AC 2011-1565: FREQUENCY ANALYSIS OF TERMINOLOGY ON ENGI-NEERING EXAMINATIONSChirag Variawa, University of Toronto Chirag Variawa is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at the University of Toronto. His research interests include maximizing inclusivity, accessibility and usability of engineering education via universal instructional design and innovative instructional methods. He is an active Canadian member of the SCC division of ASEE, co-chair of the Leaders of Tomorrow (Graduate) program and teaching assistant in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering. He received his B.A.Sc. (2009) from the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of
Paper ID #7714Key Aspects of Cyberlearning Resources with Compelling ResultsMrs. Jeremi S London, Purdue University, West Lafayette Jeremi S. London is a graduate student at Purdue University. She is pursing a Ph.D. in Engineering Edu- cation. In 2008, she earned a Bachelor of Science in Industrial Engineering from Purdue, and a Master of Science in Industrial Engineering from Purdue in 2013. Her research interests include: the use of cyber- learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education; assessing the impact of cyberlearning; and exploring ways computer simulations can be used to
using student interviews offaculty to introduce a best practice for faculty members and compare this to an email distributionapproach. Participants for this project were 34 students enrolled in the Food, Agricultural, andBiological Engineering (FABE) 810 College Teaching in Engineering class. Students in theclass include graduate students and undergraduates from across the College of Engineering. Thefirst step of the project was accomplished by students interviewing faculty who agreed to the Page 22.693.3process and then doing a written summary of their interview as a class assignment. Theseinterview reports were summarized and results were
methods for engineering education research, diversity in engineering education, and technical communication in engineering.Dr. Allison Godwin, Purdue University, West Lafayette Allison Godwin, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education and Chemical Engineering at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clem- son University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. Her research earned her a National
high school graduates continue on to Baccalaureate-level (B.Eng. or B.Sc.) instruction, and for 50% of these to obtain the higher Candidate’s degree (M.Sc.) Simultaneously, an attempt to contain the costs of higher education through the rationalization of higher education, both through the legislatively mandated consolidation of the nation’s semi-professional schools (those established for teachers, technicians, nurses and others) into a single University College system, and through fiscal policies designed to force administrative restructuring within the nation’s universities. Many nationally funded, not-for-profit research institutes were also absorbed into the nation’s universities under
of university-level graduate student learning assessment practicesFaculty-led, college-focused assessment practices already provide sound assessment of studentlearning in many areas, and we wanted to avoid redundancy in the university-level system.With national attention including more focus on graduate programs, implementation ofuniversity-level graduate student learning outcomes assessment was a high priority for theappointed Enhancing Graduate Education (EGE) committee. In parallel, in 2010 the standingfaculty Graduate & Research Committee (GRC) reviewed their charge as having responsibilityfor overseeing the quality of graduate programs and began discussing a possible framework forgraduate program review.As part of that effort, GRC
not unusual for discrepancies to exist when a senior plans to spendan extra semester or year as an undergraduate or when a graduating student completed therequired senior course in a previous term.Administering the survey in the month prior to commencement, while the students are still oncampus and in contact with their faculty members, obviously allows for increased opportunitiesfor contact and leverage, both increasing response rate. The disadvantage is that some studentswill not seek or obtain placement until after commencement. Thus, surveys administered sixmonths after commencement, a common practice, will typically always report higher placementthan those administered on campus before students leave. However, response rates are
Tinkering and Technical Activities Connect Engineering Education Standards with the Engineering Profession in Today’s World?AbstractThe ABET Criterion 3 a-k learning outcomes have been used for more than a decade and havehad a major influence on the structuring and evaluation of engineering curricula. As such, theyshould have a significant impact on the perceptions of what engineers believe are the importantfactors in the education of engineering students. This research explores the question of whetherthe technical and tinkering characteristics that engineers value correspond with ABET Criterion3 a-k learning outcomes. To answer this question a volunteer sample of engineering students andASEE engineering faculty and practicing engineers responded
Motor Company's Scientific Research Lab. Dr. Sheppard's graduate work was done at the University of Michigan.Lorraine Fleming, Howard University LORRAINE FLEMING is professor and former Chair of the Department of Civil Engineering at Howard University. Dr. Fleming serves as the Co-PI of a National Science Foundation HBCU Undergraduate Program grant designed to increase the number of underrepresented minorities who pursue degrees in engineering, mathematics, and science. Additionally, she is a Co-PI for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education. She serves as the Principal Investigator of an NSF grant designed to study the post baccalaureate decisions of high achieving Black
Dean for Academics and Professor of Industrial Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh. His research focuses on improving the engineering educational experience with an emphasis on assessment of design and problem solving, and the study of the ethical behavior of engineers and engineering managers. A former senior editor of the Journal of Engineering Education, Dr. Shuman is the founding editor of Advances in Engineering Education. He has published widely in the engineering education literature, and is co-author of Engineering Ethics: Balancing Cost, Schedule and Risk - Lessons Learned from the Space Shuttle (Cambridge University Press). He received his Ph.D. from The Johns Hopkins
Engineering Education, 2007 Developing Cognitive, Affective, Behavioral Work Sampling Methodologies to Assess Student Learning OutcomesAbstractIn this study, we develop and validate a work sampling methodology to assess processes thatengineers usually engage in (i.e., working in teams, conducting design work, addressing ethicalissues). To obtain in-depth measures for these process oriented student learning outcomes, 100percent behavioral observation is typically used, but which is time consuming and expensive.Work sampling is a common industry practice used to observe physical activities, as it minimizestime to collect data, yet provides statistically similar results relative to 100% behavioralobservation. In our research we
. New Orleans, LA. doi:10.18260/p.2618713 Gerasimova, D., Hjalmarson, M., & Nelson, J. (2017, June). Profiles of participation outcomes in faculty learning communities. Proceedings of the 2017 ASEE Annual Conference. Columbus, OH.14 Samaras, A. (2011). Self-study teacher research: Improving your practice through collaborative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.15 Schwebach, J.R., Gerasimova, D., Luther, D.A., Verhoeven, A.B., Davis, C.P., Gostel, M., Romulo, C., Schreffler, L., Seshaiyer, P., Nelson, J.K. (2015). Advancing graduate education and faculty development with discipline-based education research and the SIMPLE framework: Design memos in biology for active teaching. ATINER’S Conference Paper Series, No: BIO2015-1599
. Educating Engineers: Designing for the Future of the Field. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2009.9. U.S. Department of Education. The Condition of Education. Washington, D.C.; 2001. nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001072.pdf.10. Shulman L. The Signature Pedagogies of the Professions of Law , Medicine , Engineering , and the Clergy : Potential Lessons for the Education of Teachers. 2005.11. Quartaroli MT. Qualitative data analysis. In: Lapan SD, Quartaroli MT, eds. Research Essentials: An Introduction to Designs and Practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2008.12. Bergmann J, Sams A. Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education; 2012.13
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Making Learning Whole: Toward the Development of An Instrument Operationalizing Perkins’ ModelAbstract The push for stronger links between engineering education research and practice requiresthat taking a more scholarly approach to teaching became the norm instead of the exceptionacross all engineering education. This paper seeks to make the case that there is a lack of toolsavailable for achieving some of the goals of the field, such as the one aforementioned, andpresents findings from a set of research activities designed to help address this need. Morespecifically, this work in progress paper describes the early stages of a study that uses
acourse as “designed to help students practice writing, give them opportunities to use writing as atool for learning, and to introduce them to the writing conventions and practices of particularfields or disciplines.” The purpose of WI courses is to provide a course in which students willget hands-on experience in writing for their own discipline. For the most part, this takes place ina typical disciplinary course, but one that makes a special emphasis on writing. Such WI-coursesmust provide practice with ▪ Research ▪ Drafting ▪ Writing Process ▪ Disciplinary Conventions ▪ Revision ▪ ReflectionHowever, in recognition of the
includes experiences as both a middle school and high school science teacher, teaching science at elementary through graduate level, developing formative as- sessment instruments, teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in science and science education, working with high-risk youth in alternative education centers, working in science museums, designing and facilitating online courses, multimedia curriculum development, and leading and researching profes- sional learning for educators. The Association for the Education of Teachers of Science (AETS) honored Dr. Spiegel for his efforts in teacher education with the Innovation in Teaching Science Teachers award (1997). Dr. Spiegel’s current efforts focus on
partial strategy or in addition totraditional curriculum in engineering courses17-20.Projects are universally the ‘modus operandi’ of engineering practice. Projects are typically acomponent of engineering design courses, which are usually separate from engineering scienceand are more likely though not all at the upper level. As examples of research on project work,Dym et al21 present project-based learning as the favored model for teaching design, while Franket al22 present a freshman year introductory engineering course based on project work. PBL andproject work share some similarities such as being multi-disciplinary, collaborative, and self-directed, but the two approaches differ slightly in their focus and method of implementation24. InPBL
case studies for use in thecapstone course,10, 11 and the Architectural Engineering project involved the development of acomputer-based tutor to assist students in designing steel structures.12 The latter two initiativesdid not have a lasting impact because they were each led by a single investigator who eventuallyleft Penn State before being able to convince other colleagues to buy into the pedagogicalinnovation. In Aerospace and Electrical Engineering the involvement of multiple investigatorsand the integration of the projects into formal curricular changes led to their continuation, and inCivil Engineering, the project was led by a single investigator who persisted in his efforts,eventually leading to a follow-on project involving more
Yerrick, Fresno State University Randy Yerrick is Dean of the Kremen School for Education and Human Development at CSU Fresno. He has also served as Professor of Science Education at SUNY Buffalo where he Associate Dean and Sci- ence Education Professor for the Graduate School of Education. Dr. Yerrick maintains an active research agenda focusing on two central questions: 1) How do scientific norms of discourse get enacted in class- rooms and 2) To what extend can historical barriers to STEM learning be traversed for underrepresented students through expert teaching practices? For his efforts in examining science for the under-served, Dr. Yerrick has received numerous research and teaching awards including the Journal
Paper ID #21635Understanding the Socializer Influence on Engineering Students’ Career Plan-ningRohini Abhyankar, Arizona State University Rohini Abhyankar is a second year graduate student at Arizona State University’s Engineering Education Systems and Design doctoral program. Rohini has a Master’s degree in Electrical Engineering from Syracuse University and Master’s and Bachelor’s degrees in Physics from University of Delhi, India. Rohini has over ten years each of industry and teaching experience.Dr. Cheryl Carrico P.E., Virginia Tech Cheryl Carrico is a part-time faculty Research Scientist for Virginia Tech and owner
. His wife Dawn is a 1997 graduate of the academy, and they raise five children. In his free time, Rhymer runs the falconry program at the Air Force Academy.Dr. Richard T. Buckley Ph.D., U.S. Air Force AcademyDr. Daniel D. Jensen, U.S. Air Force Academy Dan Jensen is a professor of engineering mechanics at the U.S. Air Force Academy where he has been since 1997. He received his B.S. (mechanical engineering), M.S. (applied mechanics), and Ph.D. (aerospace engineering science) from the University of Colorado, Boulder. He has worked for Texas Instruments, Lockheed Martin, NASA, University of the Pacific, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, and MSC Software Corp. His research includes design of micro air vehicles
. (1979). Learning-through-teaching: Knowledge changes inundergraduate teaching assistants. Teaching of Psychology, 6(1), 30-32.[14] Odom, S. F., Ho, S. P., & Moore, L. L. (2014). The Undergraduate Leadership Teaching Assistant (ULTA): AHigh-Impact Practice for Undergraduates Studying Leadership. Journal of Leadership Education, 13(2).[15] Schalk, K. A., McGinnis, J. R., Harring, J. R., Hendrickson, A., & Smith, A. C. (2009). The undergraduateteaching assistant experience offers opportunities similar to the undergraduate research experience. Journal ofMicrobiology & Biology Education: JMBE, 10(1), 32.[16] Fingerson, L., & Culley, A. B. (2001). Collaborators in teaching and learning: Undergraduate teachingassistants in the
, Stanford UniversityBeth Rieken, Stanford University Beth Rieken is a sixth year graduate student at Stanford University. She is currently working on her PhD in Mechanical Engineering with a focus on the relevance of mindfulness to engineers. Beth completed a BS in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Virginia in 2010 and a MS in Mechanical Engineering from Stanford in 2012.Dr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research on engineering education and work-practices, and applied finite element
technology programs.Lori Maxfield, College of St. Catherine Lori R. Maxfield, Ph.D., is the Director of Undergraduate and Graduate Education Programs (Initial Licensure) in the Education Department at the College of St. Catherine. She teaches social studies methods for prospective teachers at the elementary, middle school, and senior high levels. At the college-wide level, she serves as a member of the Curriculum Design Team that is working to create core minors that provide and integrated and interdisciplinary focus across the liberal arts and professional studies programs. Her direct experience with the Parallel Curriculum Model includes serving as a National Cadre Curriculum Writer (2002-2003
research 1. Its questions are tailored to identify students’ implicit assumptions in aspecific field and may be applied both pre- and post-instruction. There is no currently existing CIfor networking and telecommunications. Our initial results seem to suggest that the developmentof a CI for this field would be very useful. However, we would like this CI to be applicable to adiverse set of students, with respect to both their culture and their educational level(undergraduate and graduate). At the moment, the development of such a CI is still in an earlystage.In summary, this study expands the breadth of knowledge on student preconceptions in STEMby including the subject of QoS in telecommunications, identifying some of thepreconception(s
the 21st century has been built squarely oninformation, communications, and computational technology (ICCT). In this WIP, we explorehow ICCT impacts the way that engineering is learned with the goal of establishing a researchagenda for propagating the effective use of ICCT in engineering education. We seek to informaction and generate conversation amongst administrators, instructors, researchers, and students.We can approach this goal from two broad perspectives. First, ICCT has fundamentally changedengineering practice by supporting discovery, collaboration, and innovation processes.1 Intandem, learning technologies promise to provide an unprecedented opportunity to improveinstruction, provide adaptive learning, and foster increased access
the full spectrum of teaching activity. Some protocols are designed to observe a specific pedagogy in practice. The goal of this project is not to research the effectiveness of one particular pedagogy, it is to research the effectiveness of the space and tools designed to enable the instructor’s teaching plan. If a protocol is too heavily based on observing an expected pedagogy, important observations might go untracked. Active learning classrooms should support a variety of teaching perspectives and pedagogies and be designed in a way that encourages the use of a broad spectrum of learning activities, so the instructor has the flexibility to pick the best teaching approach for their intended goals
how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering fos- ter or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. Her research earned her a National Science Foundation CAREER Award focused on characterizing latent diversity, which includes diverse attitudes, mindsets, and approaches to learning, to understand engineering stu- dents’ identity development. She has won several awards for her research including the 2016 American Society of Engineering Education Educational Research and Methods Division Best Paper Award and the 2018 Benjamin J. Dasher Best Paper Award for the
Page 14.966.3survival analysis techniques to explore the time to complete a doctorate at the HarvardUniversity Graduate School of Education (HGSE). Willett and Singer13 stated that educationalresearchers should employ survival analysis techniques in order to study topics such as studentpersistence and teacher attrition. The article maintained that one of the best reasons to applysurvival analysis is that standard statistical techniques require knowledge of when the eventoccurred (the outcome) for each sample member. This is a standard unlikely to be met instudying event times. Regardless of the length of the study, it is probable that some samplemembers will not experience the event of interest prior to the end of data collection.The prior
) Promotes split of teaching/research faculty Deeper Fear: Engineering graduates whose education lacks societal relevance Possible Actions: 1) Identify key innovators and give release time to develop/implement 2) Find ways to encourage truly multi-disciplinary teams 3) Push for “design in every course” 4) Reward faculty for instructional accomplishments on a par with research 5) Seek increased support from Dean, external sources (Industry) 6) Benchmark progress in curricular change 7) Strengthen “Design” criteria in ABET 8) Hire non-faculty PE’s or “Professors of Practice”, more grad student support 9) Use vertical