engineering, research [7]-[9] recommends utilizing amore empathy-based or human-centered approach to engineering design processes, centeringengineering as a helping profession, cultivating students’ self-efficacy, and connecting students’interests in engineering. With this in mind, we reviewed curricular resources that aligned withour school’s mission, attended to best practices for advancing girls in engineering, and cultivatedstudents’ engineering habits of mind [10]. Based on convincing evidence, e.g. [11]-[12], weselected resources from the EiE curriculum to complement our CS&E curricular scope andsequence.Relevant to this paper, an example of a selected EiE module is a chemical engineering unit. Toassess the impact of this module on students
becoming certified on a specific machine. Students are alsoencouraged to participate in co-ops and internships through the “Professional Field Experience”course. All students must complete at least three credit hours of “practical experience” earnedthrough completion of one of the above-listed courses.4.1 Manufacturing and Electronics LabsThe main laboratory for four engineering technology courses related to manufacturing processes,applications of technology, and electronic circuits is located in the recently (2020) renovated andrebranded “Innovation Hub” which combines a manufacturing service center and a student-focused maker space.The maker space includes wood-working tools, a computer lab with a variety of engineeringsoftware, plus common
and operations management, tracks and certificates are relevantbecause students can work in several areas. These tracks and certificates show in-depthknowledge about a specific topic, like digital transformation, ergonomics, and quality.University 4Infrastructure to promote hands-on learningThe university has a center that promotes hands-on learning and activities. In this center,students can build whatever they want for the subjects and the various university clubs. Thishands-on learning environment is very important for developing teamwork and criticalthinking. In addition, graduate students are assistants and give some practical classes toundergraduates. These graduate student professors manage to develop other skills, such ascommunication
Director of Diversity and Inclusion at CISTAR, an NSF Engineering Research Center.Kristin Everett Dr. Everett is an educational evaluator and researcher and the lead evaluator at Everett Evaluation. She works with a variety of education programs and projects, including STEM, engineering education, teacher professional development, after school programs, and health education. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com The Value of Assessing, Reporting, and Discussing Culture of Inclusion with a Scale Designed for an Engineering Research Center (Experience)AbstractThere is a common need
Transactions on Education, and past chair of the Educational Research and Methods Division of ASEE. She founded the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching in Engineering at U-M in 2003 and served as its Director for 12 years. Prior to joining U-M, Dr. Finelli was the Richard L. Terrell Professor of Excellence in Teaching, founding director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, and Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering at Kettering University. Dr. Finelli’s current research interests include student resistance to active learning, faculty adoption of evidence-based teaching practices, the use of technology and innovative pedagogies on student learning and success, and the impact of a
of sustainability are integrated withexisting topics (rather than stand-alone) such as energy and water quality further widens this gapbetween environmental and social/economic concerns, making it clear that, at the present time,sustainability education in engineering is dominated by the environmental pillar of sustainability.A broader scope in sustainable practice is beginning to emerge in numerous programs thatimplement sophisticated and more comprehensive sustainability programs and certificationprograms. However, these programs are at the graduate level and are often not designed for orare unable to accommodate the high numbers of undergraduate students who co-exist with thesegraduate programs.14, 15, 16, 17 Without a doubt, more efforts
than twice as likely to enroll in an ET program versus Engineering. Wesuspect it may be due to traditional Engineering programs’ requirement of higher levels of mathand science classes, often lacking in under-privileged or underserved urban or rural high schools.Recently published research by the New York Equity Coalition supports this supposition.Understanding the reasons for the higher representation of these students in ET can provideinsights on the background of these students for developing effective practices and programmingto improve retention of this cohort. It would also provide useful information for increasing thediversity of traditional engineering programs. This paper presents initial findings from a work inprogress that is part
Africa. According to the World Bank [2], Sub-Saharan African countriescurrently lack the engineering capacity required for developmental needs especially in areaslike manufacturing and infrastructure. It is therefore imperative to better understand howpedagogical practices may impact student self-perceptions towards innovation. As thisunderstanding is formed, best practices can be suggested to foster student problem-solvingprowess for economic development.Ashesi University in Ghana is a small, private institution, which aims to offer a moreexperiential approach than the norm. The majority of the students are Ghanaians, but 26% areinternational, coming from 34 countries across Africa [3]. Nearly all come in with similarbackgrounds in terms of
Learning in Engineering Design Education: Sharing Best Practices," in ASEE Annual Conference & Education, Indianapolis, IN, 2014.[8] N. Wijayati, W. Sumarni and S. Supanti, "Improving Student Creative Thinking Skills Through Project Based Learning," in UNNES International Conference on Research Innovation and Commercialization, 2019.[9] S. Y. Chen, C. F. Lai and Y. H. Lai, "Effect of Project-Based Learning on Development of Students' Ceative Thinking," International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education, 2019.[10] L. L. Wu, E. Zhu, C. Callaghan, D. Irwin, D. Reinsdorf, V. Swanson, A. Zwirn and D. Reinkensmeyer, "Rapidly Converting a Project-Based Engineering Experience for Remote Learning: Successes and
the Education of Gifted 38(1), 90-96. DOI: 10.1177/0162353214565558Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., and Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 97, 117-134.Burke, W. (2014). Organization Change: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGECanale, A. & Herdklotz, C. (2012). Evaluation of teaching effectiveness. The Wallace Center at RIT, 1-10.Carmody, L. E. [Review of the book L. Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., Johnson, C. W. (2009). How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. McGraw-Hill] Education Technology Research Development 57, 267-269. DOI:1007/s11423-009-9113
of student experiences within aFIG and its impact on both persistence and academic achievement, questions still remainregarding persistence of various subgroups of students. Given the high attrition rate and declinein enrollment of engineering students, the researchers are particularly interested in the impact ofengineering-focused FIGs on academic success, retention, and graduation of students initiallyinterested in the field of study.This concern with freshmen interest groups (FIGs) for engineering students complements themore general concern of how to increase the quality of undergraduate education and studentretention. In the late eighties, Chickering and Gamson neatly outlined “seven principles of goodpractice in undergraduate education
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Development of an Institutional Teaching ModelAbstractMany universities host centers for learning and teaching that disseminate pedagogical bestpractices, to benefit their faculty and, ultimately, their students. However, many smaller collegesand universities without such centers struggle to provide pedagogical development for theirfaculty due to a lack of knowledge about best practices or the centralized guidance and staff acenter can provide. Oregon Institute of Technology, a small public polytechnic university, took agrass roots approach to this problem. We first established a teaching workshop based on theAmerican Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Excellence in Civil Engineering
impact of globalizationon the practice of engineering. An international summit hosted by ASME concluded thatengineering grand challenges require engineering to evolve as a global profession. Theprofession will become more globally competitive3. Industry and academic leaders rated howimportant it was for engineering graduates of today to be globally competent, averaging 3.8 on a5.0 Likert scale4. A study on global engineering excellence by eight leading internationaluniversities recommended integrating experience-based programs into an internationalcontext. Our design projects use international experience-based projects to improve the globalcompetence of our engineering students5.Several researchers have defined various descriptions of global
post-baccalaureate formal education as well as pre-licensure experience. Specific emphasis is giventhose BOK2 outcomes that previous survey data identified as being a challenge for manyprograms to address within current curricular design. The curriculum, as developed, isconsidered to be BOK2 compliant, in addition to meeting current university graduation andABET/EAC accreditation requirements.IntroductionThe first edition of the Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge for the 21st Century1 (BOK1) wasreleased in January 2004. Based on various inputs, a second edition of the Civil EngineeringBody of Knowledge for the 21st Century2 (BOK2) was developed and released in February 2008.The BOK1 has already impacted accreditation criteria and civil
Paper ID #35262Informing Authentic P-12 Engineering Outreach EffortsDr. Jamie R Gurganus, University of Maryland Baltimore County Dr. Jamie Gurganus is the undergraduate program coordinator and a faculty member in the Mechanical Engineering Department at UMBC, Director for the Center for the innovative, teaching, research and learning and she is the Associate Director of Engineering Education Initiatives at COEIT. Her research is focused on solving problems relating to educating and developing engineers, teachers, and the community at all levels (k12, undergraduate, graduate, post-graduate and faculty development). She
curriculum criteria.The core curriculum courses are typically planned for the first two years of the degree programs.In the last three decades, the first year (and in some instances, the second year) curriculum alsobecame a focus of attention for recruitment, retention, and attrition efforts [3-7]. The retentionand attrition rates are usually at the center of this discussion as they can be directly linked toother metrics, including graduation rates. Several AEC programs also explored the idea of aninterdisciplinary/multi-disciplinary curriculum, which utilized a common curriculum in the firstand second years for multiple majors [8-10].Two specific observations can be noted from the decades-long research work: 1) the first andsecond-year success and
. Page 11.923.2© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 MEMS and Microsystem Courses with National and International Dissemination*AbstractThe Wireless Integrated MicroSystems (WIMS) Engineering Research Center (ERC) hasdeveloped a broad comprehensive MEMS and microsystem curriculum suitable for upper-levelundergraduate students, graduate students, and industry professionals. Five core courses were inthe initial curriculum design. The design had flexibility that invited development of other corecourses, as well as related technical electives and breadth electives. The core courses provideinstruction in MEMS, Microsystems, major design and laboratory measurements, and societalimpact. The course
education, guided numerous Women in Center for Research Advancing With a sharp focus on big-picture Ershela is now channeling her Engineering (WIE) and Minority Racial Equity, Justice, and thinking and a gift for fostering expertise to researching the Engineering Programs (MEP) to Sociotechnical Innovation Centered collaborative connections, she has everyday experiences of those within thrive in today’s competitive in Engineering (RARE JUSTICE) and redefined how clients approach the equity spectrum. As an industry landscape. With a deep an Assistant Professor of creativity in their daily lives, leader, she is
notnecessarily a design approach that was taught to the graduate students on theproject as they all did their undergraduate degrees at other institutions. So itprovided an opportunity for the graduate students to learn Design Thinking andHuman Centered Design by doing. 15This picture was taken at our first focus group meeting with all stakeholders.During this meeting we learned about differences in class size and classroom time.We also learned how much time the usually devote to a certain topic area and howlong a hands on project could last before losing student interest and engagement.In order to keep track of so many moving parts in this project, Professor
Regression, Experimental Design, Program Evaluation, and Survey Methods. Page 19.14.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 1 Engineering Leadership Development Programs: Universities Respond to Critical Needs in the US and InternationallyIntroduction In a world where technological innovation continues to accelerate, engineers need tocontinuously evolve and improve, just like the new technology they are developing. The need forengineers to be effective leaders and
. There were 14 benchmarks in STELStandard 1 that explicitly reflected the NOEK; six in middle grades and eight in the high schoolbenchmarks. However, the societal and cultural dimension of the NOEK was exclusive to thehigh school grade band while both its empirical basis and the personal dimension were exclusiveto the middle grade band. For example, benchmark 1N identifies how high school learnersshould graduate high school with the societal and cultural understanding about the NOEK that Technological developments are best achieved through experiences and interactions within a given context. For example, design of buildings should take into account local conditions including soil type, wind, and snow loads, and should also
schoolthat focused on promoting STEM learning for underrepresented populations through makerspaceexplorations bounded in STEAM practices. This paper and research ask, “What do kindergartenmakerspaces look like in the El Paso-Juarez border region?”, “How do engineering and artintersect in kindergarten makerspaces?” and “What occurs, is experienced or learned in theseintersections in a kindergarten makerspace?” We contend that skills and knowledge developed in makerspaces straddle STEM,specifically the design process commonly discussed in engineering education, in relation to theEngineering is Elementary model [3] and studio art practices, described by Hetland et al’s [4]Studio Habits of Mind. Our approach, very much like Lachapelle and
) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems(f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility(g) an ability to communicate effectively(h) the broad education necessary to understand the impact 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(j) a knowledge of contemporary issues(k) an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering tools necessary for engineering practice
to thehypothesis. The student deliverable for each technology centered unit was a written reportsummarizing and citing the resources found and a conclusion that inferred whether thehypothesis was supported or not supported. Each student also presented a brief oral report.In addition to individual research activities, the class conducted a survey on issues associatedwith the impact of technology on society, using their friends and classmates as subjects. Thesurvey instrument was constructed collaboratively during the course of the semester with Page 12.928.5students suggesting and critiquing questions. Examples of questions created include
context: Implementation of CE Education requiresknowledge of workforce development, community, government coalitions, funding, and policy.Research activities focus on the best practices in these areas and are informed by socioeconomicfactors that influence the findings' scope and impact on social justice. The research design andimplementation plan are created from what is learned in the literature review, using researchtools, and methods aligned with supporting theories.1. Illuminating Truths in a Literature ReviewAs a writer, Lamott's TEDR speech video [14] is motivational about finding the truths we wish toreveal through writing. I want to reveal the “truth” that advances in clean energy technology andthe rapid growth in the CE sector
overengineering of solutions that are so common in products, projects, orprocesses that are loaded with features that have little value to most consumers, we focused onfrugality in design thinking as a way of bringing products within the reach of a larger segment of thepopulation by focusing on the customer. Frugal Engineering can be defined as a process that reducesproduct/process/project complexity with a focus on customer need and affordability. Some universitieshave already seen the need for frugality, as in the Frugal Innovation Hub at Santa Clara University(https://www.scu.edu/engineering/labs--research/labs/frugal-innovation-hub/), and the Social E Lab atStanford University where complete projects as part of a program in Design for Extreme
and by connecting problems to the student’s pre-existingknowledge. As stated in Huet et al. 8 courses “should present real-world problems, in whichfuture engineers are expected to not only understand the phenomena involved but also to solveproblems”.Additionally, information on how a practicing engineer would attack problems is rarelypresented for many textbook or instructor derived cases thereby limiting their impact. Researchinto good teaching practices, and active learning methods in particular, demonstrates thatstudents’ performance improves when strategies and skills are modeled for students 9. In otherwords, students learn best when they see how others approach and solve a problem. With respectto critical thinking skills and design
engineering technology.The current plastics laboratory course indicates deficiencies for undergraduate students to dealwith complex material systems in characterization and testing for selection and design purposes.We develop the concepts involved in converting a traditional “verification” experiment (wherethe student verifies a principle taught in the classroom) to a "guided inquiry" experiment (wherethe student discovers the concept using the data and information collected.) and to reemphasizediscovery-type experiments (i.e. research). The main purpose of this study was to develop andenhance plastics laboratory practices to increase engagements in an active-learning pedagogythrough the modification of POGIL strategies. In addition, we attempted to
, while staff members naturally exchange best practices and innovative teaching technologies. The effectiveness of the implemented model, as reported in the session, suggests that other institutions interested in promoting STEM programs may replicate it with success. This underscores the project's impact and potential for broader dissemination of effective strategies within the educational community. REFERENCES1. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Projections overview and highlights, 2018– 2028, https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2019/article/projections-overview-and-highlights-2018- 28.htm [February 5, 2024].2. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics; Employment in STEM occupations; https://www.bls.gov/emp
mentoring Student support Collaborative learning Community Welcoming spaces Personal connectionsLiterature review: Inclusive learning environments best practices Reference available upon request “Making Culture” Report - ExCITe Center RecommendationsKim, Y., Edouard, K., Alderfer, K. and Smith, B. (2018). Making Culture: A National Studyof Education Makerspaces. [online] Drexel University. Creating an Inclusive Makerspace CultureGoal: increase student sense of belonging in undergraduateengineering students by integrating inclusive and equitableelements into an academic makerspace. Work Engagement