, project-based design courses. She has also studied and published on other aspects of the student experience, including studies of persistence and migration (why students stay in engineering or choose to leave), as well as differences in the engineering experience between male and female students. In 2010, she received an NSF CAREER Award in support of her research on engineering education. Page 25.417.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Developing a Small-Footprint Bioengineering ProgramAbstractThe field of bioengineering is rapidly changing and expanding to
industrial aspects. Mark received his Professional Engineering (PE) license in 2009 in the Metals and Materials specialty. Page 24.1390.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Work in Progress: International BME Capstone and Summer Design ExperienceIntroductionEducation that includes international experiences has long been seen as an important way to givestudents a unique perspective and skill set for their future career endeavors. Seldom, however,do these experiences include rigorous engineering education. This can be due to constraints of atypical
Number of Jobs, 2014 22,100 Job Outlook, 2014-24 23% (Much faster than average) Employment Change, 2014-24 5,100Johns Hopkins University has been offering part-time master’s degree programs for workingprofessionals for over 50 years, and in biomedical engineering for almost 25 years. Our goal is toprepare professional engineers for careers in biomedical engineering by supplementing theirundergraduate education with the necessary molecular, cellular, and systems physiology, as wellas analytical problem solving to tackle today’s health care challenges. Since many of ourstudents are interested in changing their occupation, it is critical to provide them with the hands-on skills needed to
efforts on research, service, and teaching on the pathtoward promotion and tenure, with less emphasis placed on translating findings outside of the labduring their academic training. Alternatively, graduate students seeking careers in industry or asentrepreneurs have a keen interest in innovation and commercialization and hope to developskills in this area. Unfortunately, it can be difficult to address the opportunities and challenges ofcommercialization and entrepreneurship while also meeting the demands of academia. Ourobjective was to develop a course to meet the unique needs of both groups by providing studentswith real-world experience in technology commercialization while at the same timeproviding Faculty with structured support to bring
providing students with ample opportunity during their undergraduate careers to learn how toeffectively engage in a team. In an effort to enhance student engagement and incorporateprinciples of teamwork and design earlier into our curriculum, our first year, introductorybiomedical engineering (BME) course was redesigned from a traditional, lecture-based surveycourse to an active, team-based learning course. The Fall 2015 quarter was the first offering ofthis redesign, and this Works in Progress paper presents the redesign methods used and discusseshow students operated in a team as assessed by modes of communication, level of organization,and peer-evaluation.MethodsThe previous structure of this Introduction to BME course consisted of guest
currently pursues educational research activities, with the ultimate goal of optimizing bioengineering curriculum design and student learning outcomes. Page 25.1409.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Use of Case Studies and a Systematic Analysis Tool to Engage Undergraduate Bioengineering Students in Ethics EducationAbstractIn addition to developing technical skills, engineering undergraduates must also be prepared tonavigate the ethical issues they will encounter during their professional careers. Inbioengineering in particular, students must be prepared to identify
six areas that should be taken intoconsideration when developing course goals: foundational knowledge, application, integration,human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn.6A consideration for our department was that we have several “pathways” or plans of study withinbioengineering, such as biomaterials, biomechanics, tissue engineering, etc. This introductoryBioE course needed to support the educational desires of all bioengineering students as well ashelp those students that were “undecided” or unsure as to which pathway best fit their longer-term career goals.With the redesign, the new goals for BIOE 2001 are: “At the end of the course, students will… I. Be more interested in the bioengineering field so that they can
means ofdeveloping a diverse, internationally competitive, and globally-engaged science and engineeringworkforce. After an undergraduate research experience students should be prepared andmotivated to pursue careers in science and engineering. A critical component of an effectiveprogram is the cultivation of a positive and supportive community by fostering student-studentand student-faculty relationships. The potential benefits of transitioning a summer researchexperience composed primarily of isolated research and seminars to one based on a learningcommunity approach has recently been demonstrated. In 2008, the Department ofBioengineering at The University of California, San Diego (UCSD) initiated a ten-week summerprogram through a National
them on being admitted to BME. ● Let the mentees know they can ask to meet with you or ask questions anytime. Let them know that you will initiate at least 4 meetings. ● Let the mentees know you are a resource for scheduling, learning about design, navigating the COE, career/advanced education opportunities in BME etc. In your meetings this semester, it would be valuable to discuss the following: ● Ask them why they chose BME and if their plans have changed to another discipline. ● Ask about their first few weeks here on campus (so we can gather info about the "Freshman" experience). ● Tell them about your research/design project/extracurricular activities. ● Ask
involves faculty and students spanningthree academic units at our university - Biomedical Engineering, Biological Sciences, andAnimal Science. The goals of our program are to prepare students for careers in regenerativemedicine in both academia and industry by providing them with broad technical, critical thinking,and problem solving skills. This paper will discuss the evolution of the program and assessmentof the program and our students.The Regenerative Medicine Program is a two-year program that consists of three components -one year of coursework, a nine-month internship, and a three-month Master’s project.Coursework includes intensive lab work and focuses on principles of stem cell biology, cellculture, scaffold development, cell sodding
programs, about ten students from different parts in thecountry meet at the REU hosting institution and perform research and career-developmentactivities for 10 weeks. The NSF-funded REU program at our Institute is the first one thatfocuses on Neural Engineering: a hot topic in research and also highly sought after by students.Neural engineering is a rapidly growing interdisciplinary research area that takes an engineeringapproach to analyze neurological function and to understand, repair, replace, or enhance thenervous system. The main goal of a neural engineer is to develop solutions to neurological andrehabilitative problems. The REU site in neural engineering (NEURON REU) at the New JerseyInstitute of Technology (NJIT) is led by our biomedical
encouraged to share their ideas withfaculty and other students during discussions. Both courses have proven to be successful informat and content. Students enjoyed the variety of topics that were presented, met thedepartment faculty at an early stage, and were assisted in picking an area of focus withinbioengineering. Since these courses were pass/fail, the students did not feel pressured at avulnerable time in their college career, when they are transitioning to the demands of collegecourses. Group design project gave the students some experience with working on teams andperforming background research necessary for research, and prepared them for other courses.Introduction The bioengineering program at UCSD was founded in 1966 with an
incorporation of „conference style writing‟ as a teaching toolinto an introductory multidisciplinary (Bioengineering and Materials Science) laboratory course.The goal of this work was to evaluate the use of “conference style” abstracts, oral presentationsand poster presentations to teach undergraduate laboratories, and evaluate the students perceivedvalue of these tools and skills in their future engineering careers. A 1 credit (3 hours per weekfor 16 weeks) materials science laboratory was used to instruct 7 materials science laboratoriesusing pre-lab conference skills tutorials, pre-lab content quizzes, individual student 1 pageabstract submissions, team conference presentations and final team poster presentations. Theresults of this work show that
synthesis, purification, analysis, and identification.The question on relevance asked: “Please rate how relevant you think the knowledge you willgain in the following classes would be to a typical career in biomedical engineering.” The Likertscale included the headings: “No relevance”, “Low relevance”, “Moderate relevance”, “Highrelevance”, and “Essential relevance”. Students were supplied with catalog descriptions of thecourses because most students had not yet taken these courses and might not know what thesecourses were. These descriptions are shown in Table 1.The question on motivation asked: “Please rate how motivated you are to learn the material thatwill be taught in the following courses.” The Likert scale included the headings: “Not at
Appendix). Prior to their use, the surveyswere approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Western New England University.The primary goal of the surveys was to measure student interest and attitudes toward the POCTfield. The surveys consisted of 5-choice Likert questions that were designed to obtain studentfeedback on their current knowledge of POCT, confidence in their ability to develop POCTdevices, level of interest in pursuing further studies/training/careers in the area of POCT, and thesuitability of POCT devices for solving problems in medicine and biology. Students alsocompleted a Likert-scale skills inventory that prompted them to rate their current level ofknowledge and confidence in their ability to develop and/or utilize the
them better understand their own learning (63% M, 73% E), andincreased responsibility for their learning (62% M, 69% E). Also, students felt the muddiestpoint exercise did not take too much effort (85% M, 79% E), make them feel anxious orfrustrated (88% M, 87% E), and did not require too much time (92% M, 87% E). Lastly,students felt that the material learned in the course will be of value after graduation (96% M,96% E), will be useful in their careers (94% M, 94% E), and helped them see real-worldrelevance of the material (94% M, 96% E). These results are summarized below in Table 1. INTEREST/ATTAINMENT VALUE Agree motivated me to do well in the course 50% (M), 58% (E
skillsnecessary to embark on successful careers and to contribute to the advancement of the currentstate of bioengineering. To this end, at our institution we have conducted an extensiveexamination of our undergraduate bioengineering program. The goal of this study was to utilizea variety of assessment techniques in order to enhance our understanding of the strengths andlimitations of our curriculum and to identify any aspects of the curriculum which could beoptimized to better meet the needs of the modern bioengineering undergraduate student.In this paper, we present our comprehensive approach to assessing the effectiveness of thecurrent curriculum at the University of Washington. We describe the multiple methods of self-analysis implemented over the
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 with faculty to publish educational research. Her research interests primarily involve creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurship education.Prof. Keefe B. Manning, Pennsylvania State University, University ParkDr. Margaret J. Slattery, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Margaret Slattery Ph.D., has been a faculty member at Penn State University in Biomedical Engineering since 2007 and her career has focused on undergraduate students and their academic experiences. She currently is directing a new office within
part.Preliminary student assessment indicates that the students feel that designing, rapid prototyping,and physically producing the Cube of Knowledge was both a valuable and enjoyable experience.The vast majority of students agree that the project experience will be valuable for senior designand their future engineering careers. Additionally, they indicated that they would like to see themodule expanded to include a larger variety of fabrication techniques and more time for basicskill development.IntroductionGiven the broad spectrum of topics that must be addressed in an undergraduate biomedicalengineering (BME) curriculum it is difficult to provide adequate exposure to students in designand manufacturing technology such as computer-aided design (CAD) and
teaching development(TD) programs is the Longitudinal Study of Future STEM Scholars (Connolly et al., 2016),which studied graduate students from three large institutions. The goal of this work was toanswer the question “What are the short- and long-term effects of TD programs on doctoralstudents’ teaching-related skills, knowledge, attitudes, and career choices?” The three mostimportant results are captured in the executive summary: “1) TD during the doctoral programhad positive, significant effects for all participants, including those who do not take positions inacademia after graduating. 2) Participating in TD programs during the doctoral program had noeffect on students’ time to degree completion, which was six years on average. 3) For
. Caspi is interested in ways by which universal design, collaborative commons and cooperation can challenge and transform computing disciplines and technology design.Dr. Katherine M. Steele, University of Washington Dr. Steele is an assistant professor in mechanical engineering at the University of Washington. She received her BS in engineering from the Colorado School of Mines and MS and PhD in mechanical en- gineering from Stanford University. She leads the Ability & Innovation Lab, dedicated to designing new tools and techniques to improve human ability through engineering, and also a leader of AccessEngineer- ing to enable individuals with disabilities to pursue careers in engineering. Dr. Steele previously
Page 12.755.5with industry members, professors, graduate students, and UCSD alumni/ae. The halftime eventwas so successful that it was extended from the originally-planned 15 minutes to >30 minutes.Students interacted with faculty, graduate students, industry members and alumni to talk aboutresearch and job openings, current trends in bioengineering, career development decisions, and,in general, gained insight into what their futures might hold.The Future of BQBsThe 1st BQB completed its mission, to establish a tradition in the UCSD Department ofBioengineering, to foster recognition of advances in bioengineering, to raise awareness ofachievements in the field of bioengineering, to connect students with educators and members ofindustry, and
Paper ID #16776Work in Progress: Reviving a Transport Phenomena Course by Incorporat-ing Simulation and Laboratory ExperiencesDr. Marcia Pool, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dr. Marcia Pool is a Lecturer in bioengineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In her career, Marcia has been active in improving undergraduate education through developing problem-based laboratories to enhance experimental design skills; developing a preliminary design course focused on problem identification and market space (based on an industry partner’s protocol); and mentoring and guiding student teams through the
in responsefollowing the event. Question 3 was not directly tied toan activity, requiring students to extrapolate from theirexperiences. The other two questions (2 and 6) wereanswered correctly by more than 80% of students atthe start.Student inspiration is more difficult to track, in partbecause we did not link responses from specificstudents between surveys. Hence, the lack ofsignificant change on these questions could represent asubset of students with increased interest and anothersubset with decreased interest, cancelling one anotherout. In relating biomechanics to careers, our activitiesmay have communicated the relevance ofbiomechanics to athletics, but in the future we plan tocreate clearer links between biomechanics andadditional
thatdistinguish itself from the other ITL methods: (1) A relatively longer duration and amount oftime a student is involved in the research project; (2) A clearly defined research scope andobjective; and (3) Promotion of both teamwork and individual excellence. This paper describeshow I leveraged my own background and student interest to initiate the collaborative researchproject, how undergraduates participated in the research project through different avenues, andhow the experience enhanced their skills in critical analysis, problem-solving, communicationand teamwork, which positively impacts their career, regardless of whether they pursue anindustry job or an academic position after graduation.Some practices I have been promoting in undergraduate
instructors compile adescriptive list of potential projects which is distributed to Capstone students at the beginning ofthe course. A “BME Capstone Project Fair” is held one week later, where all potential advisorsand students gather to interview one another for the various projects. After the Project Fair,students indicate their interest level in each project using a numerical ranking system (i.e. 1 =extremely interested, 4 = not interested in project). Students are also asked to indicate their toptwo project choices and to describe the reasons for their interest in the projects (i.e. previousexperience in the area, relation to career goals, etc.). Advisors also submit their preferences forparticular students based on the interviews at the Project
AC 2011-1544: A FIRST COURSE TO EXPOSE DISPARATE STUDENTSTO THE BME FIELDCharles J. Robinson, Clarkson University Director, Center for Rehabilitation Engineering, Science and Technology (CREST) and Shulman Prof of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Clarkson Univ, Potsdam, NY; and Senior Rehab Research Career Scientist, VA Medical Center, Syracuse, NY; and Adjunct Prof, Dept of Physical Medicine and Rehabili- tation, SUNY Upstate Medical Univ, Syracuse, NY Page 22.41.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 A First Course to Expose Disparate Students to the BmE
programming (the“Summer Program”). In addition to the Summer Program, the H.S. Program offers workshops,field trips, career exploration opportunities, and college advising during the school year. A major goal of the H.S. Program is to foster a sense of community among the admittedstudents and to introduce the high school students to a variety of people studying STEM fieldsand working in STEM fields in different capacities. To further this goal, the Summer Programincludes a variety of eight-day collaborative projects in a variety of STEM-related fields.Students are allowed to choose one of those eight-day collaborative projects to join with theirpeers. The focus of these eight-day projects is to collaborate with a community partner to
much faster than for other engineering disciplines.2 Reasons for thisprojected rapid increase include the demand for more technically sophisticated medical devicesdue to an aging population, and concern for the development of more cost effective medicalprocedures.2 This increased demand coupled with an existing trend of engineers going to themedical device industry necessitates a change in the academic setting to better prepare and train Page 15.1335.2these engineers for careers in biomedical device and related industries. The objective of thispaper is to present an experientially-based pedagogical method using the senior capstone designcourse to
homework (significance at p < 0.05),and a Friedman ANOVA was used to compare student rankings with a post-hoc WilcoxonSigned Rank test using Bonferroni correction (significance at p < 0.005). Correlations betweenquestion scores were made using Kendall’s Tau-b. Of the 12 questions on the questionnaire, 3were significantly different between the MEA and homework. Specifically, students found theMEA to be more frustrating, had more choice in how to complete the MEA, and felt the MEAbetter related to their career goals. When ranking items, competence, purpose, and extrinsicmotivation were ranked significantly higher compared to community and autonomy. Correlationsindicated that students enjoyed the project more when they learned the content (τ