association management experience to her work with ASCE’s Committee on Education on issues of importance to the undergraduate and graduate level education of civil engineers. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Lessons Learned in Developing the Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge, Third EditionThe American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) recently published the Third Edition of the CivilEngineering Body of Knowledge (CEBOK3) in May 2019 [1]. The Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge 3Task Committee (CEBOK3TC) officially formed in October 2016 and spent approximately two and a halfyears developing the third edition. The third edition defines the knowledge, skills, and attitudesnecessary to
. The preferredpresentation method is Lightning Talk.IntroductionLecturers, also known as teaching or professional-track faculty, have served a significant role forseveral years at the engineering college at our large, research institution. Their value has onlyincreased with steadily climbing student enrollment, combined with demand for more time forresearch and administrative duties by tenure-track and tenured faculty: a shift occurring broadlyacross the academic landscape [1]. An active, university-wide union for lecturers creates theassumption that their collective voices and needs are represented “above” the college-level, butthe union has limited resources to support the needs of the growing population of lecturers withinthe college
instructional design, campus resources and required onboarding, andprofessional skills and identity development (See Table 1: NEO Session Titles and Description).These are the common themes you find running through the course lineup (see Figure 1: ProgramTracks).Audience in Context: The audience for the NEO TA Training Program is a diverse group ofgraduate students from the College of Engineering (80%) and the College of Agriculture and LifeSciences (20%). The graduate students are at all levels of their program, some being new to theinstitution. There is a heavy representation of international students in attendance in the Collegeof Engineering population. We intentionally keep the training to graduate students-only to providethe TAs an environment
programsoffered by individual degree-granting universities.Keywords: technology management; TM; management of technology; technologyconcentrations; graduate programs; Ph.D.IntroductionThe National Research Council [1] described the technology management as “a process, whichincludes planning, directing, control and coordination of the development and implementation oftechnological capabilities to shape and accomplish the strategic and operational objectives of anorganization.’’ McKirahan and Cheney [2] noted Gaynor reporting technology managementlinks the disciples of engineering, science, and management to plan, develop, and implementtechnological capabilities for shaping and accomplishing an organization’s strategic andoperational objectives. On the
institutions in an NSF IUSE grant to develop procedures to affect cultural transformations in engineering education. She also is Co-PI of the leadership team (Network Coordination Office) for the NSF Natural Hazards Engineering Research Infrastructure (NHERI). c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Lessons Learned: Integrating Active Learning into Undergraduate Engineering CoursesIntroductionStudent success is an ongoing concern in undergraduate engineering courses where high attritionrates are common. Inadequate prior preparation, lack of engagement, and difficulty of the content[1, 2, 3, 4] are some of the factors that produce these outcomes. One main challenge
encountermultiple barriers that prevent them from achieving their academic goals. Although they oftenhave good intentions to help students succeed, faculty often attribute the academic barriers to thestudents’ lack of preparation, motivation, or effort to learn. Research studies [1] showed that thisdeficit mindset of instructors negatively impacts the students’ self-efficacy and hinders theiracademic growth. A recent report from the National Academies [2] highlighted the need to createa learner-centered culture that “meets students where they are.” This raises an important yetchallenging question for faculty development: “What can be done to help transform facultyperception to achieve such cultural change?”As a Very High-enrolled Hispanic Serving
professional responsibilities inengineering situations, and make informed judgements...” [1]. Typically, ethics education issummarized into four main goals: 1) to make students aware of professional expectations, 2) tosensitize students to potential ethical issues that may arise, 3) to improve the students’ ethicaldecision making, and 4) to motivate them to behave ethically [2].The recent unscrupulous activity at high profile companies like Volkswagen [3] and Boeing [4]underscores the need to better prepare students for their professional practice. Unfortunately,effectively forming ethically-minded students is challenging due to credit hour limitations in theengineering curriculum, low student engagement, and a lack of perceived value in the
discipline is defined as the part of the technological field thatrequires the application of scientific and engineering knowledge and methods combined withtechnical skills in support of engineering activities; it lies in the occupational spectrum betweenthe craftsman and the engineer at the end of the spectrum closest to the engineer 1, 2.The Electrical Engineering Technology (EET) program at Kennesaw State University is housedwithin the Southern Polytechnic College of Engineering and Engineering Technology (SPCEET)on the Marietta, Georgia campus. The program has gone through several changes since the mergerbetween its Kennesaw State University and its original base university Southern Polytechnic StateUniversity (SPSU) in 2015. The EET program was
(CUST), Islamabad, Pakistan as Associate Professor. Sajjad Hussain did his masters in Wireless Communications in 2006 from Supelec, Gif-sur-Yvette and PhD in Signal Processing and Communi- cations in 2009 from University of Rennes 1, Rennes, France. His research interests include 5G self- organizing networks, industrial wireless sensor networks and machine learning for wireless communica- tions. Sajjad Hussain is a senior member IEEE and fellow Higher Education Academy.Prof. Ala Al-Fuqaha, Hamad Bin Khalifa University (HBKU) Ala Al-Fuqaha received Ph.D. degree in Computer Engineering and Networking from the University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City. He is Professor at Hamad Bin Khalifa University. His research
follow up to thesurvey, the librarians met with two focus groups who provided more qualitativeinformation on student use of eTextbooks. Survey and focus group results may informnot only changes to the service of providing eTextbooks, but also can be shared withpublishers to potentially inform improvements to ebook platforms. This paper reports onthe results of the survey and focus group and implications for the future.IntroductionIn the early 2000s, ebooks became available to academic libraries [1] and the wider world. TheUniversity of Michigan Library subscribed to a package of Netlibrary ebooks in the year 2000,and has continued providing and increasing access to ebooks over the ensuing 20 years. Thisemphasis on collecting in ebook format led
usage of future learning resources.This paper presents and analyzes the data from this assessment.IntroductionLifelong learning is included in Criterion 3 Student Outcomes in ABET EngineeringAccreditation Commission (EAC) and ABET Engineering Technology AccreditationCommission (ETAC) programs [1]. For some instructors of laboratory courses, this can be achallenging, vague, or difficult to measure student outcome because a consistent definition of“self-directed continuing professional development” or “lifelong learning” is not easily found.Some definitions focus on the learning outside formalized education with an emphasis on cultureand “creative innovation” [2]. Others define it in terms such as “independent pursuit” or“philosophy of personal
current study on lifelong learning and information literacy has grown out of this work as well as earlier work she conducted with Norma Godavari. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Lifelong Learning in an Engineering Communication Course1.0 Introduction and Objectives The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) has defined lifelong learning asa student’s “ability to identify and to address their own educational needs in a changing world inways sufficient to maintain their competence and to allow them to contribute to the advancementof knowledge“ [1]. ABET, through the Washington Accord, sets the standards for programsaround the world including Canada to ensure a
to ABET [1] are required to incorporate appropriate engineeringstandards and multiple constraints, and be based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earliercourses. The courses typically consist of a design-build-test sequence [2], where students arerequired to follow through the entire design process in addition to building and verifying theintended performance of the project.Mechanical engineering capstone projects reflect the broad nature of the profession, and as suchcan originate from many different fields. The overlap of Aerospace Engineering and mechanicalEngineering in particular generates a variety of capstone projects that typically are of highinterest to the students. However, a requirement for senior design courses is that the
regards to the Tampa Bay Interstate Express project andelements of equitable transportation. Her narrative provided concrete examples of elements fromthe ASCE Code of Ethics Canon 1 and Canon 8. Students’ written comments provided evidenceof effectiveness and impact. In a senior professional issues course, shorter clips from multiplemembers of the ASEE community panel were shown during class as part of both the ethicsmodule and sustainability module. However, it was unclear that the seniors gained any insightsor abilities from these activities. In an elective/graduate level course focused on site remediation,clips from Sydney Brown discussing Tonawanda Coke and from a community meetingdiscussing a proposed remedy at a Superfund site were
improving undergraduate engineering degree pathways. . She earned her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech. In 2013, Dr. Mohammadi-Aragh was honored as a promising new engineering education researcher when she was selected as an ASEE Educational Research and Methods Division Apprentice Faculty.Anastasia Nicole Doty, The Ohio State University c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Longitudinal Memos Investigating First Year Engineering PathwaysIntroductionAs of 2013, the majority of incoming engineering students (either by freshman or transfer status)progress through First-Year Engineering (FYE) courses [1]. These FYE courses are intended
. IntroductionOregon State University's (OSU) School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science(EECS) has been engaged in an ongoing study examining the Electrical and ComputerEngineering (ECE) undergraduate degree program. The key research questions were: 1. What educational experiences contribute to ECE seniors’ success in the senior design capstone year? 2. What instructional practices best facilitate these transformative educational experiences?In a previously-published literature review paper [1], key transformative educationalprogrammatic influencers were identified. Emancipatory Action Research (EAR), a pragmaticqualitative epistemology, and a critical mixed-methods approach were also identified as bestfitting methodological frameworks to
’ essayswritten in response to lectures and activities that related to art and narrative within the course.The two machine-based tools used here were i) naïve Bayes analysis and ii) Meaning ExtractionHelper. The results showed that both tools were able to identify differences in student essays. Wesuggest several ways in which these machine-based methods could be extended to aid inassessing learning and reflective thinking in students.IntroductionIn U.S. engineering education, ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)advocates the broad development of engineering students.1 Congruent with ABET guidelines,engineering researchers have framed principled foundations for understanding engineeringpractice in social, cultural, environmental, and
October 2000. In thegeneral review of 2006, the CSET program was reviewed by both Computing AccreditationCommission (CAC) and TAC of ABET. The CSET program is currently accredited by both CACand Engineering Technology Accreditation Commission (ETAC) - the successor of TAC. Thispaper demonstrates how the CSET program, housed in the Department of EngineeringTechnology at The University of Toledo, satisfies both ABET Computing AccreditationCommission (CAC) and Engineering Technology Accreditation Commission (ETAC) curriculumrequirements. CSET Science Engineering TechnologyFigure 1. Relationship between CSET and Computer Science and Engineering ProgramFigure 1 illustrates the ideal relationship between the
Community-Connected ElementaryGeotechnical Engineering Unit (Resource Exchange)Grade level: 3-6 (meets 4th grade engineering and earth and space science standards)Time: 8, 1-hour lessons. Final Design Challenge can also be a stand-alone design taskStandards: All NGSS 3-5-ETS standards are met, see full documentation for science standardsIn the ConnecTions in the Making project, researchers and district partners work to develop andstudy community-connected, integrated science and engineering curriculum units that supportdiverse elementary students’ science and engineering ideas, practices, and attitudes. In the units,students use human-centered design strategies to prototype and share functional solutions to adesign challenge rooted in the students
accreditation. Revisions in accreditationcriteria, however small, require reformatting the entire process. The shift from the iconic“(a) thru (k)” student outcomes to the newly minted “(1) thru (5) plus one [1]” may havebeen an improvement, but the effort involved in the transition at the program level has beenhuge. Furthermore, a major disconnect continues to exist between the vocabulary used inindustry (affecting part-time faculty) and that used by accreditation professionals. Severalauthors have investigated these issues and reported their findings but very few results areapplicable to EAC and CAC programs equally [9-19].As a result, the proverbial wheel of assessment and continuous improvement to address theaccreditation needs has been routinely
supportgrowth in the use of campus makerspaces both in numbers of students and the diversity ofbackground and major. Makerspaces have increasingly become part of the landscape of collegesand universities over the past decade, especially in engineering colleges where experientiallearning and design experiences are viewed as essential building blocks in educating newengineers [1]-[3]. Although it is exciting to have these new spaces filled with prototyping tools,professional support, and sets of student super-users, it is imperative that college makerspaces beaccessible, available, and intriguing to the breadth of students enrolled if we want theseparticular resources to positively impact more than a fraction of the student body. Institutionsmay find it
the prototype’s subsystems.1. IntroductionThe inverted pendulum system is an example commonly found in control system textbooks andresearch literature. Balancing of an inverted pendulum on a cart has become a classical problemused in teaching control engineering, and for evaluating controller designs for under-actuatedsystems. This is due to the presence of interesting dynamical characteristics associated with thesystem including nonlinearity, instability, and under-actuation [1, 2, 3, 4]. Various designs ofinverted pendulum mobile robots were introduced recently, for example [5]. The objective of thecontrol system in this project is to balance the inverted pendulum by applying a force to the cartthat the pendulum is attached to. Building an
engineering, particularly for ill-defined engineering problems where thebeginning of the modeling process requires an engineer to make assumptions (e.g. modeling anoddly-shaped beam as a prismatic rectangle) and discretize elements (e.g. modeling theindividual forces of people on a bridge as a distributed load over the entire span) to simplify theproblem. Making assumptions and discretizing elements are part of engineering judgment [1].Engineering judgment is defined as “judgment to make a final call on the reasonableness of theanalysis or design” (p.287, [1]). In practice, engineering judgment can be equated to expertise,which is developed as an engineer spends more time in the profession.This study is part of a larger project studying students
example improved by 5% compared to those who did notexperience this spaced practice. Importantly, they also found that students who employed spacedpractice in this course performed better in the follow-on calculus course, as measured by examscores and final course grade.1 These three examples included only review of concepts from thecourse in which the students were enrolled but not concepts from prerequisite courses. These areremarkable as being among the few studies that have investigated spaced practice in actualclassroom settings rather than the laboratory and all but one focused on the effect on the earlystages of learning (i.e. within the course in which they were originally learned.)THE IDEABased on the literature about spaced practice and
showed enough promise that Dr. Cook decided to pursue funding for thefollowing year. In spring 2019, she assigned the project to the entire class in Elements of SteelDesign for the first time with funding from the makerspace grant. The following fall she ran thissame project with funding from the makerspace grant in Structural Design in Wood, a class shewas teaching for the first time. This course is structurally very similar to Elements of SteelDesign, and caters to the same population of upper classmen, the primary difference between thetwo courses is the change from steel to wood which leads to a shift in certain content andconcepts.Timeline Figure 1: Timeline of Project Development and ResearchMethods and Data
, critical thinking and reading, annotation, visualswith wordsIntroductionEngineering and technology students require reading skills for effectively summarizing technicalinformation and transforming it into actionable form. Students can sharpen reading skills withpractice under increasingly complex conditions. In the 2019 National Survey of StudentEngagement (NSSE) [1] of four-year colleges and first-year university students, 54% percentnoted that there were some to no assignments that required them to summarize the materials theyread, such as articles books, or online publications. In response to the question (1e) aboutwhether they had "Analyzed or evaluated something you read, researched, or observed," 38%noted to have some or fewer such
, gravitational, and fluid-pressuresub-components.1 1 𝑝𝑝 + 𝜌𝜌𝑉𝑉 2 + 𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 2If the specific weight of the fluid being analyzed is divided through each term of the Bernoulliequation, then an alternate form of the energy equation results where each term has a length andrepresents a type of head.2 𝑝𝑝 𝑉𝑉 2 + + 𝑧𝑧 𝛾𝛾 2𝑔𝑔 𝑝𝑝First, the pressure head represented by 𝛾𝛾 is the height that a column of the fluid
. The students were also asked to do research on thedifferent methods of 3D printing that the Department of Energy labs are involved in.The students are taught the basic function of the Autodesk Inventor program and carried outseveral activities to expound the students' understanding of Autodesk Inventor. Among theprojects, the students researched and designed tool holders for standard household tools. Theyalso designed and virtually assembled a weathervane prototype. Several projects have beenperformed, including 1) designing and 3D printing tools holder; 2) designing safe childrenplayground equipment.To have a better understanding of Additive Manufacturing, students watched various videos onseveral 3D printing technologies. Also, students
unit/college administrator. With panelistsfrom four different universities, all in different stages in their careers, an engaged audience thatincludes instructional faculty at all levels, academic leaders and those considering an academiccareer will learn from this panel.Introduction and BackgroundA study by the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford [1] reported that a majorchallenge facing many academic institutions is attracting high quality individuals who have adual-career partner, to join their faculty. For the purposes of this discussion, a dual-career partneris a member of the dual-career couple, who also seeks an academic faculty position. Althoughthe proportion of dual-career academic couples has not changed in 4-year
program in the second summer simplified research activities, implemented adesign and manufacturing project while having frequent feedback and assessment sessions usingclicker.I. IntroductionThe state of Texas enjoys its manufacturing output of $232.2 billions or 15.2% gross stateproduct in 2014, yet Texas has only 7.6% of its workforce in manufacturing [1,2]. Figure 1shows the manufacturing growth in Texas, in terms of real Gross Domestic Product (inflation-adjusted GDP) is almost double that figure of the whole USA [3]. The growth rate for real GDPin Texas has been approximately 57% since 2009 (Fig. 1), but the numbers of manufacturingemployment has been fluctuating in the range ± 6% (Fig. 2). The robust contribution has beendue to the fast