earn secondary degrees.3 In other words,deficit thinking leads to the erroneous conclusion that individual students need to be fixed andinstitutional systems like academia may remain unchanged. Our goal in this research is similarto the goal of the NSF ADVANCE program, which is to “fix the system” not “fix the women.”6 Our study contributes to understandings of navigational capital by illuminating how Pell-eligible students glean non-traditional resources from their lives and use them to navigateinstitutions of higher education in successful pursuit of engineering degrees.III. Methods With change agency in mind, our research was designed and conducted as “actionresearch,” aimed at making the lives of the dispossessed visible as well
AC 2010-2149: MAXIMIZING BENEFITS OF SERVICE-LEARNING INENGINEERINGLinda Barrington, University of Massachusetts, LowellJohn Duffy, University of Massachusetts Lowell Page 15.858.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Maximizing Benefits of Service-Learning in Engineering AbstractAre engineering educators maximizing the benefits of service-learning to students, community,faculty, and institutions? Are we collectively converging on desired goals of service-learning asa pedagogy/philosophy that take full advantage of the benefits elucidated by research?A commonly utilized definition of service-learning is “a credit-bearing, educational experiencein which
AC 2009-230: UNDERSTANDING THE CURRENT WORK AND VALUES OFPROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS: IMPLICATIONS FOR ENGINEERINGEDUCATIONKevin Anderson, University of Wisconsin, MadisonSandra Courter, University of Wisconsin, MadisonThomas McGlamery, University of Wisconsin, MadisonTraci Nathans-Kelly, University of Wisconsin, MadisonChristine Nicometo, University of Wisconsin, Madison Page 14.1297.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Understanding the Current Work and Values of Professional Engineers: Implications for Engineering EducationKey Words: engineering practice, values, identity; education implicationsAbstractTo better meet the needs of this century’s
Validation Development Action Plan Figure 1: Approach Page 26.1022.3ScopeEgoless behavior is a mindset. The earlier this mindset is developed, the better it is. Younger minds aremore malleable and have full careers ahead of them. Carver, et al. argue that before running an empiricalstudy at a software company, it is useful to carry out a pilot study with students in an academic setting17.Therefore, we defined our scope of research to a batch of 86 junior software engineering students of
Paper ID #16865Institutional Obstacles to Ethnographic Observation in Engineering IndustryProf. Reed Stevens, Northwestern University Reed Stevens is a Professor of Learning Sciences at Northwestern University. He holds a B.A. in Mathe- matics from Pomona College and PhD in Cognition and Development from the University of California, Berkeley. Professor Stevens began his professional career as a mathematics teacher. For the past two decades, he has studied STEM learning both in and out of school. His research seeks to understand how and when learning environments are productive for people and to translate those findings
Paper ID #12572Engineering, Society and the Environment in the Teaching Goals and Prac-tices of Engineering InstructorsMs. Lisa Romkey, University of Toronto Lisa Romkey serves as Senior Lecturer, Curriculum, Teaching and Learning with the Division of Engi- neering Science at the University of Toronto. In this position, Lisa plays a central role in the evaluation, design and delivery of a dynamic and complex curriculum, while facilitating the development and imple- mentation of various teaching and learning initiatives. Lisa is cross-appointed with the Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning at OISE/UT, and
, Performance, I Choose (LPIC) combinations L P IC Example C* R “While rote learning may sometimes achieve the reward of better grades, it rarely rewards the students of a better understanding of the material. However, I believe that the way the school system is currently set up, rote learning is rewarded favorably over conceptual learning. While a conceptual learning style would be favorable on exams if the concepts were allowed to be solidified in students' minds, 10-week terms packed to the brim with engineering work does not allow time for some conceptual learners to attain confidence with the concepts. These students are then quickly
students who preferred the online mode. Attendance was not enforced, thus thepercent of students who attend class sessions (both face-to-face and online synchronous) variedfrom lecture to lecture, from about 75% to 100%.The variability in student enrollment and participation necessitate special teaching techniques tohelp students in their learning process. With that in mind and with the objective of helpingstudents to achieve preparedness for the workforce, the instructor assigns a semester-long projectwhere the students have to use all the engineering tools learned in class to design four pumpedpipeline systems in a hypothetical new plant facility. The students are required to work in groupsas working in teams is a healthy habit for their future
longitudinal approach for additional analysis. While some of the data is the same,our study branches further into examining why students stay in or leave engineering. There hasbeen some previous research investigating relationships between demographic variables andengineering fields, but leaves out the student perspectives and expectations in choosing a major[11]. With this in mind, we focus on engineering specifically with our data from students in firstyear engineering coursework analyzing their expectations by reading the response data fromsurveys.A large portion of previously conducted major selection research comes from the perspective oftrying to introduce more people into STEM fields. For example, another study approaches theparticipation of
the challenges and lessons we, theSTEM professionals on the team, learned in our struggle to build a mutually respectful, trust-based, and symbiotic relationship with our social science partners. In the spirit of an authenticpartnership, our anthropology colleague also faced challenges and grew intellectually through theexperiences of this collaboration, but that story is for a different audience. Hopefully our storywill inspire other engineering education researchers to not just use social science techniques andtheories when expedient to do so, but to open their minds to new ways of thinking, investigating,and reporting.The Research Institute for STEM Education (RISE) [22] grew from conversations in fall 2001around ideas for a proposal to
Paper ID #8663Engineering Vocabulary Development using an Automated Software ToolMr. Chirag Variawa, University of Toronto Chirag Variawa is an accelerated-stream Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at the University of Toronto. He earned his B.A.Sc. in Materials Science Engineering in 2009 from the same institution. He is the first Graduate Student member of the University of Toronto Governing Council elected from Engineering. His multi-disciplinary research uses principles from arti- ficial intelligence, computational linguistics, higher education and aspects of neuroscience to
. Page 24.279.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Collaboration within Engineering Education Research’s Community of PracticeAbstractEngineering education research (EER) is a relatively young field of inquiry, established with theintent to improve the academic experiences of young and emerging engineers. While manyresearchers’ perceptions of how to improve engineering education stem from traditionalclassroom experiences, a select group of researchers belong to EER-oriented departments, labs,and research centers. These on-campus resources create a formal bridge between EER-expertnetworks and offer researchers an opportunity to collaborate with other like-minded
Paper ID #11182A Mastery Learning Approach to Engineering Homework AssignmentsDr. Jacob Preston Moore, Pennsylvania State University, Mont Alto Jacob Moore is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Penn State Mont Alto.Dr. Joseph Ranalli, Pennsylvania State University, Hazleton Campus Dr. Joseph Ranalli has taught since 2012 as an Assistant Professor at Penn State Hazleton in the Alterna- tive Energy and Power Generation Engineering program. He previously earned a BS from Penn State and a PhD from Virginia Tech, both in Mechanical Engineering. Prior to his current appointment, he served as a postdoctoral
Paper ID #12226Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Re-flectionsProf. Brent K Jesiek, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Brent K. Jesiek is Associate Professor in the Schools of Engineering Education and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University. He is also an Associate Director of Purdue’s Global En- gineering Program, leads the Global Engineering Education Collaboratory (GEEC) research group, and is the recipient of an NSF CAREER award to study boundary-spanning roles and competencies among early career engineers. He holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Michigan
): 𝑋 → 𝑌̂or 𝐹̂ (𝑥, 𝐼, 𝐴) = 𝑦̂where 𝑥 is a solution vector and 𝑦̂ is the engineer’s approximation of 𝑦.Because 𝑦̂ is a representation of the engineer’s approximation about the performance of thedesign, we can think of 𝑦̂ as a vector of probabilities. That is, the engineer is not certain of thevalue of 𝑦 for a solution, 𝑥, and as a result, has some possible values in mind as to what 𝑦 couldbe. Thus, we can think of 𝑦̂ as a vector of 𝑦̂ = [𝜉1 , 𝜉2 , … , 𝜉𝑜 ]where each 𝜉𝑗 is a random variable whose distribution represents the predicted values for 𝑦𝑗 andtheir likelihoods based on available information 𝐼, assumptions 𝐴. In other words
Paper ID #30606Solution Diversity in Engineering Computing Final ProjectsMs. Sara Willner-Giwerc , Tufts University Sara Willner-Giwerc is a Ph.D. candidate in mechanical engineering at Tufts University. She graduated from Tufts University with a B.S. in mechanical engineering and a double minor in engineering education and engineering management in 2018. She is a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow, which supports her research at the Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach (CEEO) on technological tools, learning experiences, and environments for teaching engineering in classrooms pre-k
2006-1889: ENGINEERING EDUCATION: TARGETED LEARNING OUTCOMESOR ACCIDENTAL COMPETENCIES?Joachim Walther, University of Queensland JOACHIM WALTHER graduated from The Darmstadt University of Technology (Germany) with a Bachelor in Mechanical and Process Engineering and a “Diplom” in General Mechanical Engineering. As a PhD student he is now member of the Catalyst Research Centre for Society and Technology at the University of Queensland. His research interests lie in the areas of cognitive and social aspects of engineering design and education.David Radcliffe, University of Queensland DAVID RADCLIFFE is the Thiess Professor of Engineering Education and Professional Development in the School of
,” which is building an online history of the development of the NSDL. She is also PI on ”Learning from the Best: How Award Winning Courseware has Impacted Engineering Education.” This research focuses on determining how high quality courseware is being disseminated and how it is impacting the culture of engineering education as measured by changes in student learning, teaching practices, and the careers of the authors of these materials.Prof. Joseph G. Tront, Virginia TechSarah Giersch, Broad-based Knowledge, LLC Sarah Giersch is a Consultant for Broad-based Knowledge, LLC (BbK), where she conducts quantita- tive and qualitative evaluations for BbK’s higher education clients. Giersch also consults in the areas of
acclimation to proficiency.Educational Researcher, 32(8), 10-14.[9] Bransford, J. (Ed.). (2000). How people learn brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington,D.C.: National Academy Press.[10] Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition andInstruction, 8 (4), 292-332.[11] Denzine, G. (2007, June). Five misconceptions about engineering students' motivation that affect theteaching and learning process. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education, Honolulu,Hawaii.[12] Smith, K. A. (1999, October 28-29, 1999). Cooperative learning and the new paradigm for engineeringeducation. Paper presented at the ABET Annual Meeting, Baltimore, MD.[13] Vergara, C. E
Paper ID #34949Identifying Signature Pedagogies in a Multidisciplinary EngineeringProgramDr. Kimia Moozeh, University of Toronto Kimia Moozeh has a PhD in Engineering Education from University of Toronto. She received her Hon. B.Sc. in 2013, and her Master’s degree in Chemistry in 2014. Her dissertation explored improving the learning outcomes of undergraduate engineering laboratories by bridging the learning from a larger context to the underlying fundamentals, using digital learning objects.Lisa Romkey, University of Toronto Lisa Romkey serves as Associate Professor, Teaching Stream and Associate Chair, Curriculum
Paper ID #29336A Review of Agentic Frameworks in Engineering EducationMs. Brianna Shani Benedict, Purdue University Brianna Benedict is a Graduate Research Assistant in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She completed her Bachelor’s and Master’s of Science in Industrial and Systems Engineering at North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University. Her research interest focuses on interdisci- plinary students’ identity development, belongingness in engineering, and agency.Mrs. Kayla R. Maxey, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Kayla is a doctoral
AC 2012-4652: IS THE ENGINEERING EDUCATION COMMUNITY BE-COMING MORE INTERDISCIPLINARY?Dr. Johannes Strobel, Purdue University, West Lafayette Johannes Strobel is Director of INSPIRE, Institute for P-12 Engineering Research and Learning, and Assistant Professor of engineering education and learning design and technology at Purdue University. NSF and several private foundations fund his research. His research and teaching focuses on policy of P-12 engineering, how to support teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering learning, the measurement and support of change of habits of mind, particularly in regards to sustainability and the use of cyber-infrastructure to sensitively and resourcefully
most of his concepts, he first suggested a food that could need to becooked with his product. He seemed to go through a list in his mind of the foods, and diversifiedhis designs by suggesting different foods he had not previously considered. For example, he saidbefore generating concept 9, “Other things to eat. We’ve got shish-kabobs, jerked meat, the driedherbs, the soups and things, um, let’s see.” For one of his concepts, he utilized the processheuristic of synthesizing by combining two previous concepts (concepts 3 and 4) into one new,superior concept (concept 5). Engineer 1 also emphasized different constraints from the problemas he worked. For example, in concept 2, he focused on "maximizing the intensity of thesunlight," while in the
required classes. One persisting student stated the following: It’s a lot of work. But I don’t know if I can really say I dislike the work because it wouldn’t be as rewarding if there wasn’t that much work involved (Persister, Structured Interview 1). For this student, the outcomes of taking engineering courses was rewarding partly because of the hard work that he put into them. Another persisting student discussed her learning in her engineering classes: It'd be nice to take the other classes and know more. But I don't mind taking the engineering classes because I feel like I'm also learning in those. And so it’s not really too big a trade off for me. But sometimes I just kind of wish that I could get a break
“engineering BS programs are notdesigned for team-based curriculum, even though team projects are paramount to engineeringpositions in the real world [16].”Another study focused on the differences between behaviors/skills of senior engineering studentsand actual skill requirements that professionals desire in the field. Among the findings is adisconnect of course outcomes and the competencies of interest to professionals. Industryprofessionals were more interested in graduates that had fundamental skills -- like being willing toask questions or say “I don’t know,” or being curious and open-minded to information and ideas -- rather than what the students were demonstrating in terms of technical accomplishment [17].These disconnects between the
Paper ID #22887WIP An Interview Study of Faculty, Course Assistant, and Student Insightwithin Teaching and Learning Assistant Programs for Undergraduate Engi-neering CoursesHern´an Gallegos, Tufts University Hern´an Gallegos is currently a junior at Tufts University. He is studying Mechanical Engineering and minoring in Engineering Education. His academic interests lie in trying to aid students to understand engineering concepts and how they can enhance their learning through various resources. With this in mind, he is working within the Engineering Learning Systems lab under Professor Kristen Wendell, a Mechanical
Development (MIDFIELD), compiles institutional data,including demographic and academic transcript records and Fundamentals of Engineering (FE)scores, from nine universities from 1987-2005. In this paper, we propose a design to combinedata from the two databases to assess the correspondence between the self-reported studentlearning outcome measures in the Engineering Change study and the MIDFIELD dataset'sinformation on program-level performance on the FE examination, the only objective test ofstudents’ engineering knowledge.IntroductionThroughout its history, U.S. higher education has been mindful of questions about educationalquality and institutional accountability. Formal accreditation mechanisms emerged in the early20th century. Although the
interdisciplinarylearning experiences through a review of engineering journals and conference proceedings thatidentified more than 1,500 articles on interdisciplinary courses and projects published in an 8-year time-period. During this same period, two reports on engineering education—TheEngineer of 2020 sponsored by the National Academy of Engineering10 and Creating a Culturefor Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education11 published by AmericanSociety for Engineering Education—placed the responsibility and challenge of promoting thedevelopment of future engineers’ interdisciplinary habits of mind on engineering faculty.In this study, we ask “What influences engineering faculty members’ inclusion ofinterdisciplinary content and skill development
Paper ID #33032Development of WeBWorK Prelab Problem Sets to Support Student LearningMs. Sheena Miao Ying Tan, Simon Fraser University Sheena is currently a PhD student in mathematics education at Simon Fraser University. She was pre- viously a secondary mathematics teacher in Singapore and has worked in the Ministry of Education, Singapore. She was the research assistant for the project to develop and implement WeBWorK prelab problems in the course SEE 310, to enhance students’ learning.Taco Niet Ph.D., P.Eng., School of Sustainable Energy Engineering, Simon Fraser University Taco is an Assistant Professor of Professional
Paper ID #17980Work In Progress: Methodological Considerations for Constructing Nontra-ditional Student Personas with Scenarios from Online Forum Usage Data inCalculusDr. Angela Minichiello P.E., Utah State University Angela Minichiello is an assistant professor the Department of Engineering Education at Utah State Uni- versity (USU) and a registered professional mechanical engineer. Angela earned a BSME degree from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, a MSME degree from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and a PhD in Engineering Education from USU. Her research examines issues of access, diversity, and