course. - As a focus group member co-developed six hours of course modules to address identified gaps in a content area familiar to the University program and its local industry partner(s). - Assessed course contents through at least two delivery cycles. Implementation Academic PartnersSix institutions Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Montana Tech, University of Michigan,Virginia State University, Fairfield University, and Milwaukee School of Engineering supportedthis project as an ‘Implementation Academic Partner’ and carried out the following tasks: - Used entire or partial courseware developed by this project in at least one course through at least two delivery cycles. - Evaluated the course(s) and assess the
. Leydens won the James F. Lufkin Award for the best conference paper—on the intersections between professional communication research and social jus- tice— at the 2012 International Professional Communication Conference. In 2015, he won the Ronald S. Blicq Award for Distinction in Technical Communication Education from the Professional Communica- tion Society of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). His current research focuses on rendering visible and integrating the social justice dimensions inherent in three components of the engineering curriculum—in engineering sciences, engineering design, and humanities and social science courses. That research, conducted with co-author Juan C. Lucena
-Term andSpring performance in terms of quantitative performance toward meeting each of the courseobjectives. In 2016, however, only 57% of students in the spring course met all three objectives(and 5 students met only one or none of the objectives), whereas 83% of students in the J-Termcourse met all three objectives. While this result falls just short of statistical significance for athreshold of α = 0.05 (Barnard’s test p = 0.083), it suggests a pedagogical deficiency in someaspect(s) of the Spring 2016 course (see Discussion).Analysis of Student Course Evaluations and CommentsAt the end of each term, students completed anonymous course evaluations answering multiplequestions relating to the course and to the instructor. We have analyzed the
capstone experience with industry, andexpanded teamwork and communication training / simulations planned for the capstone. Therecent addition of a major in Design and Construction Integration in the Purdue UniversitySchool of Construction Management will also provide an opportunity for multi-disciplinaryexpansion of the design-build capstone simulation. As DCI students from the CM programreceive design exposure by attending interior design or architecture studios and becomeintegrated in the capstone course in future years, a new trans-disciplinary environment willbecome available for study. References[1] J. C. Dunlap and S. Grabinger, “Preparing Students for Lifelong Learning: A Review ofInstructional
as in Europe. At those sites, we will not collect identifiable information or registrar data.We plan to identify the students that are struggling and eventually to provide interventions thathelp to increase their prospects for success.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNos. DUE-1626287 (Purdue), DUE-1626185 (Cal Poly), and DUE-1626148 (UTEP). Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those ofthe author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Wewould like to thank all the students who participated in this study. Without their time spent inthoughtful response, this work would not be
. I am thinking about how I can apply what I have learned to a large section Prof S Asst m both of undergraduates that I will be teaching next fall. Prof T Asst m mid How do you solve lengthy problems during a short class period? Prof U Prof m mid I am working with my colleagues to try to improve this course. I am feeling like I don't have to "cover" everything, but with engaged Prof V Asst f both learning, they are still learning a lot. I have already incorporated many engaged learning strategies and I amProf W Lect m mid
design cycle, focusing on both hardware and software, to createbetter solutions for healthcare. He researched hardware components to measure someform/function of the body requiring training. Moreover, he investigated software components toenable interactive visualization of real-time data of body form/function, much like a video gamefor encouraging users to make progress in their training. After conducting research on conditions,such as heart disease and stroke, and examining the treatments, i.e. exercises, he picked onemeasurement that can be used to assess the patient’s progress with an exercise and determine whichsensor(s) could appropriately measure it. Next, he developed a hardware prototype (see Figure 8)and addressed data visualization
Paper ID #21796Implementing Civil Engineering-specific Requirements for Professional Li-censureDr. Matthew Swenty P.E., Virginia Military Institute Matthew (Matt) Swenty obtained his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Civil Engineering from Missouri S&T and then worked as a bridge designer at the Missouri Department of Transportation. He obtained his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech and then worked at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center on concrete bridge research. He is currently an associate professor of Civil Engineering at the Virginia Military Institute (VMI). He teaches engineering mechanics
: The health benefits of narrative. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55(10), 1243-1254.5 Rude, S., Gortner, E. M., & Pennebaker, J. (2004). Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students. Cognition & Emotion, 18(8), 1121-1133.6 Wang, C. C., & Geale, S. K. (2015). The power of story: narrative inquiry as a methodology in nursing research. International Journal of Nursing Sciences, 2(2), 195- 198.7 Remenyi, D. (2005). Tell me a Story–A way to Knowledge. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methodology, 3(2), 133-140.8 Paulos J, 1999, Once Upon a Number – The Hidden Mathematical Logic of Stories, Allen Lane Press, The Penguin Press, London.9 Kelchtermans, G
curriculum to conformto what one may imagine to be on the FE.References [1] NCEES, “Using the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination as an outcomes assessment tool,” NCEES, Tech. Rep., 2014. [2] S. F. Barrett, J. W. Steadman, and D. L. Whitman, “Using the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination as an outcomes assessment tool,” NCEES, Tech. Rep., Feb. 2016. [3] NCEES, “Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) Mechanical CBT exam specifications,” NCEES, Tech. Rep., 2013. [4] N. Nirmalakhandan, D. Daniel, and K. White, “Use of subject-specific FE exam results in outcomes assessment,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 73–77, 2004. [5] G. Bull, M. Armstrong, and A. Biaglow, “Using the Fundamentals of Engineering exam to
12.2 Student CreativityA survey was designed and implemented before and after the course to measure the impact ofcourse participation on students’ self-perception of their creative tendencies. We utilized twoexisting surveys: the Reisman Diagnostic Creativity Assessment (RDCA) [10] and theInnovative Behavior Scales (IBS) [11]. We chose two instruments, as while the RDCA coveredmost of the course objectives, an inspection of Reisman et al. [10] indicated that the surveyconstructs had questionable reliability in prior use. Therefore, our team refined this instrumentand its constructs prior to data collection. In contrast, our team had utilized Dyer et al.’s (2008)instrument in the past, with results that had excellent reliability. Notably, the
Biomolecular Engineering. Common across all teams is a minimumtimeframe of three to five years. Teams typically become integral parts of faculty researchprograms, continually evolving with the team advisor’s research.3. The program is curricular and all participating students are graded (A-F; not P/F, S/U). VIPis not an extra- or co-curricular activity. It is a sequence of courses whose credits count towardsstudents' degree requirements, and letter grading holds students accountable for their work. Inmany ways, feedback and grading in VIP is like an evaluation in the workplace. Work isevaluated, guidance is given, and students have the opportunity to improve. The curricularstructure and the philosophy that all students can benefit from the experience
et al.’s discussion of naming, setting thecontext, and reflecting to better fit the age of our participants and their instructional context.MethodsThis study explores if evidence exists to show that K-2 students can engage in meaningfulproblem scoping while participating in introductory problem scoping activities from a STEM+Cintegration curricula.ParticipantsUsing purposeful sampling, data from six different classrooms out of 17 were selected to beanalyzed. These six classrooms (two kindergarten, two first grade, and two second grade) wereidentified based on how well the educator followed the curriculum and the amount of interactions(students to teacher and student to student) captured. All of the teachers participated in a
No solution or Simple Detailed solution solution(s) to the problem very vague solution solutionResponsibility Describes who is responsible for or To For With should be involved in the solution, (Government (The (Farmer or with reference to the With / For / To needs to fix the designers community framework problem) know best) member involvement in
with professional development and not knowing how to support thegraduate students in their pursuits. This study’s comprehensive examination of an activeadvisor’s experience with supporting graduate student development proves to be informative anduseful in determining potential next steps in the formative development of a program aimed atgraduate student professional development.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNumber 1545211.Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect
Institute of Technology. In 2012, he completed his PhD at the University of Rochester. He now focuses his efforts to further the areas of computer architecture, digital systems, cybersecurity, and computer engineering education.Dr. Joan Giblin, Wentworth Institute of TechnologyDr. Mehmet Ergezer, Wentworth Institute of Technology Mehmet Ergezer (S’06) received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical and computer engineering from Youngstown State University, Youngstown, OH, USA, in 2003 and 2006, respectively. He received the D.Eng. degree in artificial intelligence from the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USA, in May 2014. From 2003 to 2005, following his
formalized as part of communitybenefit packages agreed to by advocates of proposed telescopes and representatives from thelocal community [1]. Opposition to the observatories has existed since the 1960’s when thegovernor and legislature, enthusiastic about development, set aside land for construction.Protests, demonstrations and litigation challenging previous and proposed construction of newtelescopes in Hawai‘i have focused on environmental protection and the sites selected as beingsacred to natives. For example, controversy over choosing Maunakea for the site location of anew Thirty Meter Telescope emphasizes that this is considered the most sacred mountain of theNative Hawai‘ian religion and culture. Yet a local workforce is also highly desired
discuss here some of the benefits and challenges challenges of associated with the adoption of this technology (in a broader electric vehicle transportation context, not only related to [university]’s adoption transportation system) Quiz after Question 2 (Day Based on our discussion, please answer the following two Day 1 1) – Personal questions: a) What did you learn from today's activity? opinion about b) How did our discussion and activity change your personal electric vehicles opinion about electric vehicles? Quiz after Question 3 (Day How does the electric vehicles adoption change the Day 1 1) – Electric community's well-being? Are
social responsibility and moral decision-making,specifically in terms of engineering pedagogy.Keywords: social responsibility, embedded teams, human-centered design (HCD), engineeringeducationIntroductionSince Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) was first introduced in the 1950’s to expandorganizational bottom-lines from profit and legal considerations to issues of social impact, CSRhas grown into a global force for linking corporations with the areas in which members live andwork. Extant research has explored CSR on a broader organizational level, without necessarilyconsidering how social responsibility manifests on the team level. Thus, we contend that feelingsand understandings of responsibility experienced by students working on design
development of a host of professional, interpersonal, andpersonal skills [8]. While these programs were developed independently of Rottmann et al.’s2015 work, there is a convergence between the explicit and implicit models of leadership thatemerge from these four programs, Rottmann et al.’s model, and other recent models ofengineering leadership, as discussed further below.The four programs that serve as case studies here have curricula that were developed, inengineering leadership and more broadly, from a similar starting point: careful consideration ofthe skills and abilities required of 21st-century engineering graduates in response to calls forengineering education reform from professional engineering bodies over the preceding decade.For example
grading in the semester prior to the implementation of training versusthat of the semesters that used training. In the future, this data will be used to further modifygrading and training procedures, and data will continue to be collected and analyzed.References[1] ABET, “Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2017 - 2018,” 2016.[2] G. W. Clough, “The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century,” Washington, DC, USA, 2004.[3] P. E. Dickson, T. Dragon, and A. Lee, “Using undergraduate teaching assistants in small classes,” Proc. 2017 ACM SIGCSE Tech. Symp. Comput. Sci. Educ., pp. 165–170, 2017.[4] S. Ashton and R. S. Davies, “Using scaffolded rubrics to improve peer assessment in a MOOC writing
, TX, 2012, p. 25.1394.1-25.1394.13.[7] E. A. Erichsen and D. U. Bolliger, “Towards understanding international graduate student isolation in traditional and online environments,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 309–326, 2011.[8] J. L. Colwell, J. Whittington, and C. F. Jenks, “Writing Challenges for Graduate Students in Engineering and Technology,” in 2011 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC, 2011, p. 22.1714.1-22.1714.13.[9] S. L. Gassman, M. A. Maher, and B. E. Timmerman, “Supporting Students’ Disciplinary Writing in Engineering Education,” Int. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1270–1280, 2013.[10] A. A. Kranov, “‘It’s Not My Job To Teach Them How To Write’: Facilitating The Disciplinary
Electrical Engineering Education, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 1-14, 2006.[11] L. Jing, Z. Cheng, J. Wang and Y. Zhou, "A spiral step-by-step educational method for cultivating competent embedded system engineers to meet industry demands," IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 356-365, 2011.[12] C.-S. Lee, J.-H. Su, K.-E. Lin, J.-H. Chang and G.-H. Lin, "A project-based laboratory for learning embedded system design with industry support," IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 173-181, 2010.[13] J. W. Bruce, J. C. Harden and R. B. Reese, "Cooperative and progressive design experience," IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 83-92, 2004.[14] M. Lande and L. Leifer, "Prototyping to learn
engineeringeducation compelled them to rely on quantitative standards for accreditation. Although ABET’sEngineering Criteria 2000 (EC 2000) reforms during the mid-1990s specifically worked to moveaccreditation beyond quantitative standards, namely the old “bean counting” approach, the actualimplementation of EC 2000’s “a-k” learning outcomes at some institutions still wind up in theend affirming Seron and Silbey’s findings: the new learning outcomes were often interpreted as alist of requirements to be met, rather than the starting point for a set of institutionally-specificcriteria that would require greater use of professional judgment on the part of both programevaluators and the faculty from programs undergoing evaluation (ABET 2016; also Pool 2016).This
, Senay Purzer, Anastasia Rynearson, Cetin Biller,Kayla Carter, Jessica Rush Leeker and Terri Sanger. References[1] C. M. Cunningham, “Engineering is elementary: An engineering and technology curriculum for children,” Eng. Educ., 2007.[2] H. A. Diefes-Dux, M. Hjalmarson, T. Miller, and R. Lesh, “Model eliciting activities for engineering education,” in Models and modeling in engineering education: Designing experiences for all students, J. S. Zawojewski, H. Diefes-Dux, and K. Bowman, Eds. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2008, pp. 17–36.[3] Ş. Purzer, M. H. Goldstein, R. S. Adams, C. Xie, and S. Nourian, “An exploratory study of informed engineering design behaviors
13 13 18 11 4.5 A 2. Natural sciences 3 36 5 4.5A 3. Humanities 2 77 1 S -- 4. Social sciences 2 69 2 I -- 5. Material science 8 15 12 -- 6. Mechanics 14 12 11 13 -- 7. Experiments 3 41 3 S 3.7 8. Problem