Conference Session

Design in Freshman and Sophomore Courses

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gail Hohner, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Shanna R. Daly, University of Michigan; Jennifer Wegner, University of Michigan; Moses K. Lee, University of Michigan; Amy Frances Goldstein, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

also compare 35 incoming students who did not participate in the program. Thisprogram is the initial activity in an undergraduate multidisciplinary design program whichincludes many co-curricular enrichment activities as well as an academic minor. We intend tostudy this group of students through their engineering education and evaluate them periodically.We use both the self-efficacy survey from Carberry, Lee and Ohland (Measuring EngineeringDesign Self-Efficacy) as well as the concepts in design survey from Oehlberg and Agogino(Undergraduate Conceptions of the Engineering Design Process: assessing the Impact of aHuman-Centered Desgin Course – which is an extension of Mosborg S., et.al., Conceptions ofthe Engineering Design Process: An Expert

Conference Session

Teams and Teamwork in Design

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Derrick Wayne Smith, University of Alabama, Hunstville; Monica Letrece Dillihunt, University of Alabama, Huntsville; Phillip A. Farrington, University of Alabama, Huntsville; Michael P.J. Benfield, University of Alabama, Huntsville; Matthew William Turner, University of Alabama, Huntsville

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

task and focuses on reasons such as challenge, curiosity, and mastery. • “Extrinsic Goal Orientation” measures the degree to which the student perceives him/herself to be participating in the task for reasons such as grades, rewards, competition, etc. • “Task Value” refers to the student’s evaluation of how interesting, how important, and how useful the task is and why they are participating in it. • “Control of Learning Beliefs” refers to the students’ beliefs that their efforts to learn will result in positive outcomes. • “Self-Efficacy for Learning and Performance” includes judgments about one’s ability to accomplish a task as well as one’s confidence in one’s skills to perform

Conference Session

Capstone Design I

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gene Dixon, East Carolina University

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

Capstone Courses, 2008 Annual Conference Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education, Pittsburgh.2. Carberry, Adam R., Hee-Sun Lee, and Matthew W. Ohland (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self- efficacy, Journal of Engineering Education, v99n1, pg 71-79.3. Douglas, Elliot P., Mirka Loro-Ljungberg, Azria T Malcolm, Nathan McNeill, David J. Therriault, Christine S Lee (2011). Moving Beyond Formulas and Fixations: Exploring Approaches to Solving Open-Ended Engineering Problems, 2011 Annual Conference Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education, Vancouver.4. Atman, Cynthia J., Robin S. Adams, Monica E. Cardella, Jennifer Turns, Susan Mosborg, Jason Saleem (2007), Engineering Design

Conference Session

The Best of Design in Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cory A. Hixson, Virginia Tech; Marie C. Paretti, Virginia Tech; James J. Pembridge, Virginia Tech

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

theories to general teacher motivation is growing. Recentstudies have applied motivational frameworks to address teachers’ use (or non-use) ofcooperative learning 7. In this study, Abrami and colleagues developed an instrument to addressteachers’ implementation (or avoidance) of cooperative learning. The underlying motivationaltheories in consideration were the expectancies, values, and costs of implementing cooperativelearning. Another study of teacher motivation discusses the limitations of applying a singlemotivational theory to teacher motivation and thus, presents a model that integrates multiplemotivational theories and frameworks. This study by Neves de Jesus and Lens integratesexpectancy-value theory, goal value theory, self-efficacy

Conference Session

The Best of Design in Engineering

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kristin L. Wood, University of Texas, Austin; Rajesh Elara Mohan, Singapore University of Technology and Design; Sawako Kaijima, Singapore University of Technology and Design; Stylianos Dritsas, Singapore University of Technology and Design; Daniel D. Frey, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Christina Kay White, University of Texas, Austin; Daniel D. Jensen, U.S. Air Force Academy; Richard H. Crawford, University of Texas, Austin; Diana Moreno, Singapore University of Technology and Design; Kin-Leong Pey, Singapore University of Technology and Design

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education

Outgoing, Energetic Openness to experience Cautious, Conservative Inventive, Curious Agreeableness Competitive, Outspoken Friendly, Compassionate Conscientiousness Easy-going, Careless Efficient, Organized Emotional (Neuroticism) Secure, Confident, Calm Sensitive, Anxious Figure 5. Five Factor Model (http://intraspec.ca/images/eysenck.gif)There exist a number of other dimensional measures of personality, such as Webster and Kruglanski’s“Need for Closure” scale (Webster, 1994). These dimensional measures, e.g., Webster and Kruglanski’s,are known to be related to the Five Factor Model. One well known