by faculty in STEM and non-STEM disciplines. Team projects result in proposed solutions for a self-chosen, context-specific instance of a global problem. Humanities & Arts Capstone (requirement): 18 credit hours including 3 credit capstone project in depth area chosen by student. Capstone may be original creative work or performance, or original research on a self-proposed question or topic. Interdisciplinary Project (requirement): 9-12 credit hours, not a course. Student teams from multiple majors address an interdisciplinary, open-ended problem at the interface of technology, society, and human need. Projects are typically for a real client at an off-campus location. Major Project (requirement): 9 credit hour
in engineering capstonecourses as they form teams, seek professional positions in the workplace, and/or make decisionsto continue on to graduate school during their last year of undergraduate studies. Further, understanding persistence of Latinx is particularly imperative given that they arethe nation’s largest minority group and among its fastest growing populations [3]. As such, thisresearch project will contribute to the national conversation on broadening participation ofLatinx. The site of this research investigation is “Border University” (BU), which serves alargely Mexican-origin population in a region of Texas with one of the lowest median incomes[4]. In particular, we focus on the senior capstone course where students work in
, her research spans education and practice, working on the integration of community research into project based learning. Her work overlaps areas of GIS mapping, global sustainable urbanism, design and creativity.Dr. Andrew N Quicksall c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Deep Observation: Geo-Spatial Mapping as a Strategy for Site-Engagement and Problem-DesignAbstractWhile project-based learning powerfully brings students into real world economic andenvironmental contexts, a subject-oriented approach to such work means that they are often ableto remain aloof from real stakeholder engagement and participation, even when working on alocal site [1]. Given
], [2] stressed the need for engineers to possessleadership abilities. The former emphasized engineering graduates “must understand theprinciples of leadership and be able to practice them in growing proportions as their careersadvance. Additionally, the latter report stated, “it is becoming increasingly recognized that it isimportant to introduce engineering activities, including team-based design projects … early inthe undergraduate experience.” Curricular approaches that engage students in team exercises, inteam design courses, and in courses that connect engineering design and solutions to real-worldproblems demonstrate the social relevance of engineering. However, the designs of theseapproaches and assessment of their effectiveness are not
practiceSeveral engineers specifically sought out this course since it provided an opportunity to doproject-based learning. April, who was the only female engineer in the course, purposelyenrolled since she wanted to do more projects instead of “theoretical stuff.” She had beendisappointed with the lack of hands-on projects in her engineering program and did not want towait until her capstone to develop project-based experience. Working in an art-based projectprovided her an opportunity to shift her focus from function to aesthetics. In addition, working inthe art space allowed engineers to do projects that they could not do in a traditional engineerspace, such as casting a molding, which were deemed as too messy for the engineering building.Humanizing
cooperative, project-based integrative and interdisciplinary learning. Although aproposed AB program in engineering was neither successful nor sustained, this institutionalsensibility is still reflected in WPI practices at the course level (e.g. [13]) as well as larger-scaleinitiatives.Since the late-1960s moment at which boundary-transgressing programs like the WPI Plan andLafayette College’s AB in Engineering (which later became a program in Engineering Studies)curriculum were launched, disciplinary boundaries have remained strong, sometimes even beingfortified on campuses. Integrative activities flourished only on the margins of traditionaldisciplines, rarely offered much institutional nourishment or light (e.g. [7]). Even at HarveyMudd, the
UniversityDr. Jason Barrett, Lawrence Technological University Assoc Prof of History and Humanities Dept Chair; Grand Challenge Scholars Program DirectorMs. Sarah Aileen Brownell, Rochester Institute of Technology (COE) Sarah Brownell is the Director of the Grand Challenges Scholars Program and a Lecturer in Design, De- velopment and Manufacturing for the Kate Gleason College of Engineering at the Rochester Institute of Technology. She works extensively with students in the multidisciplinary engineering capstone design course and other project based elective courses, incorporating human centered design, participatory devel- opment, and design for development themes. She was a co-founder of the non-profit Sustainable Organic
1writing process, reflections were assigned at the beginning and end of the courses and after everyassignment to provide opportunities to connect and apply learning across assignments andclasses.Following the junior lab courses, these students will enter the one-year senior capstone sequence,with Harold as lead instructor and Jenn continuing to work with them on writing through morehands-on methods such as writing workshops and direct feedback. The seniors spend the yearworking on projects for external sponsors, and the writing is intended for such audiences.Reflections have also been used in the senior year to continue building on their writingknowledge and to prepare them for writing beyond the university.Literature ReviewReflection has long
’ strategies in action as the basis for future studies and educational interventions. Wylieobserved and interviewed pairs of graduate and undergraduate students who worked together infour engineering research laboratories at a mid-sized public research university in the UnitedStates in 2017-2018. The labs were in the disciplines of electrical engineering, materials science(two labs), and systems engineering. The overall project compares the labs across disciplines,numbers of people in a lab, and levels of representation of students from marginalized groups inengineering (Table 1). Pseudonym Field # of group Women Underrepresented members
Paper ID #26492An Integrated Social Justice Engineering Curriculum at Loyola UniversityChicagoDr. Gail Baura, Loyola University Chicago Dr. Gail Baura is a Professor and Director of Engineering Science at Loyola University Chicago. While creating the curriculum for this new program, she embedded multi-semester projects to increase student engagement and performance. Previously, she was a Professor of Medical Devices at Keck Graduate In- stitute of Applied Life Sciences, which is one of the Claremont Colleges. She received her BS Electrical Engineering degree from Loyola Marymount University, her MS Electrical Engineering
Paper ID #27150Dr. Jason Barrett, Lawrence Technological University Assoc Prof of History and Humanities Dept Chair; Grand Challenge Scholars Program DirectorMs. Sarah Aileen Brownell, Rochester Institute of Technology Sarah Brownell is the Director of the Grand Challenges Scholars Program and a Lecturer in Design, De- velopment and Manufacturing for the Kate Gleason College of Engineering at the Rochester Institute of Technology. She works extensively with students in the multidisciplinary engineering capstone design course and other project based elective courses, incorporating human centered design, participatory devel- opment, and design for development themes. She was a co-founder of the non-profit Sustainable
company andembracing change would be seen as positive attributes. Being flexible and ready for changewould help with career progression. At Baylor University, business models have beenincorporated into capstone design projects and elective projects involving teams [26]. Operatingteams as companies and exposing students to industry procedures gives them a setting in whichto experience the work environment before graduation. Wisler of GE Aircraft Enginesrecognized this weakness and wrote about it in a paper “Engineering – What You Don’tNecessarily Learn in School [27].” He has 12 suggestions to be a successful engineer whichincludes business understanding as number one: 1. Learn to be business oriented 2. Expect
at the University of New Haven where she is currently teaching in the Tagliatela College of Engineering and coordinating a college-wide initiative, the Project to Integrate Technical Communication Habits (PITCH).Jenna Pack Sheffield, University of New Haven Jenna Sheffield holds a PhD in Rhetoric, Composition, and the Teaching of English from the University of Arizona. Sheffield is currently an Assistant Professor of English at the University of New Haven where she also directs the Writing Across the Curriculum program. Her research in composition pedagogy and theory and writing program administration has appeared in publications such as Computers and Com- position International, Computers and Composition Online
-termimpact on how students understand the societal impact of the engineering technologies they areexposed to as students. As part of the course in which the activity analyzed here took place, afinal exam was administered and it included a question that was related to the socio-technicalactivity discussed in this paper. Future analysis of this data could provide a glimpse into short-term retention of socio-technical systems thinking demonstrated by the students. Moreover,about 4-6 semesters after the students take this course, they enroll in their capstone final project. 12The project is highly technical and includes a stakeholder analysis. Getting
focuses on communication in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, design education, and gender in engineering. She was awarded a CAREER grant from the National Science Foundation to study expert teaching in capstone design courses, and is co-PI on numerous NSF grants exploring communication, design, and identity in engineering. Drawing on theories of situated learning and identity development, her work includes studies on the teaching and learning of communication, effective teaching practices in design education, the effects of differing design pedagogies on retention and motivation, the dynamics of cross-disciplinary collaboration in both academic and industry design
they are implemented, such pedagogies can directly or indirectly address both 5the chilly climate and faculty teaching style issues; by “warming” classroom climates, thecampus climate can begin to shift [22].Other ways to (in)directly address climate and faculty issues include providing challengingmaterial while also structuring in support for learning, creating hands-on research experiences(preferably with positive faculty mentoring), and developing or improving first-year seminars,capstone projects, learning communities, internships in industry, and access to women-focusedorganizations such as the Society of Women Engineers [22]. It is
institutional budget allotments to those departments.Figure 1. Customization of the Comm Lab structure to suit each institution’s needs, internalorganization, and funding mechanisms. At MIT, a central Comm Lab administration overseesdiscipline-specific Comm Labs that are embedded within each participating department in theSchool of Engineering. Each departmental Comm Lab has its own assigned manager. TheBrandeis Comm Lab is a centralized resource that serves all seven departments within theDivision of Science, with one director overseeing all operations. At Rose-Hulman, the CommLab is currently embedded within the school’s makerspace, and may in the future be expanded toserve all undergraduates in a senior capstone
WorcesterPolytechnic Institute (WPI) as a part of the school’s humanities capstone program, especiallyincluding experiences around a recent showcase of LGBTQ+-themed plays at the university.Their paper began from and substantiated the same starting point as this present study: thattheater experiences at a technical university provide a space that supports a “culture ofinclusivity.” However, their study focused primarily on showing how WPI’s theater programcontributes to such a culture and focuses on implications for liberal education, while this presentone is more provocative in stance, asking how the University Dramatic Society that I study couldinform sociotechnical practice more broadly. Furthermore, the papers diverge in methodology:while DiBiasio and