EngineeringEducation., 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x[5] Penn State’s IEEE Student Branch at University Park http://sites.psu.edu/psuieee/ (accessed July 2019).[6] Eta Kappa Nu (HKN) – Epsilon Chapter http://sites.psu.edu/hkneecs/ (accessed July 2019).[7] Ramaswamy, S., Harris, I., Tschirner, “Student Peer Teaching: An Innovative Approach to Instruction in Scienceand Engineering Education,” U. Journal of Science Ed. and Tech. (2001) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009421231056[8] Boud, David, Ruth Cohen, Sampson, Jane, Peer Learning in Higher Education: Learning from and with EachOther, First Published 2001, eBook Published 2014, Routledge https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315042565[9] First Year Seminars (FYS) http
and professional identity development for engineering undergraduates,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 100(4), pp. 630-654, 2011.[5] S. Allen & K. Peterman, “Evaluating informal STEM education: Issues and challenges in context,” Evaluation of Informal Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education, vol 2009(161), pp. 17-33.[6] National Research Council, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2000. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853[7] K. Krippendorff, Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology, 3rd edition. Sage: Los Angeles, CA, 2012.
available resources.References[1] Foor, C., Trytten, D., McClure, L., Waldren, S. and T. Combrink. (2006) “I wishSomeone Would’ve Told Me: Undergraduate Engineering Students offer Advice to IncomingStudents.” Proceeding of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education AnnualConference, Chicago, IL, July. Paper ID: 1381[2] Romkey, L. (2008) “The First Year Transition: Challenges and Solutions for Students,Instructors and administrators.” American Society for Engineering Education AnnualConference. June 22-25, 2008, Pittsburg, PA. Paper ID: 2127[3] Bradley, S and Bradley, W. (2006) “Increasing Retention by Incorporating TimeManagement and Study Skills into a Freshman Engineering Course.” Proceeding of the 2002American Society for Engineering
shifts in emphasis over the years, animportant one being the 1950’s government funding of fundamental, as opposed to “applied”research; with a subsequent (further) shift away from hands-on experiences and towardsengineering science as the curriculum core [1]. Heavy loading of first year programs with mathand science has implications for persistence and recruitment of global learners [2] and certainunderrepresented minorities such as females [3]. Felder and Brent [4] caution against a “trustme” approach to education in which students may have to persist for months or years before theysee why what they’ve been taught is important. The proposed case-studies move instructionfrom deductive to inductive [5], with the goal of deeper retention and
advancestudents’ understanding and mastery of the material.references:[1] Jensen, D., & Kellogg, S. (2010, June), Improving Conceptual Understanding In ProbabilityAnd Statistics Paper presented at 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentuckyhttps://peer.asee.org/16816[2] Wilson, R (2002, July), What Does This Have to Do with Us? Teaching Statistics toEngineering Students Paper presented at ICOTS 2010 Annual Conference, Cape Town SouthAfrica. http://iase-web.org/documents/papers/icots6/5e1_wils.pdf[3] Reeves, K., & Blank, B., & Hernandez-Gantes, V., & Dickerson, M. (2010, June), UsingConstructivist Teaching Strategies In Probability And Statistics Paper presented at 2010 AnnualConference & Exposition, Louisville
industry. Dominant first year engineering programs create team-based fundamental engineering courses to develop students’ ability to work in a team. Thenumber of foreign students studying at American higher educational institutions is consistentlyincreasing and they possess unique cultures influencing the study and experience of domesticstudents. In this study, we focus on teamwork and peer assessment behaviors of multi-culturalteams as compared to domestic [U.S.] teams in a large Midwestern first year engineeringprogram. Our research question is: do teams containing one or more international student(s)have, on average, different peer rating behaviors from teams containing only domestic students?We find significant peer evaluation differences in
the faculty. 3) Provide a transition between classroom and residence hall life leading to higher student retention, satisfaction, and success. 4) Provide collaboration opportunities between students and faculty.Besides the survey questions we did from this activity and we will continue this activity in thefuture and expect to see some positive results for student retention, performance and selection ofmajor . Also there are several other criteria we would like to evaluate as outcomes between LLCstudents and Non-LLC students in the future project.Reference:[1] Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R. S., & Smith, B. L. Learning communities:Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. New Directions for Teaching
Paper ID #28083Physical Computing Design Project to Promote Equity and Community in anIntroductory Engineering CourseDr. Jennifer Mullin, UC Davis Jennifer S. Mullin is a faculty member in the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering at UC Davis. 2019 FYEE Conference : Penn State University , Pennsylvania Jul 28 WIP Paper: Physical Computing Design Project to Promote Equity and Community in an Introductory Engineering CoursePrior to matriculation, first year engineering students at UC Davis, a large public university,declare majors in one of the eight academic departments offering
Advanced Manufacturing Center, 2014, “New Paltz Celebrates Opening of MakerBot Innovation Center” [Online]. Available: http://www.newpaltz.edu/3d/makerbot.html.[4] Wilczynski, V., 2015, “Academic Makerspaces and Engineering Design,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–18.[5] Barrett, T. W., Pizzico, M. C., Levy, B., and Nagel, R. L., 2015, “A Review of University Maker Spaces A Review of University Maker Spaces Introduction,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–16.[6] Bashyam, S., Kuhn, J., and Seepersad, C. C., 2015, “A 3D Printing Vending Machine and Its Impact on the Democratization of 3D Printing on a College Campus,” Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers
. Italso varied with time within institutions.This research can only show the required course pathway variations among institutions with FYEmatriculation models. To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of each of the coursepathways, further investigations can be conducted using student data. Reid, et al. [8] introduces ataxonomy which classifies introductory to engineering courses (classified as general engineeringin this paper). Moreover, future studies can use taxonomies like this to investigate FYE pathwaysbased on their course content and not only the course titles. V. REFERENCES[1] M. K. Orr, C. E. Brawner, S. M. Lord, M. W. Ohland, R. A. Layton, and R. A. Long, "Engineering
appropriate furniture. The objects were limited to 2’ x 1’ in size. ● Puzzles – each team had to contribute an easy and a hard puzzle, of which only one was selected to be used in the escape room. One of the committees (explained below) decided on which puzzles from each group would be used for the escape room ● 3D printed object – each team had to 3D print a small piece(s) that could be used in their puzzle or fabricated objectA jigsaw method was utilized to further split the class into escape room committees. Each teamcontributed one student to each committee. The purpose of the committees was to help connectthe escape room pieces together and included the following: ● Narrative –responsible for writing the story behind the escape
semester, themajority of students in EDSGN 100 are introduced to engineering design through an 8-week longdesign challenge of the instructor’s choosing. During this challenge, instructors lead studentsthrough the problem definition, customer needs identification, concept generation, conceptselection, prototyping, and iteration phases crucial to engineering design. In the course’s currentform, these steps are further augmented by the inclusion of six educational modules (“World ClassEngineer,” “Professional Communication,” “Innovation Process,” “Making,” “Seeing the BigPicture,” and “Grand Challenges”). However, as the modules were created after the majority ofinstructors had established their preferred design project(s) for the first 8 weeks, the
incarnations of the course, more emphasis has been placed on the team-based design projects, as evidenced by 50% of the course grade being contributed by team work.Table 1. Common grading scheme adopted for all EDSGN 100 sections. Assessment of individual proficiency (50%) Assessment of team work (50%) 20%: In-class Assessments Introductory Design Project(s) to support 25%: 15%: CAE Activities and Assessments learning of design process 5%: Making Activities Client-sponsored Design Project to 25%: 10%: General Assignments
need both during and after their education.By incorporating modern technologies (in this case Arduino and 3D printing) these projects canbe a strong introduction of how students will be able to use their technical skills to overcomechallenges in the future.Acknowledgements We’d like to thank the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence at PennState for funding the equipment of the project. We’d also like to express our gratitude to all theinstructors for helping to run the project in Fall 2017, 2018, and Spring 2019 and our dedicatedmultimedia specialist for photography and videography.References[1] S. A. Ambrose, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. (1st;1; ed.) 2010.[2] W. J. McKeachie, M. D. Svinicki
engineers, and are attended by all selected Bridge students. TheSCLC courses meet twice a week for 2 hours in addition to the regular Calculus or Physicscourse which is part of the curriculum. Students work in 4-6 member heterogeneous groupsproviding a comfortable environment to ask questions and learn. SCLC further strengthens thelearning community built in the SSBP.Monthly Socials: To strengthen the learning community, 3 to 4 monthly socials throughout eachsemester will allow students to interact with invited professionals and upperclassmen in aninformal setting. Each monthly social will revolve around a theme and speaker(s), for example,reducing stress during midterms and finals, time management, setting high expectations,undergraduate research
Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 58–62. IEEE, 2015.[7] Maceiras, Rocio, Angeles Cancela, Santiago Urréjola, and Angel Sanchez. “Experience of Cooperative Learning in Engineering.” European Journal of Engineering Education 36, no. 1 (2011): 13–19.[8] Springer, Leonard, Mary Elizabeth Stanne, and Samuel S. Donovan. “Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis.” Review of Educational Research 69, no. 1 (1999): 21–51.[9] Tahir, Nooritawati Md, Kama Azura Othman, and Faieza Hanum Yahaya. “Case Study of Jigsaw Cooperative Learning Effect within Electrical Engineering Courses.” In 2011 International
and reflection upon practice,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 61–71, Jan. 2003.[5] Biggs, J., “Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment,” High. Educ., vol. 32, pp. 347–364, 1996.[6] Hsieh, H.F. and Shannon, S.E., “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis,” Qual. Health Res., vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 1277–1288, Nov. 2005.[7] Elo, S. and Kyngas, H., “Qualitative Content Analysis Process,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 107–115, 2008.[8] Creswell, J., Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1998.
situations.AcknowledgmentsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under GrantNo. 1726268. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2017.“Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2017.” SpecialReport NSF 17-310. Arlington, VA. Available at www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd[2] Meadows, Lorelle, Denise Sekaquaptewa, Marie Paratti. 2015. “Interactive Panel: Improvingthe Experiences of Marginalized Students on Engineering Design Teams.” Conference Paper,122nd annual
, using a food dehydrator makes it possible to extend the periodfor which fresh food can be safely prepared and stored for later consumption when food sources arescarcer. The efforts of the first-year engineering student teams demonstrates their capability inaddressing one of the global issues –zero hunger– identified and targeted by the United NationsDevelopment Programme in their Sustainable Development Goals.REFERENCES[1] Gee, D., “Are Post-Millennials Enrolled in Engineering Majors Inclined to be Socially Active?” Proc.ASEE First Year Engineering Experience Conference (FYEE 2018), Glassboro, NJ, 2018[2] Gee, D., Tiari, S., and Zhao, L., “Design of Solar-Powered Food Dehydrators to Meet Food AvailabilityNeeds in Emerging Markets,” Proc. 2018
for the lab activity? What would you do differently in the future when approaching a design problem? Did you learn anything new about working in a team, and/or designing a solution after the first lab?Thirty one students provided consent to participate in this research study and their responseswere analyzed qualitatively. The pre-survey responses were checked to see if customer wasmentioned in their visual representations. For the post reflection, the number of reflections inwhich customer was mentioned was counted and a few specific themes were identified.In the pre-survey, only one out of the thirty one participants mentioned customer and thisparticipant indicated that s/he had been exposed to the concept of engineering
the Status and Improving the Prospects. Committee on K-12 Engineering Education. National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council of the National Academies. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.[8] Su R., Rounds J., Armstrong P. I. (2009). Men and things, women and people: A meta-analysis of sex differences in interests. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 859-884.[9] Dasgupta, N., & Stout, J. G. (2014). Girls and Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics: STEMing the Tide and Broadening Participation in STEM Careers. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214549471[10] Cooke, L., & Williams, S. (2004). Two approaches to using
, portable spectro-photometer to determine contaminant concentrations in water. The students in this course havefocused primarily on the development of the user interface consisting of a LCD shield withbuttons for navigation. In year one of the project, a circuit was constructed on a solderlessbreadboard and the students in the first-year course developed the user interface and relatedcontrol signals to operate the spectrophotometer with an Arduino Uno, see Figure 1. In thisversion of the circuit, calibration data was provided and hard-coded into the system.Figure 1: Left: Initial spectrophotometer circuit designed and constructed at Norwich Univ.Readily available materials were used for the sample holder (labeled S D in the photo). Right:Example
States: Foundations of our Techno-Economic Future (Washington, DC: National Research Council)5. Salisbury, M. H., An, B. P. & Pascarella, E. T. The Effect of Study Abroad on InterculturalCompetence Among Undergraduate College Students. J. Stud. Aff. Res. Pract. 50(1), 1–20(2013).6. Shuman, L. J., Clark, R. M., Streiner, S. & Besterfield-Sacre, M. Achieving GlobalCompetence : Are Our Freshmen Already There ? ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo. (2016).7. Grandin, J. M. & Hirleman, D. E. Educating Engineers as Global Citizens : A Call for Action /A Report of the National Summit Meeting on the Globalization of Engineering Education.Online J. Glob. Eng. Educ. 4(1), (2009). Available athttp://digitalcommons.uri.edu/ojgee/vol4/iss1/18. Parkinson, A
(future) engineer? Developing an innovative solution & considering its impact on the energy/water issues Category case/CASE 1 – survey analysis results: Figures 4 Designing/developing system/device & its working principle(s) with and 5 show the distributions of different keywords obtained some degree of entrepreneurial aspect to the products/system Developing virtual (UGS NX) models and building & testing (small- from the survey category case/CASE 1 shown in Table VIII. scale) prototype (mock-up) system/device The statistical data displays information about some