Paper ID #25639STEM Servingness at Hispanic Serving InstitutionsDr. Vignesh Subbian, The University of Arizona Vignesh Subbian is an Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Systems and Industrial Engineer- ing, member of the BIO5 Institute, and a Distinguished Fellow of the Center for University Education Scholarship at the University of Arizona. His professional areas of interest include medical informatics, healthcare systems engineering, and broadening participation in engineering and computing. Subbian’s educational research is focused on ethical decision-making and formation of identities in engineering.Dr
same time as the second capstone designcourse in which the students continue assessing the feasibility of their design projects, developtheir functional design specifications and work toward system-level designs. Thus, the deviceevaluation course complements the design process topics with those of regulation and deviceevaluation and allows for course assignments specific to the students’ design projects. Thecourse is offered two quarters after the Professional Topics in Biomedical Engineering courseand builds upon other professional BME topics such as intellectual property, engineeringstandards, design for manufacturing, healthcare economics, globalization of medical devices,ethics in medical device development, documentation, and user
Appendix B.On the first day of class (for undergraduates) or before the first session (for high schoolstudents), this survey was distributed and collected by a sociology graduate student, so thatrespondents would not feel that their answers would prejudice the professor towards them oneway or another. After removing unique identifiers from the survey, the engineering professorsgraded them. Each professor was responsible for the same questions at Time 1 (before thecourse) and Time 2 (after the course) so as to maintain as much uniformity in grading aspossible. No grade was attached to the survey, as per ethical guidelines, but students were told to“do their best.”Research Questions:Thus, our research questions include: i) what is the knowledge
trigonometry, appropriate to the student outcomes and the discipline; 2. Design topics such as those related to industry and engineering codes and standards. 3. Topics related to professional responsibilities, ethical responsibilities, respect for diversity, and quality and continuous improvement; 4. Physical or natural science content of the curriculum appropriate to the discipline and must include laboratory experiences. 5. At least one-third of the total credit hours for the curriculum but no more than two-thirds of the total credit hours for the curriculum must be technical in nature. 6. A capstone or integrating experience
. Students expected to gain confidence, skills, and relationshipsthrough the program.All students expressed an interest in pursuing a career in STEM and hoped to use thisprogram as a way to help them refine what they wanted to do for graduate school.Students reported an increase in knowledge about ethical research conduct, graduateeducation at UNL, and how to apply for graduate school. Other skills students gained werecommunication skills and interdisciplinary work. Students felt most strongly they gained anability to complete research independently. They also felt mostly satisfied with mentorinteractions and the social events during the REU. 4
concepts and introduced later conceptsthrough an interactive discussion around a case-study. The examples came from readingsavailable in the back of the textbook in the section titled “Practical Aspects of Biomaterials”mixed with related current events. Examples included: material design considerations, regulatoryconstraints, and ethical dilemmas (i.e those surrounding failed implants). An overview waspresented in the first 10 min of the case-study session. For the next 20-30 minutes studentsworked in groups on a worksheet while the instructors and TAs circulated around the room. Thelast 30-40 min was used to report out the groups’ findings. With such a large class, the worksheetquestions were either divided between groups in the class or during
instructing courses in industrial management, financial management, computer technology, and environmental technology, as well as leading seminars in the uni- versity’s general education program. Prior to academia, Mr. Hilgarth was employed as as engineer in the aerospace industry in laboratory and flight test development, facilities management, and as a manager in quality assurance. He has contributed papers on management, ground-test laboratory and flight test facilities, and ethics to several technical and professional organizations. In education, he has served as a consultant and curriculum developer to the Ohio Board of Higher Education and the Ohio Department of Education. He holds an M.S. in engineering management
memorized). Therefore, the approach of maximizing partial credit based onmemorizing a few problems is counter to the goals of an engineering education. Furthermore, itcan be said that the current partial credit grading model rewards students for pretending that theyknow how to solve a problem, even when they don’t. This means our grading model ispromoting behavior that is explicitly unethical for professional engineers, according to theNational Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Code of Ethics for Engineers [7] (paragraphsII.5.a and III.1.a).A second practice affecting learning is the copying of homework solutions from onlineresources. Collaboration on homework has occurred at some level since graded homework wasintroduced, but the practice
research.Different ways of thinking facilitate different strategies and subsequent actions to innovate. Thestudy uses the Sustainability Education Framework for Teachers (Warren, Archambault, &Foley, 2014) that embraces four ways of thinking including futures, values, systems, andstrategic thinking to address complex educational challenges.Futures thinking focuses on working to address tomorrow’s problems today with anticipatoryapproaches to understand and prepare for future changes, problems, and solutions (Warren et al.,2014). Values thinking is about recognizing the concepts of ethics, equity, and social justice(Warren et al., 2014). It involves understanding these concepts in the context of varying culturesand accordingly making decisions. Systems
which students miss critical opportunities to build theirprofessional portfolio.For the purposes of this work, and in agreement with current research on the topic [17, 18, 19], theauthors will use the list of competencies described in items d-j of ABET’s criterion 3 as a definitionof professional skills. These competencies are shown below d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility g) an ability to communicate effectively h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal context i) a recognition of the need
in a team (82.9%), written communication skills (80.3%),leadership (72.6%), and strong work ethics (68.4%), were the top five attributes out of a total oftwenty attributes they want to see on their graduates resume. These attributes are general innature and not very specific to any field of study. Analytical/quantitative skill, initiatives, andverbal communication skills were tied at 67.5%. In addition, the top two attributes that have thehighest influence factors among 12 were ‘Has completed an internship with your organization(4.6/5)’ and ‘Has internship experience in your industry’of attributes (4.4/5). Attribute ‘Major’(3.8/5) was the third, 3.0 or above GPA (3.4/5) was the third, and the last attribute ‘Has studiedabroad’ (2.2/5) in
connect to the local clean tech energy start up community.3.4 Incorporating the NEET Ways of Thinking --- cross-school initiativesA major effort of the current school year is building bridges to other schools within MIT.NEET has identified resource experts from across the Institute to help develop pilot modules for theNEET Ways of Thinking3. This is detailed in Table 1 below. Work has begun on four of the Ways ofThinking --- Self-learning, Personal Skills (ethics), Critical Thinking and Creative Thinking (see Figure1 below), with the goal of piloting them in the NEET seminars and projects in 2019-20 and beyond.Figure 1: Implementing the NEET Ways of Thinking in Threads with Cross-School PartnersWe started with a Self-learning module that was
.) (c) Ability to design a system, • The system and/or process design consideration component, or process to meet based on the P3 (Planet, Prosperity, and People) desired needs within realistic (Fig. 1) constraints such as economic, • Relation of challenge to the P3 environmental, social, political, • Research activities that promote and incorporate ethical, health and safety, sustainability principles. manufacturability, and sustainability (d) Ability to function on • Most engineering programs have little or no multidisciplinary teams opportunities for students to work with students
• Hands-on activities of the class such as the second (bridge design) projectMore than 80% of the students had the hands-on activity as their first choice and the team workingaspect of the class as their second choice or vice versa. To focus our study on the questions thathad more variability in the responses, we eliminated these two questions (i.e., hands-on activitiesand teamwork) and re-ranked the other 5 questions: • Orthographic drawing (Visualization) • Sustainability and ethics • Term Project (Entrepreneurship, creativity, and customer interaction) • Traditional physics, math, and mechanics • Communication (Writing and presenting)We studied the relationship between the students’ personality types and their interests in the above5
of collaborative design and construction experiences [18]. Theseprevious initiatives have identified benefits to the collaborative approach related to relevance ofprofession, increased project success, improved communication, and better awareness of theAEC disciplines.Despite the benefits, attempts to implement and maintain cross-disciplinary collaborationoftentimes falls short due to barriers related to communication, cultural divide, work ethic,course structure, and differing academic motivations [6, 10-12, 14-17]. Studies have indicatedlonger rather than shorter learning experiences are necessary to achieve the intended success ofcross-disciplinary approaches [12, 19]. Implementing such invasive approaches may not be anoption for many
introductory course to befollowed with open-ended learning on a topic of personal interest is an optimum strategyfor meeting the needs of adult learners.”With regard to simultaneously supporting of learning “engineering skills” and“professional skills” (i.e., ABET student outcomes)10, all ten alumni agreed that skillsfrom “both-sets” were included successfully in the course. Specific skills mentioned bythe majority of alumni, included: 1) application of math, science, engineering; 2) analysisof data; 3) multidisciplinary teams (from the lab portion of the course); 4) professionaland ethical responsibility; 5) effective oral and written communication; 6) recognition ofneed for and ability to engage in life-long learning; and 7) knowledge of
), pp.222- 233.[11] T. Peck, S. Seinfeld, S. Aglioti and M. Slater, "Putting yourself in the skin of a black avatar reduces implicit racial bias", Consciousness and Cognition, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 779- 787, 2013. Available: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.04.016.[12] H. Farmer and L. Maister, "Putting Ourselves in Another’s Skin: Using the Plasticity of Self-Perception to Enhance Empathy and Decrease Prejudice", Social Justice Research, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 323-354, 2017. Available: 10.1007/s11211-017-0294-1.[13] Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. John Wiley & Sons.[14] G. Behler. "Disability Simulations as a Teaching Tool: Some Ethical Issues and
socioeconomic class and social responsibility. She is currently completing a book manuscript on the intersection of engineering and corporate social responsibility. She is the author of Mining Coal and Un- dermining Gender: Rhythms of Work and Family in the American West (Rutgers University Press, 2014), which was funded by the National Science Foundation and National Endowment for the Humanities. In 2016 the National Academy of Engineering recognized her Corporate Social Responsibility course as a national exemplar in teaching engineering ethics. Professor Smith holds a PhD in Anthropology and a certificate in Women’s Studies from the University of Michigan and bachelor’s degrees in International Studies, Anthropology and
Engineering (Kansas State ’08), a M.S. in Industrial Engineering (Purdue ’14) and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education (Purdue ’15). Her team, Beliefs in Engineering Re- search Group (BERG) utilizes qualitative methods to explore beliefs in engineering. Her research has an overarching goal of leveraging engineering education research to shift the culture of engineering to be more realistic and inclusive. Dr. Dringenberg is also interested in neuroscience, growth mindset, engi- neering ethics, and race and gender in engineering. In general, she is always excited to learn new things and work with motivated individuals from diverse backgrounds to improve the experiences of people at any level in engineering education
principles to propose novel and practical solutions to medical/human health problems 2. Ability to gain basic understanding of business, finances, intellectual property and regulatory matters 3. Understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities 4. Ability to communicate real-world scientific problems with bigger vision and offer solutions, as well as their impact, effectively to a diverse audience and stakeholders, both orally and in writing 5. Demonstrate moderate to high technical mastery in chosen research area, shown by the ability to identify an important scientific problem, formulate a hypothesis, and design experiments to conduct research and data analysis to test the hypothesis. The student
Paper ID #27026Board 67: Shame in Engineering: Unpacking the Expectations that StudentsCo-Construct and Live WithinDr. James L. Huff, Harding University Dr. James Huff is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education and teaches courses in design thinking and ethics. In the context of his research lab Beyond Professional Identity (BPI), he mentors undergrad- uate students, doctoral students, and academic professionals in using interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) as a qualitative research method to conduct psychological investigations on identity as experienced in and out of professional domains. He received
with younger people with different previous degrees or certifications. Some notedthat there is a need for veterans to come together and talk about these interaction issues anddifferent work ethics. In the military, they noted that if there are some problems, they do not losetheir job but instead get transferred to another. They also noted that not all veterans are the same:Navy veterans are different from Army veterans, etc., but still they have more common ground,and similar work ethic, than they do with the traditional population of students. They noted thatthey prefer classes that are attendance optional and more interactive. They agreed that whileprofessors are clicking through slides fast, it is hard for them to sit and watch a
classifiedas masters institutions by the Carnegie classification system. Out of the total 21 comparativelearning gains in the SURE survey, the EGGN 122 students’ learning gains were higher than theaverage student population for the following 10 areas: tolerance for obstacles, understandknowledge construct, assertions require evidence, understand science, learn ethical conduct,learn lab techniques, understand primary literature, understand how scientists think, learn towork independently, and potential for science teaching.Figure 8. Comparative means on the 21 learning gain items. The mean learning gains from "YourStudents" data are depicted as green triangles. For comparison, the "All Students" means (bluediamonds) represent the n≤3281 responses from
Department of Engineering Sciences and Materials at the University of Puerto Rico, Mayag¨uez Campus (UPRM). He earned B.S. degrees in Civil Engineering and Mathematics from Carnegie Mellon University (1993) and a Ph.D. in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics at Cornell University (1999). Prior to UPRM, Papadopoulos served on the faculty in the Department of Civil engineering and Mechanics at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Papadopoulos has diverse research and teaching interests in structural mechanics and bioconstruction (with emphasis in bamboo); appropriate technology; engineering ethics; and mechanics education. He has served as PI of several NSF-sponsored research projects and is co-author of Lying by
political identity, social welfare, and perspectives ofdiversity. In reflecting on the personal impact of recent national events and how politicaldiscussions have or have not been integrated into their STEM courses, two themes emerged: 1)political awareness and 2) future-self impact. Findings revealed that first year engineeringstudents recognized the personal and social impacts current national events imposed on theirfriends, family, and society. However, students did not sense the significance of politicaldiscourse concerning the social impact and ethical practice of engineering. Our research showsthat limiting political discourse in the classroom and depoliticizing engineering spacescontributed to students dissociating the relevance of political
. Leydens won the Exemplar in Engineering Ethics Educa- tion Award from the National Academy of Engineering, along with CSM colleagues Juan C. Lucena and Kathryn Johnson, for a cross-disciplinary suite of courses that enact macroethics by making social justice visible in engineering education. In 2017, he and two co-authors won the Best Paper Award in the Mi- norities in Engineering Division at the American Society for Engineering Education annual conference. With co-author Juan C. Lucena, Dr. Leydens’ most recent book is Engineering Justice: Transforming En- gineering Education and Practice (Wiley-IEEE Press, 2018). His current research grant project explores how to foster and assess sociotechnical thinking in
and dynamics of machinery for undergraduate engineering programs. He has advised on over forty (40) Senior Design Projects and his teams of students have received five (5) National Championships and three Best Design Awards. In the recent years, he has challenged himself with the creation of an effective methodology for successful Invention and Innovation. He was part of a 14 member multi-disciplinary team to design and create the ”Society, Ethics, and Technology (SET)” course at TCNJ in 1994 and has c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Paper ID #27214taught multiple regular and Honors sections
exercises for information technology students to study ethical issues. Day and Foley [31] used class time exclusively for exercises, having their students prepare beforehand for class with materials provided online. Frydenberg [32] primarily used hands-on exercises to foster student understanding in data analytics. Class exercises should result in similar student responses. Case Study Videos: One commonly used technique to enhance the classroom learning experience is the use of video. Videos can reinforce reading and lecture material, help to develop common knowledge, enhance the quality of discussion and overall student comprehension, and accommodate students of different learning styles, increasing student motivation and
enhanced by ensuring a scaffolded and recursive process forePortfolio creation that incorporates ongoing dialogue with mentors and peers.Introduction We learn by doing, if we reflect on what we have done. — John DeweyAuthentic experiences combined with reflection and continual integration acrosstime and contexts are essential for deep, transferable learning, development ofexpertise, and ethical development. Ambrose [1] identifies these elements as coreprinciples from the learning sciences that should be foundations for high qualityundergraduate engineering education. A well-designed curriculum, among otherthings, has "authentic experiential learning opportunities to
–139.[34] N. Fryer and M. Boot, “Beyond you and I: role play and reflection-in-action in communication training,” Reflective Practice, vol. 0, no. 0, pp. 1–11, Nov. 2016.[35] D. Nestel and T. Tierney, “Role-play for medical students learning about communication: Guidelines for maximising benefits,” BMC Medical Education, vol. 7, p. 3, 2007.[36] K. S. Kesten, “Role-Play Using SBAR Technique to Improve Observed Communication Skills in Senior Nursing Students,” J Nurs Educ, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 79–87, Feb. 2011.[37] B. Joyner and L. Young, “Teaching medical students using role play: Twelve tips for successful role plays,” Medical Teacher, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 225–229, 2006.[38] K. M. Brown, “Using role play to integrate ethics into