EngineeringPrograms, 2016 – 2017,” accessed February 2, 2017, http://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2016-2017/.3. Rachel Callison, Dan Budny, and Kate Thomes, “Library Research Project for First-Year EngineeringStudents: Results from Collaboration by Teaching and Library Faculty,” The Reference Librarian 43, no.89–90 (2005): 93–106; H. Nerz and Lisa Bullard, “The Literate Engineer: Infusing Information LiteracySkills throughout an Engineering Curriculum,” in Proceedings of the 2006 American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2006; Honora F. Nerz and Suzanne T. Weiner,“Information Competencies: A Strategic Approach,” in Proceedings of the 2001 American Society
followed learning outcomes, and integrated learningwith team teaching of modules. Their response was to revamp the curriculum to be highlyintegrated and focused on problem-based learning to develop transferable and conceptual skills(Gomes, et al., 2006). Another study at the University of Barcelona looked at adapting theirchemical engineering curriculum to be more student-oriented and structured around theundergraduate and master’s degrees. They changed their curriculum gradually to have moreemphasis on ethics, feedback, and collaborative learning. Their findings were that although moretime consuming, both students and teachers responded positively (Iborra, et al., 2014). A similarstudy was completed at Newcastle University, and resulted in using
Eng Educ. 2012;101(2):187–219. 13. Carr RL, Bennett LD, Strobel J. Engineering in the K-‐12 STEM Standards of the 50 US States: An Analysis of Presence and Extent. J Eng Educ. 2012;101(3):539–564. 14. McGrath RG, MacMillan IC. The entrepreneurial mindset: Strategies for continuously creating opportunity in an age of uncertainty. Harvard Business Press; 2000. 15. Bøhn JH. Integrating rapid prototyping into the engineering curriculum-‐a case study. Rapid Prototyp J. 1997;3(1):32–37. 16. Bodnar CA, Anastasio D, Enszer JA, Burkey DD. Engineers at Play: Games as Teaching Tools for
presented by the students to decrease their perception of “harsh” grading and increase their self-confidence and motivation. • The course content discussed in lecture was re-ordered to present integrated devices (operational amplifiers, instrumentation amplifiers, audio and other specialized amplifiers) earlier in the semester. Use of these components is required for multiple laboratories and studying them earlier made the lecture content and laboratories more in tune.A practical limitation of the inquiry-based approach with respect to electronic circuit designis that the laboratory room needs to be stocked with an abundant choice of parts as thestudents may select different combinations of components for the same
teaching methods and tools, he has received grants and established collaborations with colleagues from different fields and countries. Dr. Gulacar has developed and organized workshops about implementation of social constructivist methods and effective use of technological tools in science classrooms.Dr. Jennifer H. Choi, University of California, Davis Jennifer Choi is currently a Lecturer with potential for security of employment (LPSOE) in the Depart- ment of Biomedical Engineering (BME) at UC Davis. In addition to teaching core undergraduate courses, Jennifer is aimed at integrating engineering design principles and hands-on experiences throughout the curriculum, and playing an active role in the senior design
. Jennifer Olson, University of Illinois at Chicago Jennifer Olson is a clinical assistant professor in the College of Education at University of Illinois at Chicago. She coordinates the Secondary Education program and teaches curriculum, instruction, & as- sessment courses to undergraduate and graduate secondary education students. Jennifer’s research focus on urban high school reform is informed by nine years of teaching in Chicago Public Schools, giving her an informed perspective of how policy moves from theory to practice. Dr. Olson’s current research interests include urban teacher preparation, teacher professional development and student voice. Her most recent publication in Journal of Urban Learning
engineeringeducation field in general, a number of investigations have been conducted to explore therelationship and importance of empathy, self-awareness, and social-awareness in engineeringstudents [11-14]. These studies reveal the importance of empathy for effective innovation andengineering design. In biomedical engineering design, a more in-depth understanding of theentire patient experience may provide for more innovative and effective design alternatives.The efforts discussed in this paper to address the inclusion of the disease pathway and the entirepatient experience into the educational opportunities for biomedical engineering students are onestep to more effective integration of the liberal arts and humanities into an engineeringeducation. Previous
half years as the Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs of the College of Engineering. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017Using a Techno-Economic Model to Promote Consideration of Uncertainty in Bioengineering DesignIntroductionDecision-making is an integral aspect of the engineering design process. Engineers solvecomplex open-ended design problems with a variety of technical and non-technical constraints.In many engineering courses, this kind of decision-making can lack realistic context (Jonassen etal., 2006; Jensen, 2015) and may often be reduced to the elimination of all or most of the real-world constraints. Research on the decision making process of engineering
an ability tocommunicate effectively [ABET 2016]. Engineers need to document and report their technicalideas, designs, and solutions in a clear and succinct manner and to a variety of audiences. Oneway for students to gain and practice documentation and technical communication skills in apractical setting is through the experiential courses throughout the curriculum (i.e. laboratorycourses).Given the increasing presence of social media as well as other methods of electroniccommunication, computer mediated activities provide an opportunity to educate students in afamiliar setting. Electronic documentation is also gaining popularity in research laboratories andindustries, as well as in the medical and other professional fields, all in which
, theCardiovascular Research: Engineering a Translational Experience (CREATE) REU program isunique in that it emphasizes the parallels between the creative process and research. Creativity,an attribute that most feel is important for aspiring engineers, is typically not emphasized inresearch programs or in the undergraduate curriculum. This study describes the impacts thatemphasizing the creative process in the CREATE REU had both on student and facultyperceptions.Background and Literature ReviewThe National Academy of Engineering (NAE) emphasizes that creativity is one of the importantcharacteristics that engineering students should possess. As stated in the pivotal Engineer of2020 manuscript, “Creativity…is an indispensable quality for engineering and
biomedical engineering curricula", Frontiers in Education Conference, 2001. 31st Annual: IEEE, 2001, pp. F3E-16-21 vol. 12.[16] Linsenmeier, R.A., T. Harris, and S. Olds, "The VaNTH bioengineering curriculum project", Engineering in Medicine and Biology, 2002. 24th Annual Conference and the Annual Fall Meeting of the Biomedical Engineering Society EMBS/BMES Conference, 2002. Proceedings of the Second Joint: IEEE, 2002, pp. 2644-2645.[17] Linsenmeier, R.A., and D.W. Gatchell, "Core elements of an undergraduate biomedical engineering curriculum–State of the art and recommendations", 9th International Conference on Engineering Education, 2006.[18] Martin, T., S.D. Rivale, and K.R. Diller
-native speakers ofEnglish.10,11Students’ consistent performance increase is generally attributed to a cluster of interrelatedpractical and cognitive factors. Foremost, given the limited time that an instructor has availablefor formative review of student writing (particularly in writing-across-the-curriculum designs),peer review effectively increases a student’s opportunities to receive timely feedback to informrevisions.2,6 Reviews across a breadth of research suggest that in higher education settings, theeffect of peer feedback upon a student’s work is equivalent to the feedback of the instructor.1Substantive revision is a key practice of experts that we must often scaffold in students, and peerreview serves as an organizing circumstance for
Paper ID #19614Clinical Immersion Program for Bioengineering and Medical StudentsProf. Susan Stirling, UIC School of Design, University of Illinois at Chicago Susan Stirling is a a designer, researcher and educator. She has an undergraduate degree from the Univer- sity of Wisconsin-Madison and a graduate degree from the Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology. At the University of Illinois at Chicago she teaches Design Research Methods, Human Experience in Design and Interdisciplinary Product Development. Susan collaborates with non-design faculty to teach the design process, and helps
/subspecialties including MedicalInstrumentation, Imaging, Biomechanics and Human Factors, and Biomaterials/Cellular/TissueEngineering. With a thorough introduction to various technical and professional skills as well aseach subspecialty, it was hypothesized that there will be an improvement in student performancelater in the curriculum and that students can make informed decision while selecting appropriatetrack and career path. We have compiled data from our department’s Assessment Committeewho evaluate student outcome performance throughout the curriculum (sophomore throughsenior year) from student populations with the new BME 201 (post-201) and students in theprevious client-based sophomore course (pre-201). We have also assessed the
student designed projects), a course in biomedical ethics, and oversees an off-site undergraduate clinical experience. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Sophomore Design Course on Virtual Prototyping1. IntroductionA sophomore-level design course (BME282) teaches students how to apply the design process toa biomedical product. Course objectives are for students to be able to: (1) apply principles fromcourses they have completed and from courses that they will take in their BME curriculum tobiomedical product design and development to determine quantitative design constraints criticalto biomedical device design and (2) integrate these principles and resultant design constraints
Paper ID #19742Freshman Design Course: Device Design for Low-Resource SettingsDr. Emma K. Frow, Arizona State University Emma Frow is an Assistant Professor at Arizona State University, with a joint appointment in the School of Biological & Health Systems Engineering and the School for the Future of Innovation in Society. She has graduate training in both the natural and social sciences, with a PhD in biochemistry and an MSc in science & technology studies. Emma is interested in the engineering imagination, particularly in the emerging field of synthetic biology. Over the past 7 years, her curricular and
more inclusive and welcomingclassroom; and ultimately increase retention, particularly of underrepresented minoritiesincluding women. Herein, we discuss the development and implementation of a new hands-onfreshman engineering design course, Design Practicum, with an emphasis on improvements incurriculum and teaching strategies, and creating a more inclusive environment.Development of Design PracticumWe began by looking through student survey responses to determine areas needing improvement,and which features of past courses were the most effective at engaging students, retainingstudents, and creating a more inclusive environment. From there, participating faculty and ourteaching intern developed curriculum and strategies to implement in our
and sensorimotor integration in the context of functional restoration of grasp.John G. Davis, University of Wisconsin, Madison John G. Davis, PE John holds dual appointments at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, College of Engineering. He is an Assistant Faculty Associate and Program Director in the Department of Engineering Professional De- velopment and a Research Engineer at the Industrial Refrigeration Consortium (IRC). John’s professional interests include HVAC products and systems, DX refrigeration, industrial refrigeration, geothermal sys- tem design, thermal systems optimization, building science and building energy management, technical leadership and project management. John is a member of