when theyare recording individual responses and team responses. Before class, Mrs. J wrote rules for whatshe wanted her students to put in their notebooks. To display the notebook rules to her students,Mrs. J projects the rules with the document camera and has the students copy them exactly. Shefollows a similar structure to introduce other times students should write in their notebooks, suchas when they are copying notes about the engineering design process. When she introduces theengineering design process, she verbally tells the students to focus on the overall structure of thedesign process, and not worry about the details of copying it down.Notebook IntegrationWhen students respond to the prompts in their notebooks, Mrs. J usually has
. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa D. McNair is a Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she also serves as Director of the Center for Research in SEAD Education at the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT). Her research interests include interdisciplinary collaboration, design education, communication studies, identity theory and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include exploring disciplines as cultures, liberatory maker spaces, and a RED grant to increase pathways in ECE for the professional formation of engineers.Dr. Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is a Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she co-directs the
previouslyattended the FEMME program reported that grades in mathematics and science had improved,74% reported that the girls’ attitude(s) toward math and science class had become more positive,and 96% reported that she had expressed an interest in further STEM studies since attending theprevious summer.References[1] Sargent, J. F. (2014). The U.S. Science and Engineering Workforce: Recent, Current and Projected Employment, Wages and Unemployment. Congressional Research Service. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43061.pdf[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017). https://www.bls.gov/ accessed August 29, 2017.[3] JerseyCan, (2017). “Preparing the Children of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow, A Window into STEM Education in New Jersey”, The New
asynchronous interactions with the instructor and TAs and amongst the students. 4. Connects students’ ethics learning to engineering practice: Online learning allows students to take professionalism and ethics classes while on co-op or internship work terms at engineering firms. They are literally immersed in a professional practice and potentially experiencing ethical dilemmas on projects. Students have access to professional engineers to interview for assignments on the ethical dimensions of the Company’s work. 7. Incorporates innovative or creative educational methods: Online learning provides the environment to utilize a whole host of innovative educational method. As such, it requires creative teaching
PhD program at Texas State University and holds degrees from Texas State University (M.Ed.), and University of Texas at San Antonio (BA).Dr. Laura Rodr´ıguez Amaya, Dr. Laura Rodr´ıguez Amaya serves as research faculty at the LBJ Institute for STEM Education and Re- search. In addition she is the Co-I and Assistant Site Director of the NASA Future Aerospace-engineers and Mathematicians Academy project. Her research interests include applications of geospatial technolo- gies in issues of social justice, women in science with a focus on access and equity, and Latin America. She earned her Ph.D. in Environmental Geography in 2014 from Texas State University c American Society for
incentivized the development of modules, lessons, or class projects that have a clearhumanities-based learning objective and have the potential to reach many students. The moduledescribed here was funded for development through an internal grant, and this paper presents asummary of the module’s content, the rationale for its approach, reflections on some of the keyassumptions of the rationale, and recommendations for others wanting to implement a similarly-styled ethics assignment.Most Engineering Economy instructors would probably agree that these courses are well-suitedfor reaching large numbers of students due to their cross-disciplinary nature and are also well-suited to discussing professional ethics because of their connection to the world of
develop a notional machine in order to write programs (Khalife, 2006).Learning to program may be particularly difficult thing for many people. While humansnaturally learn language, “instructing a computer is an ‘unnatural’ activity and not at all likeinstructing a person” (Du Boulay, O’Shea, & Monk, 1999, p. 239). Often novices are capable ofreplicating examples, but struggle to fix problems or create new projects. Even if theyunderstand syntax rules and can type code, they do not seem to learn from trial and error. Papertet al. blame the inability of students, who otherwise are successful in procedural coding tasks, tolearn from experimentation is “not surprising from Piagetian work” (Papert & others, 1978, p.70), though do not explain
practices’ for student professional development and training. In addition, she is developing methodologies around hidden curriculum, academic emotions and physiology, and en- gineering makerspaces.Dr. Marialuisa Di Stefano, Utah State University Marialuisa Di Stefano is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Utah State University, advancing research projects on bilingual education in New England and in Puerto Rico. She is an education researcher and advocates for historically marginalized groups in elementary education. Her research interest lies in bridging perspectives between transnational civic education, bilingual education, and STEM education, and how such intersections may lead to a more equitable education system
, all competencies that comprise thisconceptual framework of engineering thriving were derived from existing narratives inengineering. Overall, this paper addresses the growing need for a clear definition of engineeringthriving relevant to undergraduate engineering students.While few would challenge the pursuit of thriving as a pertinent educational goal, discussions ofthriving remain largely missing in the engineering education literature. This paper was inspiredby a research project that examines the impact of non-cognitive factors on engineering studentsuccess (NSF #1626287). As part of this project, we developed a survey to measure several non-cognitive factors using existing validated instruments reported in the literature. Most non
sharedthat he did not implement this user-centric design thinking in his design project: That wasn’t in my design project. I was aware we were designing for a person, but I didn’t think it needed to be that finely ingrained into the design process. I guess, yeah, that’s one way that … what was it, difference, how people thought differently about engineering. I’ve taken that obviously like you can’t afford not to take that and adopt it to your own type of engineering because that amount of information is way too valuable.This quote is another example of how Nathan described how there are various ways of thinkingin engineering that are complementary to one another. While he acknowledged differences, in
Paper ID #21574Understanding Engineering and Technology Student Perceptions: Barriersto Study Abroad ParticipationDr. Gregg Morris Warnick, Brigham Young University Gregg M. Warnick is the Director of the Weidman Center for Global Leadership and Associate Teaching Professor of Engineering Leadership within the Ira A. Fulton College of Engineering and Technology at Brigham Young University (BYU). His research and teaching interests include leadership, global agility, globalization, project management, ethics, and manufacturing processes. Gregg has lived in numerous locations within the USA and Europe and has worked in many
andeffort expended with and without the adaptive platform. Data from our evaluation survey weretriangulated with qualitative data collected from the student focus groups and instructorinterviews, since the questions aligned. We conducted two focus groups with differentdemographic groups – 1) white males and 2) students who were not white males – to investigatepotential differences in perspective based on demographic background. The assessment analystfor the project (i.e., the first author) and an upper-level undergraduate student performed acontent analysis of the focus group data. They each independently coded the data and thendiscussed their responses to achieve consensus; thus, the focus group data were double-coded.Nonetheless, their first-time
were available when I had questions: 1 2 3 417. Staff were friendly and encouraging when I had difficulty: 1 2 3 4GENERAL18. The length of the program was 1 (Too short) 2 (Just right) 3 (Too long)19. The number of speakers was 1 (Too few) 2 (Just right) 3 (Too many)20. The number of projects was 1 (Too few) 2 (Just right) 3 (Too many)21. The number of field trips was 1 (Too few) 2 (Just right) 3 (Too many)22. The number of hours spent in class was 1 (Too few) 2 (Just right) 3 (Too many)23. The program was both educational
) the removal of a two week final project. 4. In addition to having “leaders” post presentations and procedures, the requirement for analysis assistance such as MATLAB code or Excel template was made formal.Year 3 Findings. As compared to Year 1, EOG notebook scores significantly increased similar toYear 2 (Table 4) while the perceived learning stands out as particularly low (Table 3). Whilethere appeared to be a dramatic decrease in the EEG lab report scores, a few very low scoresbrought the average down. As EEG became the last lab of the semester, a few students did notcomplete the report.Unfortunately only 14% of students responded to the SALG survey so comparing any onequestion is problematic but compared to the Year 1 almost all
competence in active tasks [12]. This study presentsthe final protocol for gathering data on how purposeful sampling is traditionally performed. Thisis part of a technology literacy research project lead by Tafur Arciniegas.MethodsInstrumentThe collected data during the doctoral research of Tafur Arciniegas was provided as this study isthe extension of her work. It consists in 118 profiles built from interviews and surveys whichprovided information related to the following sections: population characteristics, familial,educational and professional background, technical and technological development of theindividual, according to the factors established by Livneh [2] and explained in the introductorysection of this document.The data was organized
engineering careers to be acontributing factor for improvement in the retention rate for both underrepresented and FGSTEM students at Wright State University [11]. Likewise, in a 3-year long longitudinal study of18 four-year universities, Pascarella et al. [3] found that only academic (research experience,project based learning, etc.) and classroom activities have positive impact on student persistence.Interestingly, per their findings, other on-campus experience such as volunteer work,employment, and participation in inter-collegiate athletic experiences had a negative effect onFG students’ success in their academic performances.Similarly, higher education literature also reports that self-efficacy level among the FG studentsis lower compared to
having a goodunderstanding of what engineering is as a major and a field. That understanding itself variesdepending on what type of engineering program the first year student is in, and what gender theyare. The majority of participants however saw engineering as cross functional, responding thatengineers work with people, machines and technology to solve problems and help society. Thismultifaceted view is a positive sign for the freshmen engineers, as they will often have to workon projects and in areas that can span several engineering and non-engineering fields. Regardlessof major, the first year students showed a grasp of the fundamentals of engineering beingproblem solving and improving.Incoming engineering students also have largely
, focuses specifically on the person: self-esteem, one’s overall regard of the selfas a person 7 ; and self-efficacy, a confidence in one’s own ability to achieve intended results 8 . Seron,Silbey, Cech, and Rubineau 9 followed cohorts of undergraduate students from four different typesof institutions (elite private college; large, public land-grant institution; engineering-only college;and single-sex college) for four years. Through diaries and interviews, they were able to tease outhow socialization, both during team-based projects in classes and in the workforce throughinternship opportunities, leads women to develop less confidence that they will ’fit’ into the cultureof engineering 9 . Results from comparing climate surveys conducted at a
Paper ID #23529A Comparison of Learning Outcomes and Learner Satisfaction in a CADDCourse with Flexible and Rigid DeadlinesDr. Joel Peterson P.E., University of Wisconsin, River Falls Dr. Peterson is a faculty member in the Agricultural Engineering Department at the University of Wis- consin - River Falls. Dr. Peterson strives to bring the real-world lessons he learned in industry to students in the classroom. He is a registered civil engineer and teaches a variety of classes ranging from to project management to fluid mechanics.Dr. Matthew Francis Digman, University of Wisconsin, River Falls Dr. Digman received
currently focuses only on en-gineering science excluding electrical circuits, and it stresses a unique system approach to apply-ing the basic conservation and accounting laws (conservation of mass, linear momentum, etc.).The evolution of this curriculum and its efficacy for student learning have been presented in pre-vious papers [3-4].Unlike many other NSF-funded projects, this curriculum has survived long past the NSF fundingand the advocacy of the original developers. In fact, none of the original developers of the cur-riculum still teach the introductory, foundational course for the SEC – Conservation and Ac-counting Principles (ES201) – and only one of them still works at Rose-Hulman. There has beensome research on barriers and drivers for
this educational research project, game-based in-class and after-class learning activities aredeveloped to teach selected inventory control strategies to undergraduate and graduate students.Students from Supply Chain Management and System Simulation courses are targeted, who aretaught by different instructors. The activities include teaching the inventory control policies tostudents in a regular class setting, then providing an overview on a game developed on MS Excel.In the game, the lead time and customer demand variables are defined uncertain, and not given tostudents, which make the assignment an ill-structured problem. A 12-month planning andexecution period is given to students with qualitative and quantitative information about
. Poor agreement between the refrigerant-side and air-side measurementsshowed the instruments needed to be calibrated or replaced. Second, the overall heat transfer coefficient (U) for the selected operating condition wasdetermined. The data from the experiment was fed into a computer analysis program developedby an upperclassman as part of an independent study project. The program calculated the finefficiency to adjust the area of the fins to an equivalent area. The overall heat transfer coefficientwas a key input into the system model which the thermodynamic students then used to performthe optimization. 4 2
Engineering Society (AES).Dr. Jeanne Christman Ph.D., Rochester Institute of Technology Jeanne Christman is an Associate Professor in the Computer Engineering Technology Department at the Rochester Institute of Technology. Her expertise is in the area of Digital and Embedded Systems Design and her research focuses on equity in engineering education.Prof. George H. Zion, Rochester Institute of Technology George H. Zion, Ph.D. Professor & PLTW Affiliate Director Rochester Institute of Technology Dr. Zion is a Professor in the Electrical, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering Technology Department at Rochester Institute of Technology. Additionally, Zion is the Affiliate Director of RIT’s Project Lead the Way (PLTW
only did the students benefit from ourcollaboration, I learned much from the experience.Lastly, my involvement with our senior capstone design course is as part of a faculty team. I havethe ability to unpack and discuss design decisions with my more experienced, licensed colleagues.This co-teaching experience provides not only a rich learning experience for the students; I againlearn much from the process. Little do the students know how much homework I do. Senior designpushes me beyond what I know every year. Even a colleague with consulting experience reflectedthat this is the case for him as well. With a mentor (academic and/or practitioner) to vet approachesand assumptions, I think each capstone project is the ultimate learning experience
] E. Alsaadi and A. Tubaishat, "Internet of Things: Features, Challenges, and Vulnerabilities", International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Information Technology (IJACSIT), vol. 2015, no. 4, pp. 1-13, 2016.[5] E. Ronen and A. Shamir, "Extended Functionality Attacks on IoT Devices: The Case of Smart Lights," in 2016 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy, Saarbrücken, 2016.[6] D. Miessler and C. Smith, "OWASP Internet of Things Project", OWASP, 2016.[7] B. Stone-Gross et al, "Analysis of a Botnet Takeover," University of California, Santa Barbara, 2011.[8] “DNSSEC and DNS Amplification Attacks”, Microsoft.com, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/hh972393.aspx[9
that are further nested withineach of these course objectives.During the academic year in 2017, 51 engineering major students completed EngineeringMathematics during their educational experience. For the course, a student could earn up to 2000points in graded material, consisting of quizzes, problem sets, a course-wide project, andexaminations. The course was taught in four sections by three different instructors, enabling thestudent-teacher ratio to remain small at roughly 14:1. A typical class consisted of a 20-25 minuteperiod of instruction on a subject with another 30 minutes of the students working problems onthe boards (see Figure 1). The low student-teacher ratio facilitated more interaction with thestudents and a better awareness or
ENGAGE Engineering Project [6] offercourses in spatial visualization. These courses have been shown to positively impact participantspatial skills and retention in engineering programs [7], [8], [9]. A number of studies have alsoinvestigated the role of solution strategy in spatial performance. In 1991, Schultz [10] developedand tested the Spatial Strategy Questionnaire (SSQ) and used it to examine the contribution ofstrategy to variations in spatial performance on a number of spatial tasks including mentalrotation. This study found a significant contribution of strategy to performance in mentalrotation higher performance on the MRT being associated with the use of a strategy involving“moving the object” and avoidance of a strategy of the use of
in our FreshmanEngineering program. The objective of the project is to see if the engineering students will alsodevelop their deeper learning and cycle of questioning and reflecting. In addition, we would liketo know if the process helps them developing self awareness in their learning practices and if thishelps them be more successful in their growth as engineers.As instructors, these bring us new challenges. Generally, students tend to repeat what theymostly did in their classes: memorize and repeat what they know well to achieve good grades. Inmost classes, tests are also designed around such learning practices. However, there aren’t manyways for students to communicate their learning methods, their thoughts, and their reflection onhow
engineers as indicated by thepost-program survey and focus group results. In addition to strong successes in the acceleratedmath curriculum, the lab activities and design projects in Introduction to Engineering were wellreceived by students and allowed them to explore the major fields of engineering, increase theirknowledge of specific engineering topics and disciplines, as well as understand a variety of jobfunctions in an engineering career. The program has also shown to provide context tofundamental physics and math concepts—a strategy that has been proven to increase studentmotivation and persistence, especially during the potential struggle through the first two years oftheir engineering studies.Several key findings emerged from the focus
measures, includingthe increased number of study abroad programs [4]. Study abroad programs can take a number ofdifferent formats including short-term faculty led programs (usually ranging from 2-6 weeks),semester long exchange programs, international co-op or research experiences and service-learning projects [5]. Informal discussions with students who have participated in study abroadopportunities have revealed that these students’ outlook on the world was changed and theirability to be more accepting of different cultures was enhanced [6]. Although evidence showsstudents that participate in longer-duration programs achieve better global competency outcomes[7], the IIE open doors report for 2017 shows that 60% of students studying abroad