social relevance or appear to have no conscience.(13) Therehave been laments about excellent students opting out of engineering, as they felt to be ill-prepared or incompetent because of the methods of teaching, the rigidity of the system, and theauthoritarian approach in the transmission of knowledge. Often, these negative aspects ofteaching, and the non-stimulating classroom environment, appears to impact the “second tier”students (i.e., those students who are serious about their learning and career goals, but who canbe intimidated for a variety of reasons, and chose not to pursue engineering). Unlike “first tier”students (i.e., those students that will learn no matter how the class is conducted, or the course istaught), “second tier” students
structures subjected to earth quake loadings,and strategies to enhance their performance. The selection of the students was based on GPA, two recommendation letters, and an essayon why they would like to participate in this REU Site and how it relates to their career goals. Intotal 27 applications were received for the nine positions. All applicants had excellent scholasticqualifications, and satisfied the requirements for selection if resources permitted their support.An effort was made to recruit at least three under-represented and/or minority students. Theparticipants were paired such that a more experienced student interacted with a lesser-experienced student, as far as their scholastic standing was concerned. All students had indicatedthat
., Jones, J. D., Davies, P., Coyle., E. J. & Jamieson, L. H. (2000). Engineering education,beyond the books. 2000 ASEE Annual Conference, Charlotte, NC, June 2000.Hissey, T. W. (2000) Education and Careers 2000. Proceedings of the IEEE, 88(8), 1367-1370, August.Hobson, R. S. (2000). Service-Learning as an Educational Tool in an Introduction to Engineering Course,Proceedings of the ASEE 2000 Annual Conference, St. Louis, Missouri, June 2000.Hughes, J. L. (2001). Incorporating Project Engineering And Professional Practice Into The MajorDesign Experience, Proceedings of the 2001 Frontiers in Education Conference.Jamieson, L. H., Coyle, E. J., Harper, M. P., Delp, E. J. & Davies, P. (1998). Integrating engineeringdesign, signal processing, and
practice (g) an ability to communicate effectivelyD “diverse career skills” (d) an ability to function on multi-disciplinary teamsprepare students with the diverse skills needed to be (h) broad education necessary to understand the impactsuccessful engineers of engineering solutions in a global and societal context (i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning
/physicalanalysis. Two lectures, one lab per week, plus 1/2 - hour lab lecture. Students will complete adesign/build/characterization project as part of a multidisciplinary team, outside of lab. Mustalso register for ME EN 6056 (lab).Course meets with MEEN 5055, BIO EN 6421, ECE 5225/6225, MetE 5055/6055, MSE 5055/6055, ChFE 5659/6659.Textbook: None required (lecture notes and miscellaneous readings on e-reserve)Structure: Lecture (1 hour – 2 times/week), lab (3 hours – 1 time/week), lab lecture (1/2 hour – 1time/week) Being the last course in the sequence, one of the objectives of this course is to transitionstudents from the academic environment to their professional career after degree completion.One aspect of this transition is to get students
and administrators described themselves as being part ofa community whose members were “talented” and “extremely creative.” Atypical ofmany academics, most professors come to Rose-Hulman and wind up staying for theduration of their careers. More than one interviewee described Rose as “a wonderfulplace to work.” An engineering professor remarked that faculty “wouldn't have remainedhere if they weren't good and they weren't dedicated to teaching. That has been thehallmark of how we hire and how we retain faculty.” So in addition to the organizationalsaga, the “other-regarding” interest” – the overriding dedication to the student – is alsopart of Rose-Hulman’s institutional culture. It is a commonly-held value held by bothfaculty and staff
Wednesday session on 9 Apr il 2002It must be noted that RCS students are self-selecting participants who must be nominated bytheir faculty advisors; they are generally highly motivated and capable students. However, asparticipant observers we have noted that student collaboration challenges students—as well asthe academic and professional fields in which they are fledgling members—in ways thatindividual study could not. We believe the interactive character of the session under study isreflective of students’ cognitive, social, and professional development.All of the students continue to excel in their engineering careers as RCS alumni. S2, a senior,worked on his Honors College thesis during 2003 and won an award for his poster presentationat the
disciplines, their interdependencies, and the various career opportunities forengineering graduates. In the past, VUSE has done little beyond standard coursework to activelyengage students in self-discovery of their own talents and how they mesh with a specificengineering discipline. What was needed was an intense, interactive program that allowsstudents to educate themselves with what the various fields of engineering are, their similaritiesand differences, and which of those areas are more closely aligned with their own interests. Theintroductory engineering course was selected as an ideal forum to implement this program.In 1989, VUSE launched an innovative introductory course that focused on exposing students tocomputing tools that many had never
curriculum combining depth through disciplinary studies and breadth throughinterdisciplinary experiences that ensures that all our students have the knowledge and leadershipskills to be successful in their careers and productive citizens.” The strategic plan further asserts,“Engineers do not act in isolation. It is imperative that we expose our students to the real-worldchallenges and constraints facing engineers.” In summary, then, the EIC initiative allowed us tobuild on existing strengths within our school and to achieve one of the school’s most importantstrategic objectives. Page 9.555.5 Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for