Paper ID #11644Creativity and Innovation as Part of the Civil Engineering BOKDr. Stuart G. Walesh P.E., S. G. Walesh Consulting Stuart G. Walesh, Ph.D., P.E., Dist.M.ASCE, D.WRE, and F.NSPE (stuwalesh@comcast.net, www.helpingyouengineeryourfuture.c is an author; teacher; and an independent consultant providing leadership, management, and engineering services. Prior to beginning his consultancy, he worked in the public, private, and academic sectors serving as a project engineer and manager, department head, discipline manager, marketer, legal expert, professor, and dean of an engineering college. Walesh’s technical specialty
Paper ID #12881A Transdisciplinary Approach for Developing Effective Communication Skillsin a First Year STEM SeminarDr. Jeffrey J Evans, Purdue University, West Lafayette Jeffrey J. Evans received his BS from Purdue University and his MS and PhD in Computer Science from the Illinois Institute of Technology. His research interests are in artificial intelligence for music composition and performance and adaptive computing systems, focusing on the effects of subsystem interactions on application performance. He is a member of the ASEE, ACM and a Senior Member of the IEEE.Prof. Amy S. Van Epps, Purdue University, West
Paper ID #12527Refinement and Dissemination of a Digital Platform for Sharing Transporta-tion Education MaterialsAllie S Peters, Oregon State UniversityDr. Shane A. Brown P.E., Oregon State University Shane Brown is an associate professor in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Oregon State University. His research interests include conceptual change and situated cognition. He received the NSF CAREER award in 2010 and is working on a study to characterize practicing engineers’ understand- ings of core engineering concepts.Dr. Kevin Chang P.E., University of Idaho, Moscow Kevin Chang, Ph.D., P.E., is an
military career he spent over 10 years on the faculty at the US Military Academy at West Point teaching civil engineering. He has also served as the Director, Graduate Professional Development at Northeastern University’s College of Engineering.Dr. David S. Hurwitz, Oregon State University Dr. David Hurwitz is an Associate Professor of Transportation Engineering, Director of the OSU Driv- ing and Bicycling Simulator Laboratory, and Associate Director of the Pacific Northwest Transportation Consortium in the School of Civil and Construction Engineering at Oregon State University. Dr. Hurwitz conducts research in transportation engineering, in the areas of transportation safety, human factors, traffic control devices, and
distribution of years at the institution in required upper-level courses. Many students at thisinstitution engaged in cooperative education, and this participation helps account for the studentswho had beyond four years of enrollment. A total of 129 students indicated that they were male(56.7%), 45 students indicated that they were female (19.7%), three students indicated that theywere a non-binary gender (1.3%), and the rest preferred not to answer. Students were also askedto report their self-identified race and/or ethnicity. A total of 141 students indicated they werewhite (49.0%), two students indicated that they were Black or African-American (0.9%), 15students indicated that they were Asian (6.6%), one student indicated that s/he was
civil engineers do.AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under AwardNo. EEC-1733636. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. We would also like to thank our participants, who have given generously oftheir time to help us better understand their experiences.References[1] M. W. Ohland, S. M. Lord, and R. A. Layton, “Student Demographics and Outcomes in Civil Engineering in the United States,” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., vol. 141, no. 4, p. 7, 2015.[2] C. Groen, L. D. McNair, M. C. Paretti, D. R. Simmons, and A. Shew, “Exploring
studentlearning, student satisfaction, or both: in-class group problem solving[1], peer instruction[2], theuse of workbooks[3], physical demonstrations[4], interactive online textbooks[5], body-centeredtalk[6], inverted or flipped classrooms[7], etc. However, recommendations are scarce on how tobest combine these innovative activities into one class: how do we begin to assemble the partsinto a whole? In the 2000’s Steif and Dollár[8] suggested and then later showed[9] that thecombination of in-class conceptual questions and hands-on physical demonstrations in a Staticsclass resulted in high learning gains. Researchers later developed[10] and found[11] thatsupplemental web-based content was also beneficial to student learning. However, whileconceptual
academic performance. Thepercentile of students from each academic program participating in the honors program isshown in Table 1.In light of the above success, a second program using a similar model was established. TheSchool of Engineering has an S-STEM grant which is currently in its final year ofadministration to support scholarships for females, minorities and economically challengedstudents. The activities produced for this cohort have been singled out by the students andthrough program assessment as being impactful for student success to aid them in maintainingthe grade point averages to keep their scholarships (> 2.5 for freshman; >3.0 all years after). Table 1. Percentage of Honors Students in Each Discipline from 2006-20161
, while Dr. Ahmed Faheem instructs Materials and Pavement relatedcourses. Table 2. Integration of SHRP2 Products in Other Three Institutions CEE course Level Instructor(s) Temple University (TU) Transportation Engineering Materials Senior\Graduate Structural Design of Pavements Senior\Graduate Ahmed Faheem Pavement Maintenance and Rehabilitation Senior\Graduate Villanova University (VU) Introduction to Transportation Engineering Sophomore Engineering Economics Junior Seri Park Transportation systems Design Senior West Virginia University (WVU) Urban Transportation
. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In Proceedings of 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, GA.3. Bachnak, R., & Maldonado, S. C. (2014). A flipped classroom experience : Approach and lessons learned. In Proceedings of 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Indianapolis, IN.4. Redekopp, M. W., & Ragusa, G. (2013). Evaluating Flipped Classroom Strategies and Tools for Computer Engineering. In Proceedings of the 120th ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Atlanta, GA.5. Buechler, D. N., Sealy, P. J., & Goomey, J. (2014). Three Pilot Studies with a Focus on Asynchronous Distance Education. In Proceedings of 121st ASEE Annual Conference &
consequences from not following advice (e.g., relating to risks, safety etc.)”12And under competency profile 9, “Recognise the reasonably foreseeable social, cultural andenvironmental effects of professional engineering activities generally” the bullet points are: “Considers long term issues and impact(s) of own engineering activities, such as use of materials, waste during fabrication/construction, energy efficiency during use, obsolescence and end-of-life issues. Considers and takes into account possible social, cultural and environmental impacts and consults where appropriate Considers Treaty of Waitangi implications and consults accordingly Recognises impact and long-term effects of engineering activities on
firm, and the director of Missouri’s Dam and Reservoir Safety Program. Since 1993, he has been at the University of Evansville, serving as department chair for the past 21 years. He continues to work as a consultant on projects involving the design and construction of new dams, modifications to existing dams, and the investigation of dam failures.Dr. Matthew Swenty P.E., Virginia Military Institute Matthew (Matt) Swenty obtained his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Civil Engineering from Missouri S&T and then worked as a bridge designer at the Missouri Department of Transportation. He returned to school to obtain his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech followed by research work at the Turner- Fairbank
- components proposed in the fulfilled (40 points) missing 1-2 items. proposal successfully. Total: 90 points* Creativity track project should accompany a brief written report with student(s) name(s), and 1) thelearning objectives it includes, 2) description of the project, 3) justification of difficulty, 4) explanation offinal deliverable (artwork, videos, etc.), and 5) references (optional).Out of 122 students in Section 1, 69 students submitted the letter of intent, and 51
faculty mentor working with the student(s) receives a stipendranging from $1,000-$1,500.The SURE Program strives to improve student skills integral to performing research. Studentsand their research mentors are expected to work together for eight hours per week for one-on-one instruction and research skill development. In addition to conducting research with facultymentors, mentees are required to attend four lunch meetings throughout the summer experience.These meetings focus on professional development, mentoring, and providing an opportunity forstudents to discuss research progress with peers. In the first meeting, staff from the campusMultimedia Services Office conduct a poster preparation workshop in which they teach thebasics of designing a
) apply design evolution concepts to analyze the office chairs from recent decades in termsof their “green” quality or design for the environment, 3) determine the feasibility of end-of-life recycling of the materials comprising the chair via disassembly, materialcategorizing and weighing and 4) examine and assess the green design properties ofchairs from mid 1900’s versus a 21st century chair touted as green13. Sustainable metricshave been left as an intentional indirect learning objective for this module in order tocompare the cognitive outcomes of explicit versus implicit module components acrossstudent test groups.In the activity portion of this module, the instructor begins class with a 10-minutepresentation to prepare students for the
-known being the Myers Brigg Personality Type Indicator® (MBTI). The MBTI identifies16 different personality types founded on preferences in four major categories based on Jung’sTheory of Psychological Types. MBTI results indicate whether a person tends to be extroverted(E) or introverted (I), sensing (S) or intuitive (N), thinking (T) or feeling (F), and judging (J) or Page 26.411.2perceiving (P). Extroverted types focus energy on the outer world while introverted types focusenergy on the inner world. Sensing types process information through actual facts and detailsthat they encounter through their senses while intuitive types think more in
for EAC programs) and CETAA (CommitteeTelecommunication(s) for ETAC programs) committee meetings.INCOSE, Systems No Still working on initial criteria requirementsSNAME, Naval Architecture and Feedback from program heads and discussion No Yes Ad hocMarine Engineering among society reps. Any changes to Program Criteria have beenSPIE, Optical and
be slightly altered to reinforce the principles of diversity andinclusion as a consistent theme throughout the workshop. Finally, every seminar andevery piece of training literature should be reviewed with the specific awareness ofconsidering people of all races, genders and background.Clearly, this is not the final solution to a field that continues to evolve very quickly, but itrepresents a good start. Hopefully these steps will provide lessons learned and productivefeedback that will lead to even better changes in the future.Bibliography1 Estes, A.C., Ressler, S.J., Saviz, C.M., Barry, B.E., Considine, C. L., Coward, D., Dennis, N. D.,Hamilton, S. R., Hurwitz, D. S., Kunberger, T., Lenox, T. A., Nilsson, T. L., Nolen, L., O'Brien, J. J
3. Huntzinger, D. N., Hutchins, M. J., Gierke, J. S., and Sutherland, J. W. (2007). “Enabling Sustainable Thinking in Undergraduate Engineering Education.” International Journal of Engineering Education, 23(2) 218-230. 4. Chau, K. W. "Incorporation of Sustainability Concepts into a Civil Engineering Curriculum." Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, ASCE, 2007: 188-191. 5. Segalas J, Ferrer-Balas D, and Mulder K. F. (2010). "What do engineering students learn in sustainability courses? The effect of the pedagogical approach". Journal of Cleaner Production. 18(3), 275-284 6. Thatcher, T. (2007). “Incorporating Active Learning into Environmental
," International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 711-727, 2017.[6] W. Robinson, E. McGee, L. Bentley, S. Houston II and P. Botchway, "Addressing Negative Racial and Gendered Experiences That Discourage Academic Careers in Engineering," Computing in Science and Engineering, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 29-39, 2016.[7] RWU, "Roger Williams University: Diversity, Equity & Inclusion," [Online]. Available: https://www.rwu.edu/who-we-are/diversity-equity-inclusion. [Accessed 21 12 2020].[8] S. Clark, F. Palis, G. Trompf, T. Terway and R. Wallace, "Interdisciplinary problem framing for sustainability: Challenges, a framework, case studies," Journal of Sustainable Forestry, vol. 36, no. 5, p
/employment-outlook-for-engineering- occupations-to-2024.htm. [Accessed January 13, 2019].[3] CareerOneStop, United States Department of Labor, “Careers with Most Openings,” [Online]. Available https://www.careeronestop.org/Toolkit/Careers/careers-most- openings.aspx?persist=true&location=US. [Accessed January 13, 2019].[4] National Academy of Engineering, “Changing the Conversation,” 2008.[5] M. W. Ohland, S. D. Sheppard, G. Lichtenstein, O. Eris, D. Chachra, and R. A. Layton, “Persistence, Engagement, and Migration in Engineering Programs,” Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 259- 278, Revised December 2008. [Online]. Available https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00978.x. [Accessed January 13, 2019].[6
empowered by anunderstanding of the basic underlying physical meaning of the design equations and methods, theywill be much better equipped to tackle updated versions throughout their careers.The author has approached lectures in this way with excellent feedback from students. Examplestudent feedback include comments like: “[the instructor] explains complicated topics and concepts using pictures, drawings and example[s]…” “… [the instructor] tries to make everyone think about the concept behind the equations, instead of just plugging and chugging numbers…” “… [the instructor] encourages students to graph and look at trends and realize what is actually going on…” “Does a good job teaching concepts and how material applies
results generated, the students’ perception is that ALEKS helped them tobetter perform in the class by reviewing the math pre-requisite knowledge.REFERENCES[1] R. Zaurin, "Preparing the Engineering Student for Success with IDEAS: A Second YearExperiential Learning Activity for Large-size Classes," in Proceedings of the 125th AmericanAssociation of Engineering Education National Conference (125th ASEE-2018), Salt Lake City,2018.[2] S. A. Ambrose, M. W. Bridges, M. DiPietro, M. C. Lovett and M. K. Norman, HowLearning Works: 7 Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching., San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass., 2010.[3] L. Santiago, "Retention in a First-Year Program: Factors Influencing Student Interest inEngineering," in 120th ASEE Annual
research. International Journal of Listening. 22 (2), 141-151.[4] Trevelyan, J. 2014. The Making of an Expert Engineer. CRC Press.[5] Crumpton-Young, L. Pamela McCauley-Bush, L Rabelo, K Meza, A Ferreras, B. Rodriguez, A. Millan, D. Miranda, M. Kelarestani, 2010, “Engineering leadership development programs: a look at what is needed and what is being done.” Journal of STEM Education, 11 (3/4), 10-21[6] Wikoff, K., J. Friauf, H. Tran, S. Reyer, O. Petersen. 2004. Evaluating the communication component of an engineering curriculum: A case study. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference & Exposition, Session 2004-2532, 8 pp.[7] American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). 2019. Civil Engineering Body
sciences, mathematics, and physical and life sciences, but also psychology and socialsciences. Seventeen million U.S. workers are considered part of the skilled technical workforce[16]. For engineers alone, this value has risen from 2.11% of the U.S. population in 2005 to2.71% in 2018 [17]. Additionally, the number of people connected to technology continues toincrease, as previously cited herein. It is therefore the authors’ assessment that the size of thepopulation of those involved with or affected by technology has both increased and become moremultidisciplinary.A study of the diversity portion of this prediction indicates that diversity has increased slightlyamong the U.S. science and engineering (S&E) workforce, although women and
upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1741611 Encouraging Civil Engineering Retention through Community and Self-EfficacyBuilding. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this materialare those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National ScienceFoundation.References[1] "Infrastructure Report Card." American Society of Civil Engineers. (accessed 2 Feb., 2019): https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/.[2] S. Hatch, Diversity by Design: Guide to Fostering Diversity in the Civil Engineering Workplace. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2008.[3] "Criteria for accrediting engineering programs 2019-2020." ABET. (accessed 2
well known in academia.Housner and his students [3] at Cal Tech in the 1940’s and 1950’s experimentally determined thecritical load of a member by means of linearly correlating the square of the frequency and theload; the extrapolated regression line at zero frequency represents the critical buckling load ofthe member. On the theoretical side, the most acknowledged achievements are traced back toTimeshenko [4] who used differential equations to show that as the loading of a columnapproached Euler buckling, the frequency of the first mode approaches zero. Recently Carpinteri[5] presented a solution using potential energy that is well-tailored to student understanding. Hisderivation uses a single degree-of-freedom system similar to that shown in
, this interest might be indicative of the value these instructors are seeing inthe materials created by CIT-E and of their desire for similar modules in these other areas.When asked about the reason for their interest in the CIT-E community developing these newmaterials, there was a fairly even split in participants’ responses: 19% mentioned they would liketo integrate the suggested topic(s) into their classes, but did not have time to develop thematerials themselves, 17% wanted to integrate the proposed content, but did not feel qualified todevelop the materials themselves, and 17% claimed that they have expertise in the areassuggested and would like to collaborate with others to create course materials. Some of the
engineering education, 3(2), 2-16. 2. Hadim, H. A., & Esche, S. K. (2002). Enhancing the engineering curriculum through project-based learning. Frontiers in Education, IEEE. 3. Jackson, S. E. (1992). Consequences of group composition for the interpersonal dynamics of strategic issue processing. Advances in strategic management, 8(3), 345- 382. 4. Larochelle, P. (2005). Unifying assessment of freshman design teams with team project management. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, OR. 5. Bannerot, R. (2005). Characteristics of good team players. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
problems in their communities and beyond using the Game Changers as examples of innovative solutions.• Q: If you were going to grade our infrastructure systems (at the local, state or national level), what grade(s) would you give and why? Can you justify the grade(s) using similar criteria as in the Report Card? o Activities: For older students, teachers assist in exploring why the various infrastructure categories received the grades that they did, bring in local infrastructure “experts” to assist with the discussion and assessment. Additionally, depending on the infrastructure that is being considered, teachers