to experience development andpeople-centred design. All the student participants meet again to spend another four daysworking on their concepts and further cultural immersions. Each team then presents theirconcept, including a prototype and summary documentation, to the community partner.Although community partners can take on-board any concepts or ideas, there is no aim orexpectation that development and implementation work will be carried out as part of theSummit. This is captured in the Summits aims which include supporting community partnersby generating ideas for their project. Other aims include practise and promote two-wayknowledge sharing and embedding people-centred values and approaches in engineering,technology and design
Division.Dr. Christopher Swan, Tufts University Chris Swan is Associate Dean at the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civil Life and an associate professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering department at Tufts University. He has additional appointments in the Department of Education and the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach at Tufts. His current engineering education research interests focus on learning through service-based projects and using an entrepreneurial mindset to further engineering education innovations. He also researches the development of reuse strategies for waste materials.Dr. David W. Watkins, Michigan Technological University Dr. Watkins’ teaching and research interests include hydrologic
Paper ID #16812Engineers Without Borders-Montana State University: A Case Study in Student-Directed Engagement in Community ServiceDr. Kathryn Plymesser PE, Montana State University, Billings Dr. Plymesser holds B.S. (CWRU ’01) and Ph.D. (MSU ’14) degrees in civil engineering. She is currently an assistant professor in the Department of Biological and Physical sciences at Montana State University Billings where she heads the pre-engineering program. She teaches Introduction to Engineering, and the introductory mechanics sequence (Statics, Dynamics, and Strength of Materials). Professor Plymesser has focused her research on
and from the College of Engineering’s IT Department joinedthe committee to provide input regarding learning objectives and outcomes, and to enhancecommunications-technology capabilities to the course effort.The committee met throughout the fall semester, frequently including USFQ faculty and FEVIstaff via Skype, to refine course objectives, balance departmental interests, and define roles bothin teaching and in project implementation. It should be noted that the engineering department’sfaculty member associated with this effort also acts as faculty advisor to EWB-UIUC, whichallows for close collaboration between course objectives and student-design procedures. As aresult, EWB project applications and planning proceeded concurrently with the
of engineering is and what engineers do than in the year previous and also inrelation to comparable students who had not yet been exposed to the program. Thesefindings have potential positive implications for the impact of community-basedpartnerships on students’ understandings of engineering. Keywords: STEM, engineering, elementary school, community partnershipsIT TAKES A VILLAGE TO RAISE AN ENGINEER 3 Science, and its contemporary companions, technology, engineering, andmathematics (STEM), have been criticized for not meeting the needs of vast numbersof students. However, applying literature from our science education world, there isevidence that access to science and
communities-in-need typically focus on creating,implementing, and optimizing innovative technologies that can be universally applied to thedeveloping world. Many of the technological design assumptions are based upon the provider’svalues and cultural experience, and often disregard the conditions and context of the recipientcommunity. This mindset is exacerbated by the characteristic isolation that engineeringeducation maintains with regard to non-technical disciplines such as anthropology, communityhealth, and social development. A year-long course at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, currently in is third year and working with its third community, breaks theisolationism of engineering thinking by combining undergraduate and graduate
Engineering Education, 2016 Preparing Engineering Students to Work on Taboo Topics in the Service of CommunitiesIntroductionAccording to the WHO, 2.4 billion people lack access to proper sanitation resources.1 Faced witha growing problem, engineers, locally and internationally, have responded to this crisis throughavenues such as the Gates Reinvent the Toilet Challenge. In the case of the Toilet Challenge,engineers were able to create what were seen as “practical” toilets that convert waste into energy.However, each toilet cost upwards of $1000 and required infrastructure and technology notavailable in their target communities, thus presenting a huge drawback in fighting the sanitationstigma.2 There is much to learn
overwhelmingly enjoy this experience and that it effectively displays the direct, positiveimpact engineering can have on people. Future work includes developing the program to servemore engineering students, providing workshops for parents and families of children with specialneeds, and beginning partnerships to extend toy adaptation to other cities and universities.Additionally, we will continue to expand our data collection to evaluate the program morecompletely and its impact on our students and the community.AcknowledgementThis work is currently supported by the Battelle Engineering, Technology, and Human Affairs(BETHA) Endowment. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressedin this material are those of the author(s) and do
Paper ID #15388A Case Study in Effective Education-to-Workforce Pipelining: An AdvancedManufacturing and Innovation AcademyDr. Ranjeet Agarwala, East Carolina University Dr. Ranjeet Agarwala serves as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Technology Systems at East Carolina University. He holds a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the North Carolina State University. Since 2001 he has taught courses in Engineering Design, Digital Manufacturing, and 3D printing, GD&T, Electro-Mechanical Systems, Statics and Dynamics. His research interests are in the areas on Advance and Digital Manufacturing and its integration
at the University of Utah. Her current research focuses on cost effective methods for efficient utilization of biomass-derived oils in combustion applications.Dr. Mary U Christiansen, University of Minnesota Duluth Dr. Mary Christiansen is an Assistant Professor at the University of Minnesota Duluth in the Civil En- gineering Department. Her education includes a B.S. in Architectural Engineering (2008) and M.S. in Structural Engineering (2008) from the Milwaukee School of Engineering and a Ph.D. in Civil Engineer- ing (2013) from Michigan Technological University. Her research focuses on the development and charac- terization of alternative cementitious materials and portland cement binders with the goal of improving
Paper ID #15776Comparison of Students’ Outcome to Different Types of Project Based Ser-vice Learning Experiences for CEE Senior DesignDr. Dan Budny P.E., University of Pittsburgh Dr. Dan Budny joined the University of Pittsburgh faculty as Academic Director of the Freshman Pro- grams and an Associate Professor in Civil Engineering in January 2000. Prior to that time he served as Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and Freshman Programs at Purdue University. He holds a B.S. and M.S. degree from Michigan Technological University, and an M.S. and Ph.D. degree from Michigan State University. His research has focused on
service project, suchas developing a cohesive report and performing applicable engineering computations, oftendirectly aligns with the student learning objectives for the academic exercise. Recognizing theneed to balance technical engineering expertise with “soft skills” associated with teamwork andengineer-client relationships, engineering undergraduate curriculum benefits from theexperiential learning process; yet very few programs promote extensive experiential learningopportunities integrated directly into the engineering curriculum. While indirectly referenced viastudent outcome criteria, the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Inc. (ABET)learning criteria for engineering programs support the intended outcomes of experiential