toproject progress (30%). Progress against plans represents the same score of 0-30 assigned to allmembers of a project team by the responsible faculty member based upon MVP panel
in their first three years of study (Figure1). These workshops are envisioned as experiential learning activities based on team-basedengineering activities. The first three workshops intend to provide an introduction to (1) team-forming and building, (2) communication, and, (3) conflict management, respectively. The lastthree workshops provide reinforcement and opportunities for application in the same areas and inmultidisciplinary settings, as well as instruction in planning, role development, and collaborativeand creative problem solving. The workshops are designed based on the principle that teamworkskills are best learned by doing1, i.e., by practicing in a context that approximates common teamexperiences in engineering, while also
paper presents results to date from a dissertation study on undergraduate student cross-disciplinary teamwork. The study focuses on a team of undergraduate students from technicaland non-technical disciplines such as, engineering, management, economics, architecture, andpsychology, working together on a cross-disciplinary project. The project was primarily student-led, and was facilitated by two faculty mentors in mechanical engineering and management. Theteam spent the semester working together to develop a business plan for a makerspace oncampus that would allow students access to prototyping equipment, such as 3D printers, at littleto no cost.This study utilized a qualitative research approach, borrowing from ethnographic, narrative, andcase
University Mark E. Yerger is the Chief Technology Officer at Bucknell University where he has been a member of the merged Library and Information Technology (L&IT) division since 2009. He oversees the systems and processes that support the seamless flow of information across Bucknell including enterprise technol- ogy operations, application development, business intelligence, systems integration, telecommunications, and networking. In addition, he is also responsible for planning, assessment, project management, and budgeting across L&IT. Mr. Yerger holds an MBA and a Project Management Professional (PMP) certifi- cation and was privileged to join in the acceptance of a 2015 CIO Impact award on behalf of his team
Justice at Temple University. Her main areas of research include critical infrastructure resilience and protection, cyber and cyber-physical security, infrastructure planning and policy, and global security and international affairs.Dr. Saroj K Biswas, Temple University Saroj Biswas is a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Temple University specializing in electrical machines and power systems, multimedia tutoring, and control and optimization of dynamic systems. He has been the principle investigator of a project for the development of an intelligent tutoring shell that allows instructors create their own web-based tutoring system. His current research focuses on security of cyber-physical systems
) BatterySizingandPowerConsumption In a future offering of this course, a pilot is planned that will introduce the project at thebeginning and have a variety of topics available to the students to request. Half of the classes willbe preplanned and dictated by course objectives; however, for the other half of the classes, thestudents will choose topics that are covered in greater detail in later classes and are only presentto improve performance by first-year students on their project. A list of potential “Maker” topicscan be seen in Table 2. This is to be done instead of having a strict course schedule with alltopics planned out. The students in the class will be able to vote and request the topics that theybelieve to be the most important to learn next. In essence
the effect of its integration on theelectrical grid, and energy efficiency in systems engineering. Furthermore, the student-internswould demonstrate improvement in collaborative learning, project management, and engineeringdesign, in particular: communication, professional documentation, articulating milestones,reviewing and synthesizing relevant literature, analytic thinking, and iterative problem solvingusing “backwards design.” To accomplish this, the mentors planned to provide a combination ofparticipatory lectures introducing relevant STEM background and context with task-focusedexperiential activities that would engage multiple learning styles.Given the number of interns involved, a single project split into constituent and transitional
represent the sources of stated student outcomes. The revised course selection(except for one) represents students in the last two years in the curriculum. The associated data collection plan for each outcome, as shown below in Table 3 below, is to have at least one course in the engineering common core to ensure that all students regardless of their area of concentration, electrical engineering or mechanical engineering, are in the sample. The courses being listed below are to (1) illustrate the selection process in order to achieve the desired distribution of curriculum to be assessed, and (2)demonstrate the inclusivity of desired student population in the measurements
Education, Research and Faculty CollaborationABSTRACTIt has been long recognized that one of the most important aspect of delivering high qualitySTEM education is to provide the students with an educational experience that includes a widerange of knowledge including not only engineering, science, and mathematics but also liberalarts education such as ergonomics (operation, safety, usability), business (economics, marketing,management, planning, corporate identity), aesthetics (form, visualization, style), and social,environmental, and cultural issues. In response to this need, the School of Engineering,Mathematics and Science (SEMS) at Robert Morris University (RMU) formed a Research andOutreach Center (ROC) in the year 2010. The center activities
levels (Figure 1). While the path throughachieving the badges will be different for every student, the levels of achievement roughlyequates to the skills that would be expected for first year students (developing), second and earlythird year students (emerging), and late third year and final year students (proficient). Studentsare not expected to reach the proficient level in every one of the sub-competencies articulatedwithin the overarching eight competencies. There is room for students to determine what areasmake the most sense for their own development and career plans, allowing them to create a pathto the envisioned and desired future that fuels their desired areas of learning.Figure 1. Competency map organized by overarching competencies
case, allstudents take the discipline-relevant core courses in support of the project they are working on.The students interact as a cohort from start to finish - from general education and math tograduation. However, such an idealized plan is difficult to implement in the face of alreadyestablished pedagogy. Electrical Mechanical Engineering VIP Engineering Senior Design Senior Design Senior VIP Team Member Junior Project Technical Elective Sophomore Project
, personal, and professional development. Science education, 91(1), 36-74.10. Kinkel, D. H., & Henke, S. E. (2006). Impact of undergraduate research on academic performance, educational planning, and career development. Journal of Natural Resources & Life Sciences Education, 35(1), 194-201.11. Olson, S., & Riordan, D. G. (2012). Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Report to the President. Executive Office of the President.12. Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Benefits of undergraduate research experiences. Science (Washington), 316(5824), 548-549.AppendixSkull Fracture Biomechanics (2013)This
notable migration of e+’s direct-matriculation students out of theprogram and into discipline-specific engineering programs to three distinct shared studentmotivations: 1) students who developed a new or greater passion for a more traditional,discipline-based engineering program; 2) students who strategized acceptance to the CEASthrough the (not enrollment-limited) e+ program with the intention of transferring later to amajor they perceived as enrollment-limited; and 3) students who inadvertently arrived to the e+program thinking that it was the engineering college’s “open-option” major.Perhaps not surprisingly, the program advisor noted that many first-year students did not arrivewith a curricular plan for themselves and were slow to select
83% Final Grade 84%Table 2: Summary of direct assessment averages.8. Final remarksOffering an undergraduate course in intra-vehicle communication, with a supplemental hardwarelaboratory, has some challenges. In this paper, the author outlined the course content and a fewexamples of laboratory experiments based on Seed studio CAN shield with MCP2515 CAN BusController board and Arduino Mega 2560. The teaching methods used have proven to beefficient tools in responding successfully to the challenge of teaching an automotivecommunication course to both Electrical and Mechanical Engineering students. Additionalenhancements and improvements are planned for the laboratory experiments. This course canserve as a basis for other
benefits of implementing a sustainable and successful capstone course were also expressed as opportunities to provide critical learning experiences for our students. References 1. National Science Foundation. (2014). Investing in science, engineering, and education for the nation’s future. Strategic Plan for 2014-2018. Downloaded October 16, 2015 from: www.nsf.gov 2. National Academy of Engineering. (2008). Grand challenges for engineering. Downloaded August 30, 2015 from: www.engineeringchallenges.org 3. Besterfield-Sacre, M., Cox, M.F., Borrego, M., Beddoes, K., and Zhu, J. (2014). Changing engineering education: Views of U.S. faculty, chairs, and deans. Journal of Engineer in Education, 103(2), 193-219. 4. Saunders, K. Brumm, T
informatics.We look at a number of leading undergraduate-level health informatics majors, and we proposeengineering-oriented health informatics degree programs focused in STEM education, that can (i)complement existing health informatics programs, and (ii) directly help narrow the skills gap inhealth informatics. In the future, we plan to continue analysis of both undergraduate and graduateprograms in other informatics fields, especially in medical and healthcare, in more detail from anengineering perspective, and share results with the community.References 1. D. Cenk Erdil. How much informatics is too much for public health big data? Big Data and Analytics EdCon 2015, August 2015, Puerto Rico. 2. The open medical record system. https://openmrs.org
/System/Team Overview & Major Works for the Project: clear introduction of the project /5 2. Design Requirements & Specifications: technical goals & minimum success criteria /5 3. Trade Study & Verification Approach/plan: technical justifications /5 4. System Development: 1) Overview of system completed 2) Drawings/circuit diagrams 3) Analysis/simulation & test results 4) Bills of Materials & Budget 5) Prototype & its demonstration: what will be shown? A short movie if possible. /20 5. Conclusions: 1) Achieved &
a chance tolearn from college students which makes the atmosphere more relaxed and enjoyable for thecamp students. The detailed description of each day’s activities is presented in the followingsections.Day 1 - Introduction to NanotechnologyA specific focus of the camp was to excite the participants about the potential of nanotechnologyand discuss products and applications that incorporate nanotechnology for specific effects.Therefore, the activities on the first day were designed to serve as an introduction to the area ofnanotechnology and to develop an appreciation of the nanoscale. During the second half of theday, activities were planned around demonstrations that use ideas and concepts that high schoolstudents are most likely to have
. Identifying the challenges that students face in multidisciplinary environment willlead to the discussion on how to tackle these challenges.The results for this study help course coordinators to plan accordingly for student teamformation, project matching and creating an environment of support. Providing workshops andsupport from the faculty to guide students through this journey, peer evaluation on top of clients’evaluation and supervisors’ evaluation, and constructive feedback are examples of further actionsto be taken.Having in place a system for peer evaluation and self-evaluation to give feedback to students andsupervisors will prevent low psychological safety of the team that inhibits innovative behaviors.There are tremendous opportunities for