in assessing inventory and manufacturing equipment, and a manufacturing and product engineer for a Fortune 100 Fluid Power company fulfilling an integral role in developing a robotic welding program to produce hydraulic cylinders. Texas Hydraulics. • Project engineer for the USAF, moving manufacturing facilities from Kelly AFB in San Antonio, Texas to Tin- ker AFB, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. DME, Defense Military Engineers, subcontractor to Lockheed Martin. Academic Teaching: • Currently subjects, Undergraduate MMET 301 Mechanical Power Transmission MMET 401 Fluid Power Technology • Professional Development and Continuing Education Short courses Pump 101 Basic Pump Fundamen- tals Pump 102 Advanced Pump
.Leslie Light, Colorado School of Mines Leslie Light is an Associate Teaching Professor in the Engineering, Design, and Society Division at the Colorado School of Mines, and the Director of the Cornerstone Design@Mines program. She received a B.S. in General Engineering, Product Design from Stanford University and an MBA from The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, specializing in Entrepreneurial Management. Prior to joining Mines she spent 20 years as a designer, project manager, and portfolio manager in Fortune 500 companies and smaller firms in the Silicon Valley and abroad. She is passionate about bringing the user-centered de- sign principles she learned at Stanford and in her career to Mines’ open
mini-grants include addressingaccessibility, dissemination, and copyright concerns. This project contributes to the discussion onthe role of OER in STEM curriculum and techniques librarians can use to facilitate OER adoptionat their institutions.IntroductionAccording to the College Board’s estimated student budget for 2018-2019, undergraduatestudents at public four-year institutions are expected to budget an average of $1,240 a year ontextbooks and course supplies [1]. According to Mines’ 2019-2020 Cost of Attendance, theinstitution informs students they should budget $1,500 a year on books and supplies, whichmeans the university’s approximately 5,000 undergraduate students should collectively budget$7,500,000 this academic year.Universities
Student Awareness of Research DatabasesIntroductionIn the late summer of 2018, the Northeastern University Library and the College of Engineeringstarted work on a collaboration that would benefit and support first year engineering students.The goal of the First Year Engineering (FYE) Library Workshops is to introduce first-yearengineering majors at the university to the library’s resources and databases, thus establishing afoundation in university-level engineering research.The Northeastern University College of Engineering, following a successful pilot in 2014,decided to adopt a “Cornerstone to Capstone” curriculum design for all incoming first-yearengineering students. The Cornerstone course incorporates hands-on, project-based design workwith
becomes decentralized (around 2010) Coordinator, Science Collections role created (2016) A&I database evaluation project (2017) Dealer Selection Order (DSO) established (1966-1967) Increase in graduate programmes (in the 1960s) Legend Faculty driven selection
wanted to learn what resources were being usedby the university community in order to assist them with collection development andmaintenance issues while keeping in mind the mandate to save money whenever practicable.Circulation statistics can help with much of the material, but this information is hard to come byfor online databases and subscriptions. Therefore, the author decided to conduct the followingcitation analysis of recently published graduate doctoral dissertations to determine which parts ofthe collection the students are using compared to how often they needed to use sources not heldby the Library.Literature ReviewThe first step, of course, was to see if such a project was even feasible and whether otherinstitutions had done such a
successful communicators in their careers, includingtypical genres, business writing conventions, and information literacy. Where traditionalapproaches to this class (both at the authors’ institution and at other universities) rely on journaldatabases, the authors’ case study replaces journal databases with a standards database todetermine how and if students gain more appropriate information literacy.In the second major unit of the EAS360 course, students were introduced to standards andrecommendation reports as essential forms of technical communication. For the purposes of theirmajor project, students were situated as entry-level product test engineers for a fictionalcompany, which had recently been hired by a toy manufacturer to test their
new librarian was to assist with an already-implementedweeding project. Based on specific criteria, like items published in the last ten years, circulationhistory within five years, and call number ranges that matched critical science and engineeringdisciplines, we discarded items, sent items to off-campus storage, and marked items to returnonce the library reopened (these were sent to another satellite library). Simultaneously, theScience & Engineering Library was tasked with conducting analysis on online journal anddatabase subscriptions as the entire university library system was transitioning to an e-preferredacquisitions model. We foresee the need to bring back books sent to off-campus storage to rehouse in thenewly renovated
course.In all but one case, the data extracted for ABET assessment (i.e., the data included in the self-study to demonstrate student achievement) came from the senior capstone design experience.The capstone rubrics, however, varied considerably in the information component required, withmost rubrics not mentioning sources or references explicitly. All institutions reported studentperformance directly, but two also indicated student surveys (i.e., self-assessments) as sources ofdata for this outcome (they were transitioning out of that assessment method). Studentperformance was measured by course instructors, project partners, and, in one case, theinstitution’s industrial advisory board.As an example of an ambiguous rubric used for ABET assessment
faculty react to, adapt to, andaccommodate those challenges, often in the words of the respective researchers themselves. Thisreport then concludes with possible recommendations for academic libraries, and researchuniversity campuses with an AE presence.BackgroundIn 2019, librarians at the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) conducted interviewswith faculty in the institute’s School of Aerospace Engineering to examine practices of academicresearch faculty with regards to the data used and produced in the course of their research. Thiswork built on a project conducted in 2017-18, when librarians at Georgia Tech joined withlibrarians at 10 other research institutions, coordinated by Ithaka S+R, in order to examine thebroader research
Paper ID #29500Lifelong Learning in an Engineering Communication CourseProf. S. Norma Godavari, University of Manitoba Dr. Anne Parker, is an Associate Professor in the Centre for Engineering Professional Practice and Engi- neering Education in the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Manitoba, where she has taught En- gineering Communication for over 30 years. She also has served as a consultant to individuals and groups in other communication areas, such as medicine, law, and business and industry. Her research interests include collaborative projects in engineering; the synergy between engineering design and
tobusiness librarians.Howard, Zwicky, and Phillips [4] describe extensive collaboration among specialists in business,engineering, and patents at Purdue University Libraries. The business and engineering librariansprovide team consultations to students in engineering design courses and co-teach libraryinstruction sessions. Librarians also provide instruction and consultations for participants instudent innovation competitions and several outreach programs that support entrepreneurship inthe community. While these collaborative projects have been successful, Howard, Zwicky, andPhillips [4] call for better coordination of Libraries support for entrepreneurship activities.Feeney and Martin [5], a business librarian and a science librarian at the
in the number ofstudents attending these sessions, important changes were made to the type of learningassessment. At first, the students were required to produce a portfolio related to their researchprojects that the librarians graded and to which they suggested ways of improvement. Thisevaluation method being time-consuming, it was changed to open-book exams. After a fewyears, the librarians decided to modify the assessment again to allow students to work on theirown projects. Moreover, a heterogeneous clientele posed some significant challenges. Forexample, the university has welcomed a growing international graduate student population thatdid not speak French. In response to these challenges and to institutional requests, the team
twoin a given year [6]. Topical Modules were conceived as short sets of prompts eliciting feedbackon student engagement in areas such as Civic Engagement, Experiences with Writing, andLearning with Technology to name a few in the original suite.Information literacy as a NSSE componentGeorge Kuh, of the original NSSE design team, and research analyst Robert Gonyea, who joinedthe NSSE project in 1999, conducted a study presented at the ACRL Eleventh NationalConference in 2003, in which they focused specifically on "The Role of the Academic Library inPromoting Student Engagement in Learning” [7]. Kuh and Gonyea describe predecessorassessments to NSSE that included a Library Experiences Scale and an Information LiteracyScale. In 2004 a College
used by students in their lab reports relate to their comprehension oftheory? The objective of this research project is to investigate the connections between studentselection of information sources and the comprehension of theory in an engineering lab course.The results will provide instructors with a tool that provides multiple aspects and qualities toexamine when assessing the information sources students use in an engineering lab course.This study examined the types of information sources that students cited in their lab reports byfour facets that include format, author, editorial process, and publication purpose and comparedthem with a disciplinary evaluation of their technical reports. Classification of these facets wasbased on a
departments, colleges, and theuniversity leadership to work towards a more open and equitable scholarly landscape. Whilesome larger institutions have spoken out about these issues this project focuses on theperspectives from a specific group of faculty at a public land-grant institution and will, thus,contribute to an understanding of the issues at play and possibilities for future advancement inPRT guidance.IntroductionResearchers have long expressed concerns about the impact promotion, rank, and tenure (PRT)guidelines have on the publishing practices of academics [1-4]. As a baseline, studies [1-4] haveshown that faculty members expect a strong research and publication record to be crucial foradvancement under PRT guidelines. Research also shows
technology issues.Sometimes, another university library’s renovation has inspired renovations such as Duke,University of North Carolina, and North Carolina State libraries. Recently, the TAMU Librarieshave undertaken several renovation projects to address insufficient instruction and study spacesand improve and consolidate service areas in addition to other issues. The Sterling C. Evans(Evans) Library renovated the first, fourth, and sixth floors to improve student spaces andinstruction spaces that the students can use when not in use. These renovations includedimprovement of student study spaces, renovation of the coffee shop, creation of a prayer room,and a graduate study lounge. Other libraries on campus had similar renovations. The
Standard (definitions of words, phrases, or othersymbology), and Test Method (actionable steps that lead to a specified result) [1]. Thisdemonstrates the wide variety of topics that are addressed by standards documents. Standardsstarted as consensus on units of weights and measures, but today standards are used in a widevariety of professions to ensure the safety of products and materials as well as the reliability ofgoods and services [2]. Due to the potential utility of this information format, academic librariesoften provide some standards to their patrons.Given the vast array of topics addressed by standards, students engaged in research or otherdesign projects in a variety of disciplines may have a need to identify and obtain full
on several research projects, programs, and initiatives to help students bridge the gap between high school and college as well as preparing students for the rigors of mathematics. His research interests include engineering education, integration of novel technologies into engineering classroom, excellence in instruction, water, and wastewater treatment, civil engineering infrastructure, and transportation engi- neering.Dr. Davida Scharf, New Jersey Institute of Technology Davida Scharf has a B.A. from Barnard College in Art and Architectural History, an MLS from Columbia University, and a PhD from the Rutgers University School of Communication and Information in the area of educational assessment and information
in the spring semester of 2019.The campus-wide collection cancellation project makes us rethink current practices for collectionmanagement, especially the pruning practice which is primarily based on the cost-per-use model.According to Kendrick, the cost-per-use model fails to account for variability of the usage pattern,consequently overvaluing journal subscriptions [1]. Beyond the limitation of the cost-per-use model,there are four main challenges around collection management. First, we engineering librarians havemany responsibilities besides collection management including instruction, reference, public servicesand outreach. Second, we spend increasing expenditures on “big deal” journal packages to which ourlibraries subscribe and have
]. Although there are some slight variations by state, there are fourmajor requirements to becoming a professional engineer (PE): Graduate from an ABET-accredited engineering program, Pass the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) exam, Work under a PE for four years (three years with a Master’s in engineering), and Pass the PE exam.Undergraduate engineering students may take the FE exam prior to graduation in their senioryear [5]. During an engineering student’s senior year, their time is limited and occupied withsenior design projects, finishing course work, and job hunting. Studying for the FE exam is oftenthe last thing on their minds. However, their interest increases when they learn that being able tolist on their resume that
the University of Miami – througharticle-level bibliometrics using Web of Science® (published by Clarivate Analytics). Given theimpending ramifications of global climate change, a particular interest to the residents and highereducation institutions in the state of Florida, this study also takes a closer look at those publicationsdirectly and indirectly focused on topics of climate change mitigation, adaptation, or resilience.By establishing solid benchmarking criteria within this narrow band of research activity, this studycould be expanded to include other similar departments at many colleges and universities. Throughfuture projects like this one, engineering and science librarians could gain a better understandingof similar engineering
the business librarian to provide technical,intellectual property and business information in support of a major competition.Similarly, the University of Utah has integrated their three libraries into the innovation space.They were involved in the concept, prototyping, product, and commercialization stages ofinnovation, employing medical, business, patent, and innovation librarians to provide innovatorswith information resources at all of these stages [2]. Different university libraries have alsosought to embed themselves with the Technology Transfer Office. The University of Arizonasaw its opportunity during a time of reorganization and formalized the relationship by havinglibrarians work on individual projects involving literature search
of 81 students from eight sessions over the past 2.5 years completed theassessment. This presentation will discuss the structure of the information sessions, preliminaryfindings from the assessment, and strategies taken to incorporate the identified needs into futuresessions.IntroductionInformation literacy support is well-established as a core component of university libraryservices, with many institutions providing subject specific information literacy instruction.Within engineering librarianship, providing information literacy support via one-shot, classroom-based instruction is fairly common within senior design or project-based courses. However,librarians supporting undergraduate engineering research is not as widespread [1]. Our paper
Engineering, and Engineering Management. Civil and Mechanical Engineering students normally take Introduction to Engineering inthe first semester of their first year. Electrical Engineering majors usually take a differentintroductory course, except during the Fall 2017 semester, when all three engineering majorswere combined due to a sabbatical. The course includes two days of lecture per week with ahands-on lab on the third class meeting of the week. The engineering majors are combined intointerdisciplinary teams on lab day to complete a project creating a fully operational windmill.Background: library involvement with mindfulness and engineering students An assortment of mindfulness and sustainability initiatives began at the library
review project.Gore and Jones [20] offer advice to library managers considering the impact systematic reviewsupport may have on their libraries. Some libraries have developed policies and guidelines thatspell out what level of librarian involvement constitutes a basis for co-authorship. It is importantthat librarians understand the substantial time commitment involved in participation in systematicreview projects, and that there is consideration in their institution of whether such support is to beroutinely offered, or whether it becomes part of a fee-for-service scheme. If they are willing toengage in this work, librarians should advocate for their inclusion in systematic review researchteams. Several agencies [21], [22] recommend the
MATLAB ** ** ** ** (Table 6: Workshop attendance for COE workshops by academic semester. * indicates that the workshop number of attendees not recorded. ** indicates an incomplete academic semester.)ConclusionAs the Subject Librarians for COE the authors have identified a few areas of growth they wouldlike to work towards in the forthcoming semesters. One area would be to increase the amount ofengineering class instruction invitations. Some possible targets to increase instruction includetargeting the researchers in charge of research groups as this would allow the authors to talk togroups of students actively participating in research projects with their professors