Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cristi L. Bell-Huff, Georgia Institute of Technology; Kali Lynn Morgan, Georgia Institute of Technology; Joseph M. LeDoux, Georgia Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

 Department of Biomedical Engineering at Georgia Tech is currently infusing entrepreneurial minded learning and critical reflection throughout the undergraduate curriculum. One unique aspect of this effort is the creation of student­faculty partnerships that are focused on developing more entrepreneurially minded and reflective pedagogy within specific core courses. In this pilot effort, eight biomedical engineering students were recruited based on previous course experience, academic performance, and expressed interest in entrepreneurially minded learning and course development. These student partners formed a core team of course implementation assistants (CIA) that were overseen and supported by one faculty member serving as team leader. Six

Conference Session

Biomedical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

C. Gunnarsson, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Camille Birch, University of Washington; Dianne Grayce Hendricks, University of Washington

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

STEM. 2. Identify how cultural concepts of race, gender, sexuality and disability have shaped scientific thought (and vice versa) through history. 3. Critically evaluate literature regarding ethics and diversity in bioengineering. 4. Analyze how engineers handle implicit bias during research and design processes. 5. Propose approaches to promote ethics and diversity in engineering practice.The honors students attended the same class sessions and completed all assignments as their non-honors peers. In addition, the honors students attended a weekly two-hour discussion section andcompleted additional assignments including weekly readings, written reflections, and a finalpaper on a topic of their choice related to the role of

Conference Session

Biomedical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mark A. Chapman, University of San Diego; Gordon D Hoople, University of San Diego; G. Bryan Cornwall PhD P.E., Shiley-Marcos School of Engineering, University of San Diego

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

to provide for rich classroom discussions and allow students to reflect onimportant topics they will likely face in their careers with the advent of new biomedicaltechnologies. Topics such as equal access to healthcare, ethical issues surrounding gene editing,and understanding how a user’s background or culture can affect their healthcare needs/desireswill all be discussed and considered throughout our curriculum directly alongside technicaltopics. This approach will allow us to more specifically address the new ABET outcomes(particularly Outcome 2) that call for more integration between social and technical elements.Our first students will not officially begin the BME track until the fall of 2020, but we arepiloting our biomechanics and

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Steven Higbee, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis; Sharon Miller, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

approaching a design problem orproject. Students’ self-reflections of design confidence before and after each project werecollected. Students were also asked to rate how worthwhile and how enjoyable they found eachproject using a reflection grid [16].Results and DiscussionDemonstrating Knowledge of Engineering Design Process: Students engaged in each projectdemonstrated knowledge gains of the BME design process (Table II). Specifically, both projectshelped students identify components of the FDA waterfall diagram (p < 0.005) and apply themappropriately. Students in the 200-level course made gains in identifying design specifications (p= 0.028), whereas students in the 300-level course showed increased knowledge of designrequirements (p = 0.014

Conference Session

Innovative Course Structures and Learning Environments

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Brian P. Helmke, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

rather than on how closely they metthe learning objectives of the activity or assessment.In a “specifications grading” system [2], students earn credit for completing activities (or bundlesof activities) by meeting clearly defined specifications shared at the time of assigning theactivities. If the work does not meet the specifications, then credit is not earned. This system hasseveral advantages. Specifications are closely mapped to the learning objectives for the activitiesand the course, making it easier to document and to reflect on learning. Students focus theireffort on meeting specifications much as they would in the professional field when addressingclient needs or competing for a project bid. Specifications can include aspects of the

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William H Guilford, University of Virginia; Meg Keeley M.D.; Brian P. Helmke, University of Virginia; Timothy E. Allen, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

number of students. Wehere report on the inaugural year of our Clinical Scholars program, its impact on participants,and lessons learned on how to broaden its impact to non-participating students via our BMEcurriculum.Scholar selectionApplicants to the clinical immersion program must be either rising 3rd or rising 4th yearbiomedical engineering students. As a result, by the time they enter the clinical environment allparticipants will have completed one semester of quantitative human physiology, and a course incell and molecular biology for engineers. A holistic yet targeted admissions process helps toensure the diversity of the Clinical Scholar cohorts. Finalists are selected based on their responseto several reflective questions rather than on

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Casey Jane Ankeny, Northwestern University; David P. O'Neill, Northwestern University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

Outcome Feature and GradebookCanvas allows for real-time assessment of students’ progress towards mastery of a skill. Afterinputting the standards and associated descriptions as outcomes we created lab report rubricsusing these outcomes. All standards are scored on a scale from one to five where one equates to“novice” and five is “distinguished”. We set a level of “3” out of “5” as reflecting sufficientmastery for each skill. Then these scores are given various weightings to produce a final reportscore which directly comprises a percentage of the final grade. The four reports comprise 7.5%,10%, 12.5%, and 15% of the final grade respectively. Building the rubric with outcomesallowed for quick visual feedback regarding progression towards mastery

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jennifer H. Choi, University of California, Davis

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

-pre) in Likert scores across all participants for each theme.Error bars represent +/- standard deviation.Implications and ConclusionsStudents’ perceived level of understanding and confidence in the needs finding process increasedfrom the start to end of the summer internship. This may suggest that actively undergoing theneeds-finding process helps to solidify understanding and increase confidence in this early stageof the engineering design process, as similarly reported by other programs6. Informalconversations with participants indicated that participation in the BMEA was the first time theywere exposed to entrepreneurial/business concepts, which may be reflected in the reportedincrease in understanding and confidence in these areas at the

Conference Session

Biomedical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Arthur L. Chlebowski, University of Southern Indiana

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

within the biomedical engineering discipline.At this stage, oral and written feedback from student regarding the sprint process to explore BMEwas the focus. Based on this feedback a more formal assessment of how the course impacts thestudent’s interest is needed. The main goal of the course is to help students realize the potential areasthat their engineering degrees could be used. To work towards the impact of the course and obtainstatistical assessment, a survey will be developed following based on an intrinsic MotivationInventory (IMI). Questions will be created that ask the students to reflect on how each emphasis areahas impacted their interest on the topics discussed. Questions pertaining to whether they knew theemphasis area existed

Conference Session

Biomedical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Robert Gammon-Pitman, Ohio State University; Tanya M. Nocera Ph.D., Ohio State University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

rubric Technical Writing  I rate my writing skills before and after each lab [1-5] Ability  My writing skills are reflected by my report grade  The report grading across each lab course was consistent  My grades and writing skills improved with each submission Self-Efficacy  I feel more confident to write a technical lab report  I believe I can write a technical lab report without a rubric  How many iterations of the writing cycle are required for you to feel confident in writing a technical lab report? [1-4]  I feel

Conference Session

Assessment of Student Learning and Skills

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

S. Cyrus Rezvanifar, University of Akron; Rouzbeh Amini, University of Akron

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

providestudents with the opportunity of active engagement in class sessions and applying course materialsinto solving real-life problems.Initially proposed by Bandura in 1977, self-efficacy is a term that describes “the belief in one’scapabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to produce given attainments” [4,5]. Perceived academic self-efficacy has been increasingly considered as a highly effectivepredictor of students’ motivation and persistence [6, 7], as well as an important contributor to theiracademic development [4, 5, 8]. Career decision-making self-efficacy is of equal, if not greaterimportance in engineering education, as it reflects students’ ability to make an informed decisionabout a career path to pursue in the process

Conference Session

Biomedical Engineering Division Poster Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Angela Lai, Carnegie Mellon University; Elaine Soohoo, Carnegie Mellon University; Diane L. Nelson, Carnegie Mellon University; Conrad M. Zapanta, Carnegie Mellon University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

paths for each team’s device. Workshopswere allocated for team discussions and group work. Guest lecturers and a field trip to a localmedical device start-up company were incorporated to illustrate real-life applications of theconcepts presented in class. At several points in the 6-week course, students were asked to reflecton the talks or activities to evaluate what they knew before, what they learned, what they foundinteresting, and what they hoped to learn next [2]. This process of self-reflection and evaluationnot only helped students identify topics they had learned but also determined what they wantedto continue studying. These reflections also helped instructors identify how to improve thelessons and better explain the theory to the

Conference Session

Big Picture Questions in BME

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nicole L. Ramo, University of Michigan; Aileen Huang-Saad, University of Michigan; Barry Belmont, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

discussed by Harmon in 1975 [2], [6]. Research Questions Student perceptions are equally as important as organizational definitions when seekingto cultivate a shared understanding of the field; as students of BME, they will become the nextpractitioners of BME. Cheville’s assertion above also suggests that student definitions mayindicate how the perceptions held by educators are reflected in their philosophy and teachingapproach [10]. Understanding how students see a field also has important implications forrecruitment and retention (e.g., students may be less likely to persist in a degree program if theirperception of the field is grossly different than that being promoted by the department).However, student perceptions of BME have

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Postcard Session

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey A. LaMack, Milwaukee School of Engineering; Larry Fennigkoh P.E., Milwaukee School of Engineering; Paul Licato, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

sequence. In addition, design instructors will be asked to ratestudents’ abilities to apply standards appropriately to their respective design projects. Allassessments will be given to two cohorts of students who took the introductory course withoutthe standards module and the first two cohorts participating in the module. It is hypothesized thatall performance measures will increase for the cohorts taking part in the module experience,reflecting a positive effect of introducing first-term engineering students to a hands-on projectincorporating real medical device standards.[1] W. Kelly, “Standards in civil engineering design education,” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, vol. 134, no. 1, pp. 59-66, 2008.[2

Conference Session

BME Laboratories and Projects

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rachel C. Childers, University of Oklahoma; Stefan Wilhelm, University of Oklahoma

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

satisfactorilycomplete the lab objectives (Figure 4). Here, we present the results of both the student self-reportand instructor evaluation because they assess different things. Instructor assessment mayunderestimate learning if the work they turn in does not reflect their understanding, for exampleif a student rushed to complete lab notebooks, and their entries do not actually reflect theirunderstanding or actual performance. Whereas, student self-reports of learning, may likelyreflect a measure of confidence of the material or some other bias. For instance, self-enhancement and self-diminishment bias may be at play. It has been previously shown that somelow-achieving students tend to over-estimate their abilities and high-achieving students tend tounder

Conference Session

Innovative Course Structures and Learning Environments

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Neda Melanie Bassir Kazeruni, Columbia University; Henry Hess, Columbia University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

means toreach these objectives. Relying on the positive effects of active learning, we designed a novelcourse format in which the class-time was divided around three different types of activities thatsucceeded each other using the pattern presented in Figure 1. The topic of each unit reflected a keyarea that we aimed to investigate in the course, and we focused on topics that are both morefavorable to generate longer class discussions, and who have been the researched in the past.Examples of such topics include: “Nanobiotechnology and its applications”, “Lifetime ofnanobiodevices” or “Reproducing macroscale bonds at the nanoscale”.Figure 1. Basic unit of the course. Each “cycle” focuses on one key topic related tonanobiotechnology. It consists

Conference Session

Big Picture Questions in BME

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alexis Ortiz-Rosario, Ohio State University; Amena Shermadou, Ohio State University; David A. Delaine, Ohio State University; Tanya M. Nocera Ph.D., Ohio State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

guidance thatsignificantly strengthened this work.This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1830814. Anyopinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors anddo not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.References[1] C. L. McNeely and K. H. Fealing, “Moving the Needle, Raising Consciousness: The Science and Practice of Broadening Participation,” Am. Behav. Sci., vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 551–562, May 2018.[2] L. Smith-Doerr, S. N. Alegria, and T. Sacco, “How Diversity Matters in the US Science and Engineering Workforce: A Critical Review Considering Integration in Teams, Fields, and Organizational Contexts

Conference Session

Assessment of Student Learning and Skills

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

William H. Guilford, University of Virginia

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

underrepresented groups (4%).Creativity increased over the course of the semester: Our data was accepted to be normallydistributed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. There were no statistically significant beginning-of-semester differences by any assessment between the control and intervention sections byunpaired t-test. Further, the overall scores for end-of-course evaluations did not differ betweenthe semesters (p=0.46; effect size, Cohen’s d=0.02).Regardless of course section, control or intervention, there was a significant improvement by theend of the semester in the fluency, flexibility, and originality aspects of creativity (Table 1).These changes reflect those seen by us in a first-year engineering course with an authentic designexperience [1], though

Conference Session

BME Laboratories and Projects

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Charles Carlson, Kansas State University; Dong Xu Ren, Kansas State Univerisity; Steve Warren, Kansas State University

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authorsacknowledge the students that participated in this effort and their work in termsof example images and data they provided for this paper. This material was included with thewritten permission of the students. Table I. Comparison of Fall 2017 and Fall 2018 student self-perceptions of learning as related to learning objectives (mean values are shown). Differential results are shown as mean (stdev). 2017 2017 2018 2018 Pre- Post- 2017 Pre- Post- 2018 Learning Objective

Conference Session

Assessment of Student Learning and Skills

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Timothy E. Allen, University of Virginia

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

analyzed the aggregated course-specific and instructor-specific metrics, and we have listed all of the free-response studentcomments from each of the semesters that mentioned team formation one way or the other (totalof 11 in both intervention and control years). Quantitative responses were based on a 5-pointLikert response (5 = strongly agree, 3 = neutral, and 1 = strongly disagree) to statements specificto the course (e.g. “I learned a great deal in this course,” “Overall, this was a worthwhile course,”etc.) and specific to the instructor (e.g. “Instructor was well-prepared for class,” “Overall thisinstructor was an effective teacher,” etc.). Mean responses reflect a weighted average based uponthe number of students assigning a specific