groups with noviceengineers. Career history interviews of experienced engineering leaders, interspersed with guidedreflection, provided us with an interesting way to access implicit leadership learning over thecourse of participants’ three-to-four decade career histories [9, 54, 55]. It allowed us to askquestions about career transitions—something most engineers have a relatively easy timerecalling—with follow up reflection questions about the leadership insights they gained along theway—something many of us struggle to define, particularly busy, task-oriented professionalsfacing pressure to complete projects in time and on budget.When we asked direct questions about how participants learned to lead, most of them said one oftwo things; either
discipline-specific tasks within their team. 3. Other Disciplines & Industry: CM or Architecture students collaborating with other disciplines and/or industry representatives.Table 2: Qualitative Analysis of Student Experience and Assessment Instruments Used Domain Dimensions/ Supporting Details Researcher Factor Notes Instruments 1. Summative 1. Test (no further details) (3A); reflection after team 1N Arch that assessment project (10A); capstone (8A), final project (5A,N); final involves CM 2. Formative reviews from industry
rubric levels couldclearly be debated; perhaps all are merely reflecting level 1 of the CEBOK3 rubric. The SEaffect items in the survey do not appear to directly measure the elements in the sustainabilityaffective rubric in the CEBOK3. Self-efficacy items reflect students’ confidence that they haveknowledge and abilities related to sustainable engineering; as such, they are somewhat a self-assessment of the cognitive domain outcomes (e.g. identify is cognitive level 1, understandingreflects comprehension or cognitive level 2).Supporting data from the College of Engineering’s graduating senior survey has also beenincluded. The College-wide survey asks CE students to rate the importance of an “ability toapply the principles of sustainability to
units responsible for implementing the IMPACT program.This partnership recognized that student-centered learning incorporates complex engagementswith information7.The overarching goals of IMPACT are to: 1. Refocus the campus culture on student-centered pedagogy and student success 2. Increase student engagement, competence, and learning gains 3. Focus course transformation on effective research-based pedagogies 4. Reflect, assess, and share IMPACT results to benefit future courses, students, and institutional cultureThe IMPACT program has been demonstrably effective in improving attainment of course-specific learning outcomes and improved degree completion, persistence, and graduation rates8.A recent external review of
interview. Furthermore, because the author had developed a close workingrelationship with each of these students, a significant impact from the “Hawthorne effect”would be expected and these results should be interpreted with this in mind7. In otherwords, the responses of the alumni is likely biased by the personal relationship with theauthor, and therefore the results reflect a combination of both the views of the alumni onmastery learning as well as the views of the alumni on the author (i.e., some alumni mayseek to provide a “positive” response in hopes of “pleasing” the author).Of the ten alumni: 1) seven were male and three were female; 2) the ages ranged from 22to 26 years of age; 3) all were employed in the practice of engineering; and 4) all
in the Pavlis Honors College at Michigan Techno- logical University. She holds a PhD from Indiana University in English (2013). Her work has appeared in Victorian Periodicals Review, The Lion and the Unicorn, and The Cambridge Companion to Gilbert and Sullivan. In addition to her research on Victorian humor, she conducts higher education research and scholarship on issues of inclusion, reflection, and innovation.Dr. Karla Saari Kitalong, Michigan Technological University Karla Saari Kitalong is Professor of Humanities at Michigan Technological University and director of the program in Scientific and Technical Communication. Her research and teaching interests are situated at the intersections of visual rhetoric
topics, which would be reflected in first-semester mathperformance. The goal was to bring RESP students’ ability to transfer math knowledge to thelevel of other incoming students, who enter with higher levels of math exposure.After RESP participants complete the bridge program, those who choose to continue in STEMmust take first and second-semester calculus during the regular school year for course credit inorder to meet the math requirements of all STEM majors at Rice. Alternatively, students with theappropriate AP credits are not required to take first-semester calculus, though the programencourages participants to take the class regardless.The Current StudyThe current study was designed to explore whether RESP successfully increased
Advisory Board, we identified aset of topics for mentor training related to facilitating engineering activities. We organized thetopics into three modules: Engineering Design; Engaging Students in Engineering; and FosteringPositive Collaborations in Teams. For each of these three modules, we created pre-workassignments that consisted of a combination of pre-reading (text we created to summarizerelevant research literature), short videos, and on-line quizzes. The pre-work assignments weresent to the mentors in May 2018. We also created Tip Sheets to reflect (1) the topics emphasizedin the pre-work assignments and (2) topics specific to each specific curriculum module.Next StepsAt this time, we are analyzing data collected during the Summer 2018
, 2. Collaboration, communication and teamwork, 3. Planning and “future self”.Further in-depth analysis is continuing, including analysis of the observational notes. An important outcome of the preliminary data analysis is some changes in the campactivities. This includes shorter presentations, emphasizing the engineering design process, anda follow-up hands-on activity closely connected to the presentation ending with a “reflection”session (theme 1). The “reflection” session after each activity would be where campers coulddiscuss why a design or approach worked or failed, like in a real engineering environment. Wefeel that this would contribute towards creating an engineering identity in the participants andthat this will lead us to rich
for successfulcompletion of the Engineering pre-major. To enter the Engineering major, students must receivea C or better in core courses and achieve certain GPAs to allow entrance into enrollment-controlled majors. The intention is that this academic support and cohort building will increasethe retention of second-year Engineering students, particularly those at Penn State regionalcampuses who expect to transfer to the Penn State University Park (flagship) campus (2+2students). Jump Start participants spend the month of May at the Penn State University Parkcampus before the sophomore year at their regional campus. Many undergraduate students enterthe second year with an academic performance that reflects the “sophomore slump
whichthey were given the opportunity to come to Purdue University to engage in hands-on projectswith CISTAR researchers and to create content for their classrooms. They implemented theselessons in their classrooms when they returned to school in the fall, revised their lessons andsubmitted reflections on the implementation back to the program leaders. While on campus, theteachers attended professional development sessions including workshops about engineeringdesign, presentations about engineering majors and careers, and discussions about genderdynamics and STEM. Some had the opportunity to help Graduate Fellows with experiments atArgonne National Labs and all the teachers visited an industry partner to learn more aboutengineering careers.Seven
engineering education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 WIP: Epistemologies and Discourse Analysis for Transdisciplinary Capstone Projects in a Digital Media ProgramAbstract: This work in progress explores the epistemologies and discourse used byundergraduate students at the transdisciplinary intersection of engineering and the arts. Ourresearch questions are focused on the kinds of knowledge that students value, use, and identifywithin the context of an interdisciplinary digital media program, and exploring how theirlanguage reflects this. Our theoretical framework for analyzing epistemology draws uponqualitative work in STEM epistemology [1]–[3], domain specificity [4], [5
with graphical communication skills [2, 3].The main problem with this sketching deficiency for engineering students is the impact on thelearned design process. This problem can manifest in several ways. For one, a correlationbetween freehand sketching and regulated thinking reflects students’ understanding of anunderlying conceptual structure [4]. This link is especially important for engineers, as complexsystems often must be sketched in order to offload working memory and sketching is a standardcommunication tool. With sketch interface systems, less emphasis is placed on the tool, andmore emphasis is placed on the fundamentals of learning. Tools change over time, but thefundamentals do not. Our goal is to produce engineers who understand
paths for each team’s device. Workshopswere allocated for team discussions and group work. Guest lecturers and a field trip to a localmedical device start-up company were incorporated to illustrate real-life applications of theconcepts presented in class. At several points in the 6-week course, students were asked to reflecton the talks or activities to evaluate what they knew before, what they learned, what they foundinteresting, and what they hoped to learn next [2]. This process of self-reflection and evaluationnot only helped students identify topics they had learned but also determined what they wantedto continue studying. These reflections also helped instructors identify how to improve thelessons and better explain the theory to the
velocity and location of moving objects. Finally, students utilizedvarious modules in the lab to integrate graphical user interfaces into their labs and display datagraphically in real time. Students selected as a final project to develop a “cloud in the bottle”experiment in which they pressurized a bottle that contained some water and then measured thepressure and the reflectivity of the “cloud” that developed once the pressure was rapidly reduced. Table I. The stated objectives of the Python Programming class for pre-service teachers. An appreciation for the enabling role of computers and computational thinking in STEM applications. Operational familiarity with elementary Python programming concepts: program control flow, basic and collection
academia after a 22-year engineering career in industry. During his career, Dr. Hamrick served in a broad range of positions in- cluding design, product development, tool and die, manufacturing, sales, and management. His teaching style brings practical, innovative, experience-based learning to the classroom, where hands-on projects that reflect real-world applications are valued by students. His teaching interests include active learning, robotics, and study abroad.Dr. Lizzie Santiago, West Virginia University Lizzie Y. Santiago, Ph.D., is a teaching assistant professor for the freshman engineering program in the Benjamin M. Statler College of Engineering and Mineral Resources. She holds a Ph.D. in chemical
-represented minorities (URMs) inengineering education.However, despite numerous calls to diversify engineering [4], [5] and the initiation of thesepolicies and programs, there is still a lack of diversity in the proportion of engineering bachelor’sdegrees awarded to people of color that is then reflected in the profession [6]. The representationof minorities among engineering graduates is not keeping pace with the changing demographiclandscape of the general population or undergraduate population of the 21st century. Themajority of undergraduate engineering degrees in the U.S. are awarded to students who identifyas White. In 2015, White students received 65% of the engineering Bachelor’s degrees, Asianstudents over 13%, and Hispanic students nearly
graduates.The Needs of IndustryIn order to maintain a strong focus on industry needs, both RCBC and RU have engaged industrypartners in skills inventory activities that have identified the most important non-technical andtechnical skills. These identified skills were then used as the basis for the new degree programs,with appropriate competencies strongly linked to the course and program outcomes.This important information was gathered through activities such as a technology conference inwhich 59 participants, including academic and industry partners, discussed the critical skills andcompetencies that are needed in industry and should be reflected in the new MET curriculum.Additionally, the Principal Investigator and Co-Principal Investigator have
related to an ability toidentify, formulate, and solve electrical engineering problems, which students have 50.00%‘strongly agree’ and 39.30% ‘agree’ of statement. Question 2 is “I understand fundamentalbuilding blocks to design a memory, control unit, processor system of computer, alighted to anability to design electrical systems, components, or processes to meet desired needs, reflects at7.14% of disagree. It is because that this class has no lab sessions associated with it. Studentshave no opportunity to perform lab and course project. Moreover, in comparison with theinstructor’s previous experience teaching this course with a traditional project-based method (i.e.no student-centered and no back-and-forth module for reflection and adjustments
intensive course for our discipline, and the students satisfy this requirementby writing ten 500-word essays on a variety of design-related topics, including the ancillarytopics listed above. The student increase in understanding and incorporation of these ancillarytopics into their design is partially reflected in the upward-trending average score for the writingintensive assignments, which went from a mid-B (86) in the 2016 course offering to a high-B(89) or low-A (91) in the 2017 and 2018 course offerings.Figure 1. Enhanced Structure and Functionality of TAMUK Chemical Engineering CapstoneDesign ExperiencePerformance of Student Teams in Capstone DesignTable 1 presents some of the factors that may be unique to Hispanics or other
implementation of UDL focuses on integrating the three principles across four criticalinstructional elements: Clear Goals, Intentional Planning for Learner Variability, FlexibleMethods and Materials, and Timely Progress Monitoring [5]. These critical elements areimplemented using an instructional design model that includes five steps: (1) Establish ClearOutcomes, (2) Anticipate Learner Variability, (3) Establish Clear Assessment and MeasurementPlans, (4) Design the Instructional Experience, and (5) Reflect and Develop NewUnderstandings. UDL makes use of a variety of technology-enhanced, evidence-based, strategiesand instructional resources to enhance instruction for all students.Preliminary Outcomes of RET and Train the Trainer Model of SupportsEarly
transition of developingan employed engineer persona. This shift in identity is reflected in writing as a student adjuststo the genre of the workplace and adapts to that workplace’s cultural engineering identity. Thisshift in writer identity creation can be compounded by the lack of practical writing help intechnical communication books (Wolfe, 2009, 2011). Wolfe (2011) notes that technicalcommunication books have shifted away from writing practice assignments to focus more onthe overall written product than on how to create the product over the years and assuming moreof a humanities bias in presentation of writing practices. There are elements of the written engineering work that may not become evident in engineering courses or in a
), where students are presented with a set of options to select theappropriate response. The responses of the students to the questions capture the level of awarenessand reflection on ethics. The final eight questions are designed to measure the level of interest ofengineering students on ethics.The concept questions were derived from the textbook by Barry and Seebauer13, and the shortcases used in the questionnaire were adapted from a list of cases published by the NationalAcademy of Engineers (NAE) (2014), National Society of Professional Engineers (2014), and theVanderbilt University Center for Ethics (2014). The questions were reviewed and endorsed by anexternal subject experts representing industry and academia who served as project
arbitrarily shaped/customized antennas, propagation in bentwaveguides, reflections/scattering of waves from discontinuities, etc. Examples of some of the (a) (b) (c) (d) Fig. 3. Some of the 3D visualizations developed. (a) Right-hand rule. (b) A rotating vector field and its Curl calculation. (c) Stoke’s Theorem representation and Electrostatic field of a dipole (d).visualizations that were developed are presented in Fig. 3. Specifically, Fig. 3(a) demonstratesthe right-hand rule for cross product operations, Fig. 3(b) illustrates the curl of a vector field, Fig.3(c) provides an interactive
that the primary focus for us is getting [User] to participate, rather than getting the device to do the job. We were going in with the attitude of we need to hit XYZ, and then we're going to need to move an object from point A to point B at X velocity… whereas their focus is much less can you build something that works, so much as it is can you help [User]? Which retrospectively, duh, but at the time it was remarkable for me to hear that from the parent.In other words, the perspectives of the user and associated individuals during this initial meetingwere surprising enough for Team C that they prompted reflection about how engineering’straditional focus on the more technical aspects of solution concepts may have
event (Dec 2018) to which all mentorsand mentees were required to attend. This event aimed to serve as a physical check-in with programparticipants, an opportunity to obtain feedback on the pilot program, and make necessary changes for theSpring semester as needed. Mentors and mentees were invited to revisit their initial goals stated in Oct2018. An interactive exercise guided mentors and mentees through a series of peer-to-peer reflections: - Reflect on the role you’ve played thus far. What has worked for you in your mentorship relationship? - Reflect on the role you’ve played thus far. What hasn’t worked for you in your mentorship relationship
.” [2] In undergraduate education this is reflected inthe approach to courses and research in engineering education, to the point it can bereferred to as the ‘design process’ rather than the ‘research process.’ Engineeringpractitioners find and use a variety of academic and technical information sources in theirwork and as early as their 1st year, when engineering students, by nature of their chosenpath, deviate from their peers in their information seeking behavior.There is a well-established body of literature around the information seeking behaviors ofprofessional engineers. Professional engineers need to find highly reliable, and deeplytechnical information to successfully make critical decisions [3]. Allard, Levine, &Tenopir identify
technical communication is included in capstonedesign since teams try to convince the client that they have the best design; since all of the teamswork on the same project it ends up being somewhat competitive. Persuasive communication tonon-technical audiences is largely absent. I believe modifications could be made to try to helpstudents reach level 1, but reaching level 2 would be more difficult.Rose-Hulman. We do not have concerns about fulfilling this in our program. Level 1 is acommon theme in the lessons both within our department and institute-wide. We’re optimisticthe students could effectively reflect on this, but we do not ask them to do so, at least in ourdepartment. The students work hard at level 2 in multiple points in our curriculum
Reflected on the source of Applied divergent- Applied an ideation Thinking component of work creativity (nurture vs. convergent thinking technique to generate creatively nature) process to converge on a solutions (Ask-Ask-Ask (TC) solution method, Fishbone Diagram or Mind Mapping method) Made an argument for Provided a non-technical Clearly stated a value Provided a clear path to
to augment physical models, as well as laboratory and in-field experimentation. Thisoverview provides context for the pedagogical approach discussed in this paper which combinesproject-based learning and large-scale laboratory experimentation. Based upon a review ofpublished research related to structural steel design instruction, there have been no similar steeldesign courses which use this teaching approach to expose students to the lateral load resistingframe systems common in seismic areas.Project-based LearningPast engineering pedagogy research has shown that incorporating a project-based approach in astructural steel course, that reflects a task similar to that in industry, is more effective than thetraditional lecture approach [2-3