University and Assistant Dean for Student Advancement and Program Assessment in the College of Engineering. Dr. Briedis is involved in several areas of education research including student retention, curriculum redesign, and the use of technology in the classroom. She has been involved in NSF-funded research in the areas of integration of computation in engineering curricula and in developing comprehensive strategies to retain early engineering students. She is active nationally and internationally in engineering accreditation and is a Fellow of ABET, ASEE, and AIChE.Dr. S. Patrick Walton, Michigan State University S. Patrick Walton received his B.ChE. from Georgia Tech, where he began his biomedical research career in
Paper ID #18887Forget Diversity, Our Project is DueMr. Hector Enrique Rodriguez-Simmonds, Purdue University - Engineering Education Raised in South Florida, born in Mexico. Half Colombian and half Mexican; proud MexiColombian. H´ector earned his MS in Computer Engineering and is currently pursuing a PhD in Engineering Education, both from Purdue University. His research interests are in investigating the experiences of LGBTQ+ students in engineering, tapping into critical methodologies and methods for conducting and analyzing research, and exploring embodied cognition.Mr. Nelson S. Pearson, University of Nevada, Reno
Paper ID #19103Complete Research Paper: Implementation of an Introductory Module onBiogeotechnics in a Freshman Engineering CourseDr. Jean S. Larson, Arizona State University Jean Larson has a Ph.D. in Educational Technology, postgraduate training in Computer Systems Engineer- ing, and many years of experience teaching and developing curriculum in various learning environments. She has taught technology integration and teacher training to undergraduate and graduate students at Ari- zona State University, students at the K-12 level locally and abroad, and various workshops and modules in business and industry. Dr. Larson
Empirical Study. Paper presented at the International Conference of Design Research Society.Anderson, E. (2003). A place on the corner (2nd Edition ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359-379.Brown, G. S., & Strange, C. (1981). The Relationship of Academic Major and Career Choice Status to Anxiety Among College Freshmen. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 19(3), 328-334. doi:10.1016/0001-8791(81)90067-1Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The Informed Design Teaching and Learning
Definition M Empowerment How in control a student feels about his or her own learning experience. U Usefulness How useful a student thinks course material is to them. S Success The student’s belief in their ability to do well in the course. I Interest How fun or interesting course material is to the student. C Caring Whether the student feels that course instructors are empathetic towards how they experience the courseThe constructs of the MUSIC model are geared towards course-level motivation. Collectively, they helpto tell a story about how
) -90 -135 -180 1 2 3 10 10 10 Frequency (rad/s) 1 Invivo=onalivesubject,asopposedtousingexcisedskinfortesting. 2 Boyeretal.,“Dynamicindentationonhumanskininvivo:ageingeffects.”Skin.Res.Tech.15(2009) AppendixB
1. Arduino. (2017). http://www.arduino.org/, last accessed: January 26, 2017. 2. Cardella, M. E., Wolsky, M., Paulsen, C. A., Jones, T. R. (2013). Informal Pathways to Engineering. In Proceedings of the 120 th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, GA. 3. Carnasciali, M-I., Thompson, A. E., Thomas, T. J. (2013). Factors influencing students’ choice of engineering major. In Proceedings of the 120 th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, GA. 4. Conrad, J. M., Harkins, M. S., Taylor, D. B., Mayhorn, J., Raquet, J. (2015). Prospect for Success in Engineering: Assessing Freshmen Curriculum Engagement. In Proceedings of the 7th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference. Roanoke
students’ understanding of a mathematical topic.20,21 Theexamples in engineering education target interpretation and feedback processes that takes intoaccount student cognition. Diefes-Dux et al.’s framework is on feedback in model-elicitingactivities.22 In engineering design, Beyerlein and colleagues present an assessment frameworkfor capstone design courses23 building on the assessment triangle model by Pellegrino,Chudowsky, and Glaser.18 To our knowledge, there are no assessment frameworks thatspecifically target first-year introductory engineering courses.Competencies and Learning ObjectivesHigher-level skills encompass multiple distinct components (i.e., core competencies) associatedwith each skill. Table 1 presents five competencies among a
not for profit in Kansas City, in the late 90’s. She earned her M.S. in Youth Development from the University of Nebraska and her B.S. in Family Studies at Kansas State University.Dr. Walter C. Lee, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Walter Lee is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education and the Assistant Di- rector for Research in the Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Diversity (CEED), both at Virginia Tech. His research interests include co-curricular support, student success and retention, and diversity in STEM. Lee received his Ph.D in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech, his M.S. in Industrial & Systems Engineering from Virginia Tech, and his B.S. in
. Thereflective comprehensive report challenges students to evaluate themselves against a benchmarkstudent—referred to as a "world-class" engineering student—based on the following objectives:1. Goal setting a. Setting your goal(s) i.e., major, time to graduation, GPA b. Strengthening and clarifying your commitment to your goal(s) c. Setting up a ‘Road Map’ – a plan to guide you over the next years to graduation d. Understanding the essence of engineering2. Community building a. Building relationships, and making effective use of your peers (help-seeking) b. Participating in co-curricular activities3. Academic development a. Navigating the university system, resources, and academic advising b
persist in engineering are not creative, it is by our instructionthat creativity is neglected and then phased out. Enhancing the creative skills of engineeringstudents can begin by incorporating the practices of art education, not necessarily to reconstructengineering courses, but to pepper our existing courses with material borrowed from the morecolorful side of campus.References1 Bairaktarova, D. (2016). Syllabus - Introduction to Spatial Visualization.2 O’Connor, A. J., Nemeth, C. J., & Akutsu, S. (2013). Consequences of Beliefs about theMalleability of Creativity. Creative Research Journal, 25(2), 155–162.https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.7837393 Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.4 Matusovich
• Friends 4 for Often 5 for Yes, Very Much Do the following see you as an engineer? 1 for No, Not at All • Yourself 2 for Seldom Recognition by Self • Engineering instructor(s) 3 for Sometimes 4 for Often 5 for Yes, Very Much In your opinion, to what extent are the following associated with the field of
), 139– 149. 2. Chen, X., Weko, T. (2009). Students Who Study Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) in Postsecondary Education. U.S. Department of Education, NCES 2009-161. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf 3. Casper, J., Khoury, A., Lashbaugh, K., & Ruesch, A. (2011). The sophomore year experience final report to Dr. Laura Coffin Koch, Associate Vice-Provost for Undergraduate Education. University of Minnesota 4. Hunter, M., S., Tobolowsky, B., F., Gardner, J., N., Evenbeck, S., E., Pattengale, J., A., et al (Eds.). (2010) Helping Sophomores Succeed: Understanding and Improving the Second-Year Experience, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass. 5. Holloway, B. and Reed, T. (2015) Extended
devices, an optional 4-day course on engineering of musicalinstruments, and an opportunity for students to get together and speak about their experiencesthrough guided storytelling. We will report on the results of these programs at a later date.BibliographyASEE (2014). Going the Distance: Best Practices and Strategies for Retaining Engineering,Engineering Technology, and Computing Students. https://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/college-profiles.Alon, S. (2005). Model mis-specification in assessing the impact of financial aid on academicoutcomes. Research in Higher Education, 46(1), 109–125.Alon, S., & Tienda, M. (2005). Assessing the “mismatch” hypothesis: Differences in collegegraduation rates by institutional
been an Electrical Engineering Professor. Dr. Mendoza is interested in Socioeconomi- cally Disadvantaged Engineering Students, Latino Studies in Engineering, Computer Aided/Instructional Technology in Engineering, and Entrepreneurship/Service Learning.Dr. Jacques C. Richard, Texas A&M University Dr. Richard got his Ph. D. at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 1989 & a B. S. at Boston University, 1984. He was at NASA Glenn, 1989-1995, taught at Northwestern for Fall 1995, worked at Argonne National Lab, 1996-1997, Chicago State, 1997-2002. Dr. Richard is a Sr. Lecturer & Research Associate in Aerospace Engineering @ Texas A&M since 1/03. His research is focused on computational plasma modeling using
measurement of engineering identity was accomplished using an adapted version of Godwinet al.’s (2016) measure of identity. Godwin et al. concludes that an engineering student’sengineering identity is a function of four attitudes relating to interest, performance, recognitionand agency. Interest is the student’s innate attraction to the subject material surroundingengineering, such as math, science and physics. Performance is an academic self-efficacyconstruct measuring how much a student believes in their ability to positively perform inacademically in engineering coursework. Recognition is how a student believes they arerecognized as an engineer, particularly by meaningful others such as parents or professors.Finally, agency or as Godwin et al
major. However despite a lack of connection between their identity andengineering, some students may persist in engineering based upon factors such as the desire toearn an engineer’s salary. Students with lower academic performance have been shown to persistin engineering if they identify with the engineering major or feel as if they were getting futureusefulness or enjoyment from engineering.6,10Engineering programs across the country have varying formats and matriculation processesranging from: common course(s) for First-Year Engineering (FYE), direct admittance to anengineering discipline, or programs in which all students are initially undesignated11. Studentsenrolled in common FYE were more likely to persist to the third semester than
. Based on the combina-tion of scores, Kolbe ATM determines the dominant mode(s) of operation for an individual. Kolbe TMCorporation has identified 17 distinct action combinations, or Natural Advantages , describinghow individuals navigate through a problem or process in the absence of external restrictions 11 . TMEach Natural Advantage is given an archetypal descriptor such as Researcher, System Analyst,Pioneer, or Entrepreneur. These are not job titles, but rather terms intended to evoke a mentalimage of the traits embodied within the category.We hypothesize that natural work patterns strongly affect an individual’s performance in self
assigned post-studio work, due during the followingweek.The course concluded with a large design project that combined technical course content withcreative thinking. Students were asked to design and program their own interactive game whilefulfilling a set of technical criteria. Students were also free to work individually or with a partner,and no restriction was set on the theme or type of game. This course format was offered again inspring 2016 to a much smaller class size. The spring class is offered primarily for students whodid not successfully complete the fall session, or for some legitimate reason missed the previoussession(s).Following the conclusion of semester, students were asked to provide feedback via a quantitativeand qualitative
, along with existing self-assessments of technical and communicationsskills. Additional observations of team engagement, or a lack of it, during in-class activities,beginning early in the semester, could also be compared to student feedback about teamperformance in their project status and reflective updates, which begin with Weeks 3 and 4. References [1] M. H. M. S. A. Hakanen, "Trust in Building High-Performing Teams - Conceptual Approach," Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 43-53, 2015.[2] C. L. F. Larson, Team Work. What must go right/What can go wrong, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1989.[3] N. a. B.-L. M. Van Tyne, "Ethics for the "Me
engineering careers.AcknolwedgementsWe appreciate the support of Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education and the FirstYear Engineering Honors Program for their support of this study. The views expressed by theauthors do not necessarily reflect the views of these agencies.References[1] Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-387.[2] Bennedsen, J., & Caspersen, M. (2008). Model-driven programming. In Reflections on the Teaching ofProgramming (pp. 116-129). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.[3]Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper Project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction,assessment, and
29 Project based learning 27 66* Reflections 24 36 In-class debates and/or role plays 18 20 Think-pair-share 13 21 Service-learning, community engagement, and/or LTS 10 29* Problem solving heuristics 10 9 Humanist readings 10 7 Moral exemplars 8 5 Other(s
infirst-year programs in the college and across the university. Integration was further bolstered bycohorting student participants and through the development and use of a new advising toolknown as the Golden Eagle Flight Plan (GEFP), which allows each student and his/her advisor(s)to keep track of the student’s academic progress, career development and communityengagement. The 32 FYrE students (treatment group) were compared to a concurrent, matchedControl Group (CG-2) of 33 students from the same entering class who participated in thesummer bridge program but none of the other FYrE interventions; and a historical Control Group(CG-3) with 33 students from the previous year who participated in the previous version of thesummer bridge program
) SurveyReflection Survey Week 16 39/64 students Qualtrics Online (end-semester) SurveyData Analysis Method Data analysis used in this study followed Miles et al.’s (2014) construct consisting of“data condensation, data display, and conclusions drawing/verification” activities (Chapter 1,Section 7, para. 1). According to the authors, all of these activities are part of the interactive,cyclical process of analysis. The goal of data condensation is to “sharpen, sort, focus, discard,and organize data…so that conclusions can be drawn and verified” (Miles et al., 2014, Chapter 1,Section 7, para. 2). The goal of the data display activity is “to put together organized
technical editor in the Department of Physics at the Uni- versity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She has been teaching technical communications to upper-level undergraduate physics majors since 2000, and recently developed, with S. Lance Cooper, a graduate tech- nical writing course.Prof. Andrew Michael Smith, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Andrew M. Smith, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Bioengineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). Dr. Smith received a B.S. in Chemistry in 2002 and a Ph.D. in Bioengineer- ing in 2008, both from the Georgia Institute of Technology. He trained with Professor Shuming Nie as a graduate student and Whitaker Foundation Fellow, continuing his
’ current major,mathematics progression, and overall academic progress during future terms. Additionalinterviews and follow-up with the participants will also be explored.AcknowledgementsThis paper is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1430398. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.BibliographyAlvarado, C., & Dodds, Z. (2010). Women in CS: An Evaluation of Three Promising Practices. ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Milwaukee, WI.Charney, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Sofer, W., Neigeborn, L., Colleta, S., & Nemeroff, M. (2007
that students were asked to design a Rube Goldberg machine thatconducts 90+ steps to complete a simple task. The insights they found through the use of theRube Goldberg machine will hopefully be a starting point for students to hone their design,communication, and teamwork skills such that they can design, communicate, and work onteams effectively in their Senior Capstone and beyond.References1. Javdekar, C. N., Ph, D. & College, M. C. Designing Freshman Engineering Experiences. (2001).2. Andersson, S. B., Malmqvist, J., Wedel, M. K. & Brodeur, D. B. A systematic approach to the design and implementation of design-build-test project courses. Int. Conf. Eng. Des. 1–15 (2005).3. Chlebowski, A. L., Davis, J. L. & Jr, Z
to the U.S. and during their first three semesters incollege. Only 20% of students in Wang et. al.’s study followed the Culture-shocked or 1Consistently distressed paths, exhibiting high levels of psychological distress and academicdifficulties with language and communication such as the ones mentioned above 8. The recent findings from Wang’s study challenge the common perception that all East-Asian students greatly struggle with adaptation to U.S. academic system and bring awareness tothe diversity among Chinese students enrolling in U.S. universities. They point to student’sprevious experiences, before starting college, as one of the
Annual Conference and Exposition.[3] Carberry, A. R., Lee, H.-S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self-Efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, (January), 71–79.[4] Daher, T., & Loehring, M. (2016). Shaping the Engineering Freshman Experience through active learning in a Flipped Classroom. In 123rd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition (pp. 1–10).[5] Estell, J. K., Reeping, D., & Reid, K. “Workshop - Envisioning the First-Year Engineering Body of Knowledge”, Seventh Annual First Year Engineering Experience Conference, August 2-4, 2015.[6] Everett, J. W., Morgan, J. K., Stanzione, J. F., & Mallouk, K. E. (2014). A hybrid flipped first year engineering course. In 6th First Year
. Pinnell, M., et al. Can service-learning in K-12 math and science classes affect a student’s perception of engineering and their career interests. in 2008 38th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. 2008. IEEE.25. Furco, A., Advancing Service-Learning at Research Universities. New Directions for Higher Education, 2001. 2001(114): p. 67-78.26. Conway, J.M., E.L. Amel, and D.P. Gerwien, Teaching and learning in the social context: A meta-analysis of service learning's effects on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes. Teaching of Psychology, 2009. 36(4): p. 233-245.27. Holland, D., et al., Identity and agency in cultural worlds. 1998, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ Press.28. Wortham, S., From good