Paper ID #18833Community Health Innovation through an Interprofessional CourseDr. Jacquelyn Kay Nagel, James Madison University Dr. Jacquelyn K. Nagel is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering at James Madison Uni- versity. She has eight years of diversified engineering design experience, both in academia and industry, and has experienced engineering design in a range of contexts, including product design, bio-inspired de- sign, electrical and control system design, manufacturing system design, and design for the factory floor. Dr. Nagel earned her Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Oregon State
Paper ID #17739Creating Communicative Self-Efficacy through Integrating and InnovatingEngineering Communication InstructionDr. Traci M. Nathans-Kelly, Cornell University Traci Nathans-Kelly, Ph.D., currently teaches full-time at Cornell University in the Engineering Commu- nication Program. She instructs within that program and is seated as a co-instructor for Writing Intensive courses as the engineering communication liaison in ME, BEE, CS, and AEP departments. Outside of Cornell, as a member of IEEE’s Professional Communication Society, she serves as a series editor for the Professional Engineering Communication books
Paper ID #18245On Quality Assurance Mechanisms in Engineering Education: A Case Studyof Purdue UniversityMing Li, Tsinghua University Ming LI is a postdoctor at the Institute of Education, Tsinghua University, Beijing, PRC. He received B.A. in Qingdao Agricultural University, M.Ed. in Shandong Normal University, and Doctor of Management in Beihang University. From March 2013 to June 2013, he studied in School of Engineering Education at Purdue University as a visiting scholar. He is interested in higher education administration as well as engineering education. Now his research interest focuses on the quality assurance in
Paper ID #18523Impact of Course Structure on Learning and Self-Efficacy in a Unit Opera-tions LaboratoryDr. Janie Brennan, Washington University in St. Louis Janie Brennan is a Lecturer of Energy, Environmental & Chemical Engineering at Washington University in St. Louis. She earned her Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Purdue University in 2015. Her primary focus is on the application of research-based teaching methods in chemical engineering education.Dr. Shawn E Nordell, Washington University in St. Louis Shawn E. Nordell, Ph.D. is currently Senior Associate Director of The Teaching Center at Washington University in
Paper ID #19405Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP) Programs: Multidisciplinary Projectswith Homes in Any DisciplineProf. Behnaam Aazhang, Rice University Behnaam Aazhang received his B.S. (with highest honors), M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in Electrical and Computer Engineering from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 1981, 1983, and 1986, re- spectively. From 1981 to 1985, he was a Research Assistant in the Coordinated Science Laboratory, University of Illinois. In August 1985, he joined the faculty of Rice University, Houston, Texas, where he is now the J.S. Abercrombie Professor in the Department of Electrical
), freshman students begin their studies within theirchosen major, typically taking an introductory engineering course specific to their discipline.For undecided engineering students, they have the option to start in a general engineeringprogram to help them select a major. FIT has had great success using this general engineeringmodel to improve student retention and time to graduation; however, improvement can be madein preparing students to be innovative, entrepreneurial-minded professionals. The purpose of thispaper is to describe the activities focused on exposing students to the entrepreneurial mindset andpreparing them for engineering careers. An introductory course in the General Engineeringprogram comprises both a lecture and a lab component
education is critical to thisprocess of improvement. Engineering, like other disciplines, has unique ways of thinking andknowing (habits of mind) and particular practices of teaching and learning3. These uniquepractices, called ‘signature pedagogies’, organize how future engineers are educated in theprofession.4 Lucas, Hanson and Claxton5 propose that the predominant pedagogy of engineeringdoes not align with true engineering habits of mind (EHoM). This work in progress aims todefine the surface characteristics of engineering education pedagogy by analyzing topicspresented at recent ASEE international conferences. The results of this study will inform a largerstudy which looks at potential disconnects between the way we teach engineering
Paper ID #19811Effective Approaches for Teaching STEM-literacy for All Majors: The Ex-ample of ResonanceDr. Maria E. Garlock, Princeton University Maria Garlock is an Associate Professor at Princeton University in the Department of Civil and Envi- ronmental Engineering where she is the Director of the Architecture and Engineering Program. Her scholarship is in resilient building design and in studies of the best examples of structural designs of the present and past. She has co-authored the book Felix Candela: Engineer, Builder, Structural Artist and has recently launched a MOOC titled ”The Art of Structural Engineering
could improve the ease of use of our device.”Other expressions of curiosity focused not on authentic professional development as a studentengineer, but on the opportunity to authentically adopt the identity of a college student: This course in hindsight, was one of the best decisions I made. I still remember the day I got my Rose-Hulman acceptance letter, and pretty much making up my mind that I would attend the school no matter what. When I got the initial email from Dr. Brackin about the Engineering Design course, I didn’t think of it as a “oh man starting school early means cutting into summer”, but instead “oh man, I’m going to get to experience real college in a smaller setting, and meet new people in
students graduate with an entrepreneurial mind set that enable them to play leading roles in existing organizations or create their own jobs. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Ecosystems of Entrepreneurship in Canadian Engineering Faculties: A Systematic MapThe economic turbulence of the 21st century is changing the engineering career landscape. Largefirms face great challenge in boosting the economy and creating more jobs amidst uncertaineconomical forecast. Engineers today need innovation, leadership and business skills more thanever. Engineering schools are aware of the rising demand of engineers to learn aboutentrepreneurship and entrepreneurship programs
to the recognition of the need for moresystemic change. Combined with department chair support, a diversity/inclusion initiative andthe vision of a group of faculty, a project emerged from over two years of efforts.The project uses a cross-functional, collaborative instructional model for course design andprofessional formation, called X-teams. X-teams are reshaping the core technical ECE curriculain the sophomore and junior years through pedagogical approaches that (a) promote designthinking, systems thinking, professional skills such as leadership, and inclusion; (b) contextualizecourse concepts; and (c) stimulate creative, socio-technical-minded development of ECEtechnologies. An X-team is comprised of ECE, design and engineering
Essential Teamwork and Leadership skills The engineering design process Civil Engineering Mechanical Engineering Electrical EngineeringEven though students were introduced to all types of engineering, they only did hands-on, minds-on activities on three major engineering disciplines: civil, mechanical, and electrical through acomprehensive project that combined the three.PreparationEngineering is quite a broad field so the instructor had to be very careful on how to introduce itto the students and how to make students interested in the subject as well as keep them engagedduring the program since they had to spend about 6.5 hrs every day from Monday to Friday inthe classroom. To achieve this, a balance among concepts, hands-on
Paper ID #18362Philosophy and Engineering Education; should teachers have a philosophy ofEducation?Dr. John Heywood, Trinity College-Dublin John Heywood is professorial Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College Dublin- The University of Dublin. He is a Fellow of ASEE and Life Fellow of IEEE. He has special interest in education for the professions and the role of professions in society. He is author of Engineering Education. research and develop- ment in Curriculum and Instruction. His most recent book is The Assessment of learning in Engineering Education. Practice and Policy. c American Society for
Paper ID #18454Development of the Engineering Learning Classroom Observation Tool (EL-COT)Ms. Timeri K. Tolnay, Colorado School of Mines Timeri joined Mines in November of 2015 to support the growth and Development of the Trefny Innova- tive Instruction (I) Center, and to bring her extensive background in instructional coaching to the college level. Prior to joining Mines, Timeri worked for a nationally recognized online Learning and Assessment System called ShowEvidence where she supported educational institutions in transferring their teaching, learning, and assessment practices online to create greater coherence
first person focus. The meditation session helped participants to calm their minds. In that calm and focused state of mind, they were asked to think of the activities that they would undertake, if they do not have to work to earn livelihood i.e. for sheer joy.3. The workshop faculty then explained the engineering education scenario by discussing the challenges at the global [26] and national levels [27], and the critical responsibility that today’s engineering educators have to develop workforce to tackle the challenges. The workshop faculty encouraged them to think beyond traditional teaching and research responsibilities and undertake innovative initiatives to develop engineers who can fulfill the requirements of the 21st
. However, they do so without any formal lectures or assignments and simplyout of necessity to make their implementation process easier. With that in mind, my colleaguesand I are planning on designing an intermediate Verilog class focused on many of the conceptshighlighted in the previous paragraph. Unlike the introductory computer engineering coursedescribed in this paper, the course will focus solely on Verilog. The lectures will cover Verilogsyntax, best practices, synthesis, etc. and the students must implement all of the homeworkassignments and projects in Verilog to give them more and more practice. We plan to roll out thisintermediate Verilog course in the near future and intend to study the course in a similar manneras the study described
Paper ID #18537An Intervention in Engineering Mathematics: Flipping the Differential Equa-tions ClassroomCampbell Rightmyer Bego, University of Louisville Campbell Rightmyer Bego is currently pursuing a doctoral degree in Cognitive science at the University of Louisville. She is researching STEM learning, focusing on math learning and performance. She is particularly interested in interventions and teaching methods that alleviate working memory constraints. Ms. Bego is also working with the Speed School of Engineering as a graduate research assistant, helping to implement educational interventions and organize and
Paper ID #18164Classroom Belonging and Student Performance in the Introductory Engi-neering ClassroomDr. Mark Schar, Stanford University The focus of Mark’s research can broadly be described as ”pivot thinking,” the cognitive aptitudes and abilities that encourage innovation, and the tension between design engineering and business management cognitive styles. To encourage these thinking patterns in young engineers, Mark has developed a Scenario Based Learning curriculum that attempts to blend core engineering concepts with selected business ideas. Mark is also researches empathy and mindfulness and its impact on gender
developed as a technique to use with groups[15]. In practice, “brainstorming” refers to anymethod of idea generation where groups or individuals are instructed to generate as many differentideas as possible[21]. Engineering instructors, in many cases, encourage their students to generateideas using “brainstorming,” but may not provide students with specific instruction on how toexecute it (following Osborn). Instead, the term may be used to suggest a “natural” approach tothinking of ideas, pursuing whatever comes to mind in the moment. The expectation is often thatideas should arise without using any cognitive strategy, and without any instructions on how toideate successfully. This lack of instruction often prevents novice engineers from
Paper ID #19600Engineering Faculty Perspectives on Student Mathematical MaturityMr. Brian E Faulkner, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Brian Faulkner is a graduate student at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. His interests include teaching of modeling, engineering mathematics, textbook design, and engineering epistemology.Dr. Geoffrey L Herman, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dr. Geoffrey L. Herman is a teaching assistant professor with the Deprartment of Computer Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He also has a courtesy appointment as a research assis- tant professor
practice is meant to better the world in a variety of ways.Interestingly, the design, problem solving and teamwork dimensions had the lowest amount ofoverlap with outward perspective dimension. This discovery provides an unexpected insight thatstudents do not always draw connections between learning objective outcomes as expected orplanned. Engineering design is typically conducted in a collaborative, team atmosphere; adescription that is true of the experience of the students that responded to the question analyzedfor this study. More effective teams are generally comprised of more altruistic team members; asopposed to less effective teams made up of single-minded self-motivated individuals16. Theresearchers, sharing a goal toward educating First
that provide awindow into what working life as an engineer is like. These broader initiatives should work intandem with efforts within our courses. Many of these initiatives must take place at theadministrative level to be effective 34,35. Without administrative support and relevant incentivesfor individual professors, reform efforts often fade, although a review of multiple studies alsoshows that change cannot be mandated in a top-down approach 36. Individual professors shouldreshape their courses with these issues in mind. However, it can be difficult to bring thesedifferent facets of student experience into focus, and understand what is possible within aspecific course. What guiding principles can we use in designing courses, if our goal
difficultto creatively apply to practical engineering problems. Felder and Brent confirm this intuitionwith several studies that show students need repetitive practice with consistent feedback todevelop new skills (1). Simply showing students how to solve a particular problem doesn’tguarantee they can apply these concepts on their own. With these ideas in mind, the lab morphedfrom a traditional recitation to weekly programming challenges solved in a group setting. Thelaboratory and lecture now focus on the C++ and MATLAB languages with plans to alsoincorporate Python in future semesters. This paper details the changes to the laboratory portion of the course to use problem-based learning (PBL) and just-in-time teaching (JiTT) in a collaborative
Paper ID #18207Engineering Leadership Development using an Interdisciplinary Competition-based ApproachDr. David Bayless, Ohio University Dr. Bayless is the Gerald Loehr Professor of Mechanical Engineering and the Director of Ohio Uni- versity’s Coal Research Center, part of Ohio University’s Center of Excellence in Energy and the Envi- ronment. He is also the director of the Robe Leadership Institute and director of the Center for Algal Engineering Research and Commercialization (an Ohio Third Frontier Wright Project) He is engaged in the development of energy and environmental technology such as producing algal-based
Paper ID #18996Applying to Graduate School in Engineering: A Practical GuideDr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Director for Graduate Initiatives at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she earned Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engi- neering from the University of Michigan. She has published more than two dozen peer-reviewed works related to her interests in educational technology and enhancing undergraduate education through hands
professional society they represent foremost in their minds. Theinformation different entities within this organization have access to, and the pressures they feel,inevitably influences their actions and reactions in a time of reevaluation such as the one beforeus now.At the same time, ABET operates within a broader ecosystem of engineering educationorganizations in Washington, including the professional societies, the National Academies,government agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF), and other coalition-basedengineering organizations such as the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE), theNational Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES), and the AmericanAssociation of Engineering Societies (AAES). The
Paper ID #18064Innovation Self-Efficacy: A Very Brief Measure for Engineering StudentsDr. Mark Schar, Stanford University The focus of Mark’s research can broadly be described as ”pivot thinking,” the cognitive aptitudes and abilities that encourage innovation, and the tension between design engineering and business management cognitive styles. To encourage these thinking patterns in young engineers, Mark has developed a Scenario Based Learning curriculum that attempts to blend core engineering concepts with selected business ideas. Mark is also researches empathy and mindfulness and its impact on gender participation in
Paper ID #18551Learning to Anticipate the User in Professional Engineering WorkDr. Alexandra Vinson, Northwestern University Alexandra H. Vinson is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the School of Education and Social Policy at Northwest- ern University. She received her Ph.D. in Sociology & Science Studies from the University of California, San Diego. Her research interests include professional education in medicine and STEM fields.Dr. Pryce Davis, University of Nottingham Pryce Davis is an Assistant Professor of Learning Sciences at the University of Nottingham. He received his Ph.D. in Learning Sciences from Northwestern
case studies to teach product development lifecycle including customer needidentification, concept generation, concept development, scope expansion, and business plan.The assignment for students was to develop an abstract idea into a one-page product concept andenter into an idea to product competition.A freshman introduction to engineering course [6] spreading over two semesters incorporatedKEEN learning outcomes into multiple well-defined design/build/test team projects, individualhomework assignments, active collaborative learning modules, and presentations.Entrepreneurially minded learning was introduced in a two-course sequence spanning the entirefirst year [7]. During the first semester, artificial budget requirements were built into
Paper ID #19489Re-engineering Bowling Green State University’s Construction ManagementCapstoneDr. Robert B. Austin, Bowling Green State University Dr. Austin has over 30 years of construction, engineering and facility experience in industrial, trans- portation and building projects across the full range of project delivery systems. His industry experience is multi-faceted with a strong background in civil engineering and construction management on both domestic and international projects. Having served in responsible charge of projects nationwide, he pos- sesses professional engineering licenses in several states. During