O’Mahony, University of Washington Dr. O’Mahony is currently a Research Fellow at the University of Washington LIFE Center (Learning in Informal and Formal Environments). His research interests stem from a translation of latest neuroscience findings into practical applications in the classroom for teachers, students and parents. Pedagogical impli- cations for his research have meaningful connections to workforce learning and training in the industrial sector for adult learners. In particular, Dr. O’Mahony focuses a research strand to educational practices and principles in engineering and aerospace learning.Dr. Michael J. Prince, Bucknell University Dr. Michael Prince is a professor of chemical engineering at Bucknell
College and the Center for Research onDevelopmental Education and Urban Literacy, http://www.gen.umn.edu/research/crdeu.[7] Dorsey, J., Z. Qu, J. Maghill, and D.M. Dawson, “Integrating the Classroom and Laboratory:An approach to Capstone Design, “ IEEE Transactions on Education, vol 35, 1992, pp. 235-239.[8] Judith A. Ramaley, “The Engaged University: Research, Education and Community,”National Science Foundation, June 2005.[9] Lindsay, A., “What’s a Microcontroller?” Parallax Inc., 2005.[10] Microchip PIC Microcontrollers ,http://www.microchip.com/1010/pline/picmicro/index.htm, accessed March 2008.[11] Etlinger, H.A. “Retrospective on an Early Software Projects Course,” Twenty Firt SIGCSETechnical symposium on Computer Science Education, 1990
howcommuters use the financial assistance that they receive and its impact on the progress they maketowards completing their degrees; (c) identifying the support practices and interventions thatenhance the academic success of commuter students from among the many that are provided byuniversities and colleges; and (d) identifying the challenges that commuters face with jugglingresponsibilities and obligations from home, work, and school.Rationale and Approach of the ProjectThe objectives of this project are to (a) increase graduation rates of the STEM cohorts; (b) buildthe foundation for a sustainable institutional structure and support STEM scholars and otherstudents; (c) carry out research designed to advance understanding of the factors, practices
Civil EngineeringDr. Jennifer Harper Ogle, Clemson University Dr. Jennifer Ogle is a Professor in the Glenn Department of Civil Engineering at Clemson University, and a 2005 graduate of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Georgia Tech. Her research portfolio focuses on transportation infrastructure design, safety, accessibility, and management. She is currently the facilitator for the NSF Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer Science Depart- ments (RED) grant at Clemson, and is leading three transformation efforts related to culture, curriculum, and community to achieve adaptability, innovation, and shared vision. Alongside her research, Dr. Ogle has been active in the development of engaged
research interests and ac- tivities center on gaining a better understanding of the process-structure-property-performance relations of structural materials through advanced multiscale theoretical framework and integrated computational and experimental methods. To date, Dr. Liu has published nearly 250 peer reviewed publications, includ- ing more than 130 peer reviewed journal articles, and received 2 patents. He has been the PI and co-PI for over 40 research projects funded by NSF, DOD, DOE, NASA, FAA, Louisiana Board of Regents, and industry with a total amount over $15.5M. Dr. Liu has served on review panels for many NSF, DOD, NASA, and DOE programs. Dr. Liu received the Junior Faculty Researcher of the Year of the
large contextual projects as part of their coursework) contributed to the developmentof a professional identity amongst recent graduates. Similarly, for undergraduate students, designexperiences [24], participating in technological innovation competitions [25], enjoyment ofelements of professional engineering practice [26], and engagement in engineering-relatedactivities [27] predicted undergraduates’ engineering identity.A sense of belonging is more associated with positive social and relational experiences. Bothformal and informal mentoring, especially for underrepresented students, were important forfostering belonging [11, 28, 29]. Peer mentors with the same identities as mentees could beespecially effective [30, 31]. Actions of faculty
experiences for first year studentsa. By 1982, over 175 educators acrossthe country came together to discuss first-year seminars, and the following year the AnnualConference on the Freshman Year Experience was born. Today, an effective first-yearexperience has been identified as a high impact educational practice by the Association ofAmerican Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). Although these experiences differ significantlyfrom university to university, ranging anywhere from a single course specifically taken in themajor itself, through more involved practices including live-learn communities, Kuh emphasizesthe most influential points of a first-year experience include a “strong emphasis on criticalinquiry, frequent writing, information literacy
. In 2009, he began his M.B.A. at Michigan Technological University finishing in summer 2010. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Growing Entrepreneurial Mindset in Interdisciplinary Student Engineers: Experiences of a Project-Based Engineering ProgramAbstractEngineering education models have recently embraced the entrepreneurial mindset as a desiredoutcome of undergraduate engineering education. Interdisciplinary active learning strategies havebeen suggested as an effective pedagogy for engaging student engineers in undergraduateengineering education. Recent research suggests that active, social learning in context can lead toimprovements in learner innovation, problem-solving
characteristics of effective PD identified in the literature include:(i) sufficient duration; (ii) focus on subject matter; (iii) hands-on activities; (iv) attention toproblems of practice; and (v) institutional support for implementation. It is further suggested thatteacher learning is best promoted by a set of complementary approaches, such as summer PD andonline discussions as follow up [24].Traditionally, the focus of teacher PD programs has been on preparing teachers to follow, ratherthan to create or adapt, innovative, research-based curriculum materials [25]. However, whenteachers do not understand the underlying model of the expert-designed curricula provided tothem, they tend to pick and choose elements of the new curriculum to fit their
academic Center inFebruary 2009. At that time, the underlying foundation for ProSTAR’s professional educationactivities was a Master of Science degree with a primary focus in technology leadership andinnovation skills including tools for process improvement and quality management.In addition, this program incorporated other innovations beyond its delivery system, scheduleand fee structure. To be consistent with its goal of developing practical skills and knowledgeimmediately, or at least quickly, applicable to business and industry, its plan of study [3]incorporates a base of essential core studies, flexible and easily tailored courses to insurerelevance to emerging technologies, and a guided, industry focused applied research anddevelopment
Nebraska Lincoln. She has experience con- ducting workshops at engineering education conferences and has been a guest editor for a special issue of European Journal of Engineering Education on inclusive teamwork.Kayla Osen ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 A Measure of Engineering Instructors’ Adaptability Based on Cognitive, Behavioral, and Emotional DimensionsAbstractThis Research paper considers an adaptability framework for providing insight into facultydevelopment in the face of engineering being slow to adopt best practices in teaching. Astraditional change models (e.g., Diffusion of Innovations) have not produced the results that arehoped for, a look through a lens
Paper ID #6119Not All the Same: A Look at Early Career Engineers Employed in DifferentSub-OccupationsMs. Samantha Brunhaver, Stanford University Samantha Brunhaver is a fifth year graduate student at Stanford University. She is currently working on her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering with a focus in engineering education. Samantha completed a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University in 2008 and a M.S. in Mechanical Engineering with a focus in Design for Manufacturing from Stanford in 2010.Dr. Shannon Katherine Gilmartin, Stanford UniversityMichelle Marie Grau, Stanford University Michelle Grau is a senior
diligent execution of the plans. This paper presents our learningexperiences from launching the BS in construction engineering program at The Citadel to: i) identify thekey challenges and obstacles encountered in developing a new program and how they were overcome, ii)provide recommendations for best practices in launching a new college degree program, iii) todisseminate the lessons learned from the launch process and to encourage other institutions to considersimilar programs, and iv) to identify areas for improvement in existing construction engineering programsand suggest strategies to implement the improvements.An Overview of The Program Development ProcessDevelopment of the new BS in Construction Engineering program from internal discussions
Paper ID #11690A Cross-Sectional Study of Engineering Student Perceptions and ExperiencesRelated to Global ReadinessDr. Sarah E Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Sarah Zappe is Research Associate and Director of Assessment and Instructional Support in the Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education at Penn State. She holds a doctoral degree in educational psychology emphasizing applied measurement and testing. In her position, Sarah is responsible for developing instructional support programs for faculty, providing evaluation support for educational proposals and projects, and working
[26], hands-ondesign for team work experience [27], multidisciplinary teamwork with real customers [28], andproject-based learning in combination with other pedagogical approaches [29].Typical examples of studies that combined first-year students with upper-year students includedan engineering clinic, an engineering education center and structure that promotes practice-oriented team experiences [30], and a multi-disciplinary laboratory course [31]. An example of astudy that combined undergraduate and graduate engineering students was the Systems andSoftware Engineering Affinity Research Group, a non-hierarchical model that provides asocialization mechanism and infrastructure to support the development and management ofstudents in small and
research/teaching focuses on engineering as an innovation in pK-12 education, policy of STEM education, how to support teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering, engineering ’habits of mind’ and empathy and care in engi- neering. He has published more than 140 journal articles and proceedings papers in engineering education and educational technology and is the inaugural editor for the Journal of Pre-College Engineering Educa- tion Research.Dr. Jennifer Kadlowec, Rowan UniversityProf. Andrea Jennifer Vernengo, Rowan University Jennifer Vernengo is an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. Jennifer re- ceived her Ph.D. from Drexel University in 2007. She began work as a
a lab experience. The new labfacility would allow EET 3373 and EET 4373 to be revised and enhanced to make the coursesappropriate for both ECE and EET students. Students from both disciplines would benefit fromusing the most current PLC technology and would have the opportunity to interface the PLC’swith a new and much expanded set of digital and analog devices that are used in industry. Inaddition, the new equipment will allow us to develop industry-relevant learning materials, andprovide state-of the-art knowledge and experience to students utilizing the facility. Thisknowledge and experience will result in a well-educated graduate with practical hands-onexperience designing, configuring, and troubleshooting industrial control systems
– foundations of teachingand learning. Tier 2: Scholarship – educational research and scholarly work in the field. Tier 3:Practice and Portfolio – reflective teaching portfolio development and peer mentoring.Tier 1 Content: Foundations of Teaching and Learning - Putting theory into practiceAreas of focus for this level of faculty development should include: Learning styles/Learning processes. Learning theory. Course and curriculum design. Constructive Alignment. Active learning (student engagement). Assessment and Evaluation. Teaching with Technology.Tier 2 Content: Scholarship:In this level participants become engaged in a largely self-directed process of developing,documenting, and exploring their own ‘mental model’ of
, International Business Incubator and the San Jose BioscienceIncubator and Innovation Center, which opened in June 2004. The first three were developedfrom 1992-1994. This emphasis on business incubation is the result of a partnership between the SJSUFoundation and the City of San Jose’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and the incubators. Theincubators are led by experienced business people who have the skills and experience to knowhow to assist start ups and function relative autonomously. The RDA budgeted an investment of $6.5 million in the new San Jose BioscienceIncubator and Innovation Center: $500K in the design, $5.5 million for the construction and$500 K as an operation subsidy. The RDA invested $14,000,000 into the first three
programs for KUSU graduates at Syracuse University, and professionaldevelopment workshops for teachers in Kenya. The interventions were based on quantitativeresearch studies conducted to determine where they would be most appropriate. The KUSUpartnership was structured on design-based research (DBR) methods framework. Figure 4describes the design-based research process. 12 Analysis of Development of Iterative practical solutions Reflection to cycles of problems by informed by
from proper planning. URL (last checked 31 Dec 2011) http://www.shiftelearning.com/key-success-factors-for-elearning-implementation-resulting-from- properplanning/ 8. Harasim, L. (2003). Elearning communities of practice for teachers. In the electronic classroom of tomorrow. Columbus, Ohio: EOS Publishing. 9. Khan, B.H. (2001). A framework for web-based learning. New Jersey, USA: Educational Technology Publication, Engelwood Cliffs. 10. Kuhl, A., Reiser, C., Eickhoff, J., & Petty, E. M. (2014). Genetic counseling graduate student debt: Impact on program, career and life choices. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 23(5), 824-837. doi:10.1007/s10897014-9700-0 11. Lennon, J., Maurer H.: “Why it
adjunct faculty member at University of Texas, Austin. He has received numerous professional awards including a NASA Post-Doctorial Fellowship, ASEE Best Paper Awards, the ASME Most Innovative Curriculum Award, the Ernest L. Boyer - International Award for Excellence in Teach- ing, the US Air Force Academy Seiler Award for Excellence in Engineering Research and the Outstanding Academy Educator Award. He has published over 100 technical articles and generated approximately $3.5 million of research; all at institutions with no graduate program. His research includes development of innovative design methodologies and enhancement of engineering education. The design methodology re- search focuses on development and testing
meet this goal, this study addressed three research questions: 1) What factors influence a community college student’s decision to continue studies at a 4-‐ year university? 2) For students that pursue transferring to the University of Virginia’s School of Engineering and Applied Science, what are some of the barriers encountered in the process and post-‐ matriculation? 3) How can the Center for Diversity in Engineering support enhancement of the existing pathways to promote transfer student success at the university and beyond? Research Design Participants & Data Collection This
AC 2012-5305: PREPARING AND INSPIRING MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOLSTUDENTS WITH A PRE-FRESHMAN ENGINEERING PROGRAM.Dr. Stephen W. Crown, University of Texas, Pan American Stephen Crown is a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Texas, Pan American. He has been actively involved in a number of grants supporting innovative and effective teaching methods for engineering education. Crown is Director of the outreach component of a large Department of De- fense Center of Excellence grant that supports curriculum development for the Pre-freshman Engineering Program (PREP). Crown has been the Director of Edinburg PREP for five years
Projects Agency (DARPA), and R&D grant from Northrop Grumman to develop Anomaly Mining algorithms and apply them to solve real-world problems. She also worked as a Research Intern in the Information Security team at IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center. She has been awarded two NSF: Computer and Information Science and Engineering - Minority Serving Institution (CISE-MSI) grants as a Co-PI, (1) to increase the research capacity at SUNY OW by creating the infrastructure for big data research, incorporating course embedded undergraduate research experience, and training undergraduate students in big data research through seminars, workshops, and summer bridge programs, (2) to design an AI-driven counseling system for
partnering with area high school math and science teachers in Discovery Weekends for high school students. • Louisiana Tech’s S-STEM Scholarship Program – NSF-0631083 – scholarship program supporting the Freshman Enrichment Program (FrEP) students. • Innovation through Multidisciplinary Projects and Collaborative Teams (IMPaCT) – NSF-0536082 – motivates students to look at the “big picture” in a horizontally and vertically integrated program centered on year-long design projects. • Living with the Lab – NSF-0618288 – encourages students to develop a “can do” attitude by giving students ownership of a mobile experiment platform. • University Seminar
would be coordinatedwith individuals departments to occur during the time of the visit; (2) Meetings with faculty toexplore potential research collaborations, development of center-level initiatives and “exchange”of research personnel in the form of students and post doctoral associates; (3) Collaborativenetworking between the visiting scholars that will incorporate elements of the summits to createlong term community, and; (4) On-site coaching and mentoring for URM and women students(undergraduate and graduate) on the host campus. Table 3 shows the elements in a basicschedule that colleges could start with for the regional summits. 1) Scholarly
faculty mentorship, the pathway into and through graduate education, and gender and race in engineering.Dr. Allison Godwin, Purdue University, West Lafayette Allison Godwin, Ph.D. is an associate professor in the Robert Frederick Smith School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at Cornell University. She is also the Engineering Workforce Development Director for CISTAR, the Center for Innovative and Strategic Transformation of Alkane Resources, a Na- tional Science Foundation Engineering Research Center. Her research focuses on how identity, among other affective factors, influences diverse students to choose engineering and persist in engineering. She also studies how different experiences within the practice and
focused on Human Centered Systems Design and Engineering c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 How Problem-Solving Skills Develop: Studying Metacognition in a PBL Engineering CurriculumIntroductionMetacognition is “knowledge of one’s knowledge, processes, and cognitive and affective states;and the ability to consciously and deliberately monitor and regulate one’s knowledge, processes,and cognitive and affective states” [1, pp. 3]. Metacognition is a higher-order thinking skill andis critical for the development of self-directed learning. Self-directed learning, which consists ofsuch skills as identifying one’s knowledge strengths and weaknesses, questioning one’s
-9830.2006.tb00885.x[5] M. Prince, “Does active learning work? A review of the research,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 223-231, 2004. doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x[6] L. D. Feisel, and A. J. Rosa, “The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 121-130, 2005. doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00833.x[7] A. Cheville, “Designing Successful Design Projects,” presented at ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky, 2010.[8] A. Shekar, “Project-based Learning in Engineering Design Education: Sharing Best Practices,” presented at ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis