EngineeringIntroductionIn 2019, as part of a large research-focused grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF), achemical engineering department at a large research university in the mid-Atlantic states createdan undergraduate research experience program focusing on computational polymer science. Priorto the COVID-19 pandemic, the intention of the program was to allow students from theuniversity’s multiple campuses to gain experience in research, providing them with opportunitiesthat might not be available at their home campus. The original proposal planned for students atthe various university campuses to remotely engage in research during the fall and springsemesters, while participate in in-person research at the university’s main campus during thesummer
toapplications that go beyond the traditional oil refining and catalysis emphases typically discussedin the introductory “Applications in Chemical Engineering” course. We developed a low-cost,modified fidget spinner that introduces students to blood separation principles. On each arm of thespinner, there exists a see-through chamber filled with fluid and microbeads at various ratios,which simulates the effect of hematocrit, or red blood cell fraction, on settling velocities andterminal position—phenomena that are utilized to enhance blood separation efficiencies. Due toCOVID-19, we plan to implement this device by mailing fidget spinner kits with a complementaryworksheet to the students to conduct observational experiments at home in the spring
the impact of changes in the curriculum on attitudes and identity development. Theproject team plans to implement all the synergistic approach components during the Fall 2021and Spring 2022 semesters. With the full implementations, the research team will be able toanalyze each element's impact, redesign and enact again.During the Fall 2020 semester, the project team reached out to industry mentors, and manyindustry mentors graciously agreed to volunteer for the project. Even though other mentors werewilling to volunteer for the project, the project team chose two industry mentors to work onindustry-relevant problem designs due to time constraints. Industry mentors, course instructorand the project team met and brainstormed the design criteria
reduce the number of exams in the semester, and could be completed remotely.This Work-In-Progress paper will discuss the efforts to implement this project in a remote/hybridinstruction fall semester, including comparison between student performance on the exams andprojects, and feedback from students.BackgroundA transition to online learning driven by the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring 2020 semester,continued through an entirely online semester in the summer, provided some preparation forhybrid teaching in fall 2020. Exams, the likely planned means of assessment and which hadoriginally been planned and scheduled to be held in-class, were now taken online. While thiscould require some adjustment and planning, the impact could potentially be
/Planned: For our department, a final document (oral/writtencommunication) is required for the internships/research experiences that receive credit. To helpthe students obtain more content for their meetings, I started requiring the students taking theinternship and undergraduate research courses to perform the required presentation for this workat a chapter meeting. This provides a formal situation for the presentation; however, the studentaudience can be viewed as friendly. This approach then allows younger students to see futureopportunities while learning from the internship/research experience. Not every faculty specifiesthe chapter meeting for the document, but involving several faculty can quickly fill the meetingslots.For the current ABET
full course was during the pandemic, a comparison couldn’tbe made to a traditional exam format to use as evidence to confirm an elevation of course equity.However, creative expression and the identification of gaps were realized. Students were not asenthusiastic about the approach in Fall 2020 and attributed this attitude to the ongoing pandemic.This lethargy is supported by the higher education literature describing mounting mental healthpressures due to the duration of the pandemic.Going forward, the author will not implement the assessment method again during the pandemic.However, there are plans for use as a better alternative to the occasional take home exam.Goal of the StudyThe goal of this study is to review the outcomes from other
part of the student experience. Therefore, it is desirable todevelop strategies and action plans enabling the continuation of the in-person lab experienceduring public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic.The purposes of this paper are: 1) to provide guidelines and best practices to Unit Operationscourses which have not yet returned to in-person instruction, 2) to record experiences andstrategies from the COVID-19 pandemic to inform future instructors and administrators in theevent of another pandemic or similar event, and 3) to present and discuss student perceptions ofthe lab experience.2 Unit Operations Course at Ohio StateThe Unit Operations course at Ohio State is one of the largest in the nation, with an averageenrollment of
senior-level two-part sequential unit operations laboratory course series (ECHM 442and ECHM 443), required for all chemical engineering majors. The ECHM 442 course consistsof eight 50 min lectures, covering the basics of report writing and a refresh on statistics. Thestudents, in groups of 2-4, perform two lab experiment rotations on a 4-week schedule. Theyhave one week to write an experimental plan prior to the experiment and two weeks to analyzedata and write a final technical report or executive memo following the experiment. The ECHM443 course consists of two 50 min lectures. The first is an introduction that covers course format,schedule and structure, while the second occurs later in the semester and provides instructorfeedback on
wherestudents share answers and aimed to create assignments and exams less susceptible to plagiarism.When faculty took a learner-centered approach to conscientiousness, they put in time and/oreffort to learn about their students’ interests, experiences, and lives; they used this information inplanning course activities and examples. For example, several faculty hired peer learningfacilitators—students who had just completed the course. Rather than simply asking thesestudents to grade, they sought their ideas in planning the course, situating the students as part ofthe instructional team. Such faculty also updated their course materials, but they put effort intoresearching authentic applications of course content and checking with peer learning
learning and plans to pursue a teaching career upon earning his Ph.D.Jacqueline Gartner Ph.D., Campbell University Jacqueline Gartner is an Assistant Professor at Campbell University in the School of Engineering, which offers a broad BS in engineering with concentrations in chemical and mechanical.Dr. Prashanta Dutta, Washington State University Prof. Prashanta Dutta has received his PhD degree in Mechanical Engineering from the Texas A&M University in 2001. Since then he has been working as an Assistant Professor at the School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering at Washington State University. He was promoted to the rank of Associate and Full Professor in 2007 and 2013, respectively. Prof. Dutta is an elected
plan the course for the second semester of the junior year.Fogler’s Elements [4] and Essentials of Chemical Reaction Engineering [5] textbooks are stillthe most popular, used by 60% of the 85 reporting courses, as shown in Figure 2. Fogler’stextbooks were also the most commonly used in the 1991 and 2010 surveys [6]. A sixth editionof the Folger Elements textbook was released in Fall 2020 but was not captured in this survey.The “Other” category includes books by Hill, Froment, Hayes, and Davis as well as others notfurther described. The websites used most often in 63 responding courses are the textbookwebsite and the course’s learning management system (Figure 3). Other resources notspecifically listed in the figure include Chemical Safety
art. Yet, Dan’s academic plan to support his well-being and be happy are highly criticized. Dan’s vision long-term goal to be employable hasn’t happened and locates himself as “sitting in a void” reconciling with how to modify his plan or where things went wrong. Dan’s internalized yearly failures - the first 2 years of co-op/intern rejections as his lack of soft skills (being personable) and the third year as bad luck because of COVID—are from poor planning that should have been more career-oriented. Dan found the arts helpful to his personal growth and related more to these participating members than engineers. Reflecting Dan grapples with what he should’ve done,“ I shouldn't have made that um, I guess that happiness my
pulmonary air-particle flow simulations help engineers and physicians tooptimize the inhalation therapy plans for patients with lung diseases. All activities serve the fourfocuses of the LUNGevity session: structure, function, disease, and treatment. We also describetwo newly designed hands-on modules that will be piloted in the next offering of GrandparentUniversity. 7Lung Activity 1: “X-ray” Test of Lung Structure Using Virtuali-Tee®First, introduce the anatomical features of the human respiratory system using the visualizationof 3D human respiratory systems (Figure 4a) and the physical 3D printed airways models (Figure4b). Ask students to volunteer and draw human respiratory systems on the
resources, and, importantly,taking time (even a small amount) for mental health.Table 3. Coded response for strategies and resources by frequency Category Sample response Percent Response I have been splitting up my work into smaller sections rather than Study approach/work habits/ just doing it all at once. I feel like this makes it easier to stay on 29% planning top of my work and had really helped with
developing a distribution plan forventilators to minimize their cost of delivery to hospitals treating COVID-19. The team arrivedat the idea to combat the current COVID-19 pandemic by trying to minimize inefficiencies in thedelivery of medical equipment. The primary objective was to minimize the cost of distributingventilators with a secondary objective of minimizing delivery timelines of ventilators to allhospitals in New Jersey.The students formulated the problem as a multi-objective mixed-integer non-linear programming(MINLP) model in GAMS. At the start of the project, the team’s objective was to solve theproblem by minimizing the distribution costs to all hospitals in New Jersey; yet, due to equationlimitations of the free version of GAMS the
]. Three distinctlearning strategy groups were identified: Navigators, Problem Solvers, and Engagers [10].Navigators plan their learning and focus on completing the necessary activities to achieve theirgoals. Order and structure are important to these learners, who tend to be logical, objective, andperfectionists. They want clear objectives and expectations at the beginning of a course and inadvance of activities, such as in an explicit and detailed syllabus. Problem Solvers are criticalthinkers who like to explore multiple alternatives. For them, the process is important, so theyneed flexibility in completing learning activities. They may have difficulty making decisionsbecause they must choose among multiple alternatives and because the
., “Barriers to Student Success in Engineering Education,” European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(4), 368-381 (2017)[14] Seymour, E. and Hewitt, N.M., “Talking about Leaving: Factors Contributing to High Attrition Rates among Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Undergraduate Majors,” Final report to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation on an ethnographic inquiry at seven institutions. Boulder: University of Colorado Bureau of Sociological Research, 1994[15] Jones, B.D., Paretti, M.C., Hein, S.F., and Knott, T.W. “An Analysis of Motivation Constructs with First-Year Engineering Students: Relationships Among Expectancies, Values, Achievement, and Career Plans,” Journal of Engineering Education, 99(4), 319-336 (2010)[16
online collaborative tools,including the Google file-sharing suite. These tools are used for all members to contribute ideas: “When we research improvements to the battery, or want to tune a certain variable, every person has to write something down in the Google doc…” “...we can have everything in one place like and it’s all shared with us.”The use of these sharted tools for developing and annotating presentations, and making plans,were implemented before the onset of the pandemic, and have continued as important tools tosupport collaborative work remotely.Limitations A limitation the researchers observed in conducting the virtual interviews was thatparticipants typically discussed their experience
concern. Just because, I mean, we were in a meeting, and the project leader said, or the project sponsor said, ‘This is what we plan to do.’ I just raised my concerns […] I didn’t have any leadership responsibility in the project, per se. But I was just in a meeting and voiced my concern.In addition to identifying and communicating the need for important tests, James also gave severaladditional examples which emphasized that ethical engineering includes transparency, decision-making, and proper reporting. These examples were less detailed and presented more as a runthrough of different ways he has experienced these aspects in his career. One example was duringhis time as a postdoc when made decisions about using animal subjects
of the context [31]. The pre-reflection used in this study was given in the context of a senior design or process safety coursethat had planned to use CUP in their curriculum. As such, students may have felt obligated torank safety as their highest priority to align with the context of the course. Unintentionally,individuals may wrongly predict their behavior with a phenomenon known as behavioralforecasting [32], [33]. Regardless of context, students may sincerely believe they hold safety astheir priority but lose sight of this when immersed in complex work dilemmas. It is unclear towhat extent these two confounds come into play in how students respond to the reflection due toa lack of further data. In either case, further evidence would
in remote areas can have access to enthusiastic educators frominstitutions of higher learning, which could enhance their opportunities in STEM. As a futuredirection for this work in the field of biomaterials, we plan to adapt our undergraduate at-homeexperiments for ceramic toughness and polymer stiffness for STEM outreach purposes. Thiswould involve simplifying the broad list of potential variables undergraduate engineeringstudents explored in their inquiry-based approach (e.g., ceramic porosity, polymer solutionconcentration) and target specific learning gains about ceramic toughness and polymer stiffness.Our long-term goal is to implement these lessons in more remote areas of the country to betterserve a wider range of underrepresented
understanding with one another. When thisshared understanding is lacking, change is much harder to come by (Lyon et al., 2014).Troublingly, however, it has become evident that universities are not always aware of theirstudents’ expectations and are therefore unable to factor their voices into institutional change.Allen and Nichols (2017) highlight that while student input is frequently involved in the processof evaluating and revising teaching efforts, it is seldom included when planning and operatingother forms of student support. While Kuh et al. (1995) lay out expectations universities mighthave of their students, it remains unclear how adept the institutions’ administrators and facultyare at gauging students’ wants and needs. The work of Shank