Latinx adolescents whenconfronted with the beliefs, behaviors, and practices of engineering is an integral part in decidinghow to provide support systems for students that may feel alienated and excluded fromengineering.10,11 Alejandra Elens12,13 argued that Nepantla as a framework offers the opportunityfor individuals to examine multiple forms of oppression that can lead to decolonial thinking anddifferent perspectives on social justice. Nepantla is the state where perspectives about family,economy, society, and education among others come into conflict. “These are moments ofcritical awareness, when someone starts to see things from different and new perspectives” (p.135).12 Thus, through this sociocultural framework, Latinx adolescents can be
college math, science, computer science, and engineering teach- ing to frame his research on STEM teaching and learning. Nadelson brings a unique perspective of research, bridging experience with practice and theory to explore a range of interests in STEM teaching and learning.Dr. Idalis Villanueva, Utah State University Dr. Villanueva is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering Education Department and an Adjunct Pro- fessor in the Bioengineering Department in Utah State University. Her multiple roles as an engineer, engineering educator, engineering educational researcher, and professional development mentor for un- derrepresented populations has aided her in the design and integration of educational and
the “nature of recursive social practices that help usconceive both stability and change” [p. 302]. Lastly, student agency has been defined as “the waysstudents develop personally through engagement with knowledge” [24]. This characterization ofstudent agency is similar to Svihla et al. [21]. Both studies focused on students developing agencyas an integral piece for navigating pathways into their career as an engineer.Along with varying theoretical underpinnings of agential frameworks, multiple approaches wereused to investigate student learning, such as a multiple case study, narrative analysis, andphenomenography. The narrative analysis conducted by Case [23] highlighted how the studentsfelt constrained by the curriculum, which in turn
AC 2012-4029: INSTITUTIONAL DISCOURSES IN ENGINEERING ED-UCATION AND PRACTICENathan McNeill, University of Florida Nathan McNeill is a Postdoctoral Associate in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at the University of Florida, where he is studying the factors that contribute to success in open-ended problem-solving. He has a Ph.D. in engineering education from Purdue University, an M.S. in mechan- ical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and a B.S. in engineering from Walla Walla University.Dr. Elliot P. Douglas, University of Florida Elliot P. Douglas is Associate Chair, Associate Professor, and Distinguished Teaching Scholar in the De- partment of Materials Science and
engineering practices, such as teamwork, communication, and systems thinking,as well utilize their computing in engineering knowledge.Implications and Future WorkAs design-based projects continue to become integrated into the technical parts of undergraduateengineering curricula, it is important for instructors to know how to structure these projects andintegrate them into other aspects of their course to effectively facilitate the learning ofengineering practices. The case study presented in this paper illustrates how thinking aboutsolution diversity, and the ways in which project design and instructional techniques affordsolution diversity, is one possible metric to consider when designing an engineering project. Thisstudy also illustrates how a
in the Department of Mechanical and Civil Engineeringat the University of Evansville have undertaken a similar, multi-year study, in an attempt tofurther quantify and support the findings of these studies.Method and Study ParametersData from three different courses in the Mechanical and Civil Engineering curriculum werecollected for this study. Table 1 contains information regarding the study parameters and thethree instructors (listed as A, B, C) associated with each course included in this semester. Foreach of the courses in this study, there are typically 3-4 exams each semester, approximately 20-25 homework assignments and 8-10 quizzes. Average enrollment for ENGR prefix classes isapproximately 20 students per section. For CE prefix
. Page 25.1031.1212 Ostafichuk, P.M., Croft, E.A., Green, S.I., Schajer, G.S., and Rogak, S.N., 2008, Analysis of Mech 2: An Award-Winning Second Year Mechanical Engineering Curriculum, Proc. of EE2008, July 2008, Loughborough, UK.13 Ostafichuk, P.M., Van der Loos, H.M., and Sibley, J., 2010, Using Team-Based Learning to Improve Learningand the Student Experience in a Mechanical Design Course, Proc. IMECE2010, November 2010, Vancouver,Canada.14 Brickell, J.L., Porter, D.B., Reynolds, M.F., and Cosgrove, R.D., 1994, Assigning Students to Groups forEngineering Design Projects: A Comparison of Five Methods, Journal of Engineering Education, July 1994, pp.259-62.15 Wright, D., 1994, Using Learning Groups in Your Classroom: A Few How–To’s, Teaching
Engineering at Iowa State University. She has integrated complex, ill-structured problem solving experiences into her engineering economy course. Dr. Ryan's research focuses on decision-making under uncertainty in energy systems, asset management with condition monitoring, and closed-loop supply chains.Craig Ogilvie, Iowa State University Dr. Craig Ogilvie is an Associate Professor in Physics and Astonomy at Iowa State University. He is a recognized leader in both nuclear physics and in the teaching of problem-solving skills in large enrollment physics classes.Dale Niederhauser, Iowa State University Dr. Dale Niederhauser is an Associate Professor in Curriculum and Instruction at Iowa State
behaviors in K-12 science teachingusing discourse analysis. This protocol focuses on the instructor, including tracking questionsand responses, transitions from one activity to another, physical movement and the set up of theclassroom space, which is appealing. However, there is no provision for the coding of tool use inthis protocol [31]. Subsequently, the Classroom Observation Protocol for Engineering Design(COPED) was designed to evaluate engineering design curriculum integration in K-12classrooms [32]. The authors focus their protocol on emphasizing engineering design processesand habits of mind. The COPED is an incremental protocol designed to observe one aspect ofengineering education in K-12 classes. Wheeler [32] states that other protocols
AC 2008-1505: INVESTIGATING AND ADDRESSING LEARNING DIFFICULTIESIN THERMODYNAMICSDavid Meltzer, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA Page 13.812.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Investigating and Addressing Learning Difficulties in ThermodynamicsAbstractStudy of thermodynamic principles forms a key part of the basic curriculum in many science andengineering fields. However, there are very few published research reports regarding studentlearning of these concepts at the college level. As part of an investigation into student learning ofthermodynamics, we have probed the reasoning of students
them to drawconclusions at multiple levels of analysis: 1) the underlying biophysical substrata of the cognitive systemand 2) how students are experiencing and regulating their emergent emotional states. Similar to the Lorenz system example, Hilpert and colleagues (2013, 2014) have used differentialequation modeling to produce simulations of how students plan for a future career in engineering as theyenter young adulthood. Their work is an example of how dynamic modeling can be used to examinestudents planning, self-regulation, and problem solving. They integrate interviews, surveys, and studentdrawings of timelines of their lives to produce dynamic models for how students’ goals shift with regardto 1) what they value in the future
-directs the National Center for Cognition and Mathematics Instruction. He is a faculty member for the Latin American School for Education, Cognitive and Neural Sciences. As part of his service to the nation, Dr. Nathan served on the National Academy of Engineering/National Research Council Commit- tee on Integrated STEM Education, and is currently a planning committee member for the Space Studies Board of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council workshop Sharing the Adventure with the Student: Exploring the Intersections of NASA Space Science and Education. At the University of Wisconsin, Dr. Nathan holds affiliate appointments in the Department of Curriculum & Instruction, the Department of
). Page 26.813.1420 May, G.L.,” The Effect of Rater Training on Reducing Social Style Bias in Peer Evaluation,” Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 3, 297-313, September (2008).21 Ostafichuk, P.M., E.A. Croft, S.I. Green, G.S. Schajer and S.N. Rogak, “Analysis of Mech 2: An Award-Winning Second Year Mechanical Engineering Curriculum,” Proc. of EE2008, Loughborough, UK, July 2008.22 Michaelsen, L.K., M. Sweet, M., and D.X. Parmelee , Team-Based Learning: Small Group Learning’s Next Big Step. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2008).23 Sibley, J. and P.M. Ostafichuk , Getting Started with Team-Based Learning, Stylus, Sterling, VA (2014).24 Ostafichuk, P.M., Hodgson, A.J
Paper ID #19123Cultivating Evidence-Based Pedagogies in STEM EducationDr. Bugrahan Yalvac, Texas A&M University Bugrahan Yalvac is an associate professor of science and engineering education in the Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture at Texas A&M University, College Station. He received his Ph.D. in science education at the Pennsylvania State University in 2005. Prior to his current position, he worked as a learning scientist for the VaNTH Engineering Research Center at Northwestern University for three years. Yalvac’s research is in integrated STEM education, implementation of evidence-based pedagogies
Professor of Chemical Engineering at Oregon State University. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from UC San Diego and his Ph.D. from UC Berkeley, all in Chemical Engineering. He currently has research activity in areas related engineering education and is interested in integrating technology into effective educational practices and in promoting the use of higher-level cognitive skills in engineering problem solving. His research interests particularly focus on what prevents students from being able to integrate and extend the knowledge developed in specific courses in the core curriculum to the more complex, authentic problems and projects they face as professionals. Dr. Koretsky is one of the founding members of the
eightsemesters with a GPA over 3.0, pointing to the need for qualitative research of that population tolearn if they are leaving because the early curriculum failed to give them an accurate impressionof what lay ahead. There is also evidence that students who are the least likely to succeed inengineering are the least aware of their predicament, which has implications for engineeringadvising and academic policymaking.II. Prior research on predicting engineering attritionThe graduation rate of undergraduate students who matriculate in engineering is not muchdifferent from that for the general student population, and the rate increases significantly afterstudents reach a ‘threshold’ of progress in engineering.1 The pool of students graduating highschool
Paper ID #19822Flipping STEM Classrooms Collaboratively Across Campuses in CaliforniaDr. Laura E. Sullivan-Green, San Jose State University Dr. Laura Sullivan-Green is an Associate Professor and Department Chair in Civil and Environmental En- gineering at San Jos´e State University. She obtained her BS from the University of Dayton (Dayton, OH) in 2002 and her MS (2005) and PhD (2008) from Northwestern University (Evanston, IL). She teaches in the areas of Geotechnical Engineering, Engineering Mechanics, and History of Technology. Her research interests include evaluating crack age in construction materials, forensic
integrated STEM curriculum development as part of an NSF STEM+C grant as a Postdoctoral Research Assistant through INSPIRE in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University Her current research interests focus on early P-12 engineering education and identity development.Jacqueline Gartner Ph.D., Campbell University Jacqueline Burgher Gartner is an Assistant Professor at Campbell University in the School of Engineering, which offers a broad BS in engineering with concentrations in chemical and mechanical.Dr. Michele Miller, Campbell University Dr. Michele Miller is a Professor and Associate Dean at Campbell University. Prior to joining Campbell in 2017, she was a professor of mechanical engineering at Michigan Tech
Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies for the college.Dr. Jennifer Harper Ogle, Clemson University Dr. Jennifer Ogle is currently an Associate Professor in the Glenn Department of Civil Engineering at Clemson University. She specializes in transportation infrastructure design, safety, and management, and has been the faculty advisor for the Clemson Engineers for Developing Countries (CEDC) program since 2011. During this time, the CEDC program has tripled in growth and has been recognized by the Institute for International Education (IIE) with the Andrew Heiskell Award as a model program, and was also recognized by the State of South Carolina for the Service Learning Award in 2011. Dr. Ogle was also recognized in 2012
facilitated the emergence of faculty-driven affinity groups that will serve as onevehicle for increasing pedagogical risk-taking among faculty. The development of othermechanisms to spur additive innovation and pedagogical risk-taking are also underway.At Colorado State University (CSU), a team of educators are working to overcome the failings ofthe current engineering educational system by reimagining the roles that faculty play in theteaching and learning environment within the Department of Electrical and ComputerEngineering (ECE). The team is implementing a new pedagogical and organizational modelwhere the curriculum is no longer treated as a set of disparate courses taught in unconnectedpieces, but as an integrated system that fosters
(ASEE). Involved in supervision of 13 PhD projects and published around 200 publications. Member of several organizations and committees within EER, national government bodies, and committees in the EU. Page 24.594.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Faculty Approaches to Working Life Issues in Engineering CurriculaAbstractThe purpose of this paper is to identify faculty approaches to working life issues inengineering education. The paper focuses on faculty attitudes towards working life issues andtheir integration into the curriculum and on activities related to working life
if not well thought out. In this paper, we focus on the use of an integrated online homeworkdelivery system based upon the Google online ecosystem, an integrated online delivery system for weekly quizzesthat follow the formats and guidelines of the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) national examination forprofessional engineers, as well as an integrated system of virtual lectures and office hours. Student performance wastracked weekly for 12 weeks throughout one semester. We present, statistics and comparisons, week after week,from student grades in administered quizzes, homeworks, as well as student assessment and overall insights from thepilot use of this framework towards improvements in other inter-disciplinary, large-audience courses in
, however, have observed that terms that are distinguished by theorists and scholarsare used interchangeably by faculty32-37. To capture this variation in our study, we definedinterdisciplinarity broadly to include curricular topics that require contributions from multipledisciplines, whether or not faculty seek to integrate disciplinary knowledge or insights.Influences on Faculty Members’ Curricular DecisionsIn a multi-institution, multi-field study of faculty course planning, Stark, Lowther, Bentley,Ryan, Martens, Genthon & others38 found that an overwhelming majority of faculty identifiedtheir own background, scholarly training, teaching experiences, and their beliefs about thepurposes of education as significant influences on their course
student grades basedon individual performance. Despite the minimalist philosophy shaping the evolution of ourapproach, truly effective use of the system developed requires substantial time investment by theinstructor; we close by outlining an online system we are developing to largely automate theteam management process. Benefits of automation include real-time feedback to instructor andteam members, automated flagging of potential trouble, and automatic documentation ofcontributions/performance for individual team members.1.0 IntroductionThe past decades have brought a growing awareness of the value of integrating training in abroad range of “soft skills” – including teaming, project management, and oral and writtencommunication – into the
IEEE Transactions on Education, and past chair of the Educational Research and Methods Division of ASEE.Dr. Jeffrey E. Froyd, Texas A&M University Dr. Jeffrey E. Froyd is a TEES Research Professor in the Office of Engineering Academic and Student Affairs at Texas A&M University, College Station. He received the B.S. degree in mathematics from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. He was an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. At Rose-Hulman, he co-created the Integrated, First-Year Curriculum in Science
University Kevin Cook is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) at Montana State University. He is also the Program Coordinator of the MET Program. Mr. Cook holds a B.S. degree in MET and a M.S. degree in Industrial and Management Engineering, both from Montana State University. Mr. Cook has significant industrial experience and is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Montana. His research interests relate to education improvement, as well as curriculum design and integration. Page 22.1400.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011
. Summary of Results and Hypotheses TestedBriefly summarized below in answer to the hypotheses posed in Section 2 are the results aboveand other results to date that have been reported in other papers (12) (13)(14) (9)(15) (16) (17) (11) (18) (19) (20).1. Faculty would accept S-L: Forty eight faculty members have integrated S-L into an average of 4 courses each in the engineering curriculum. Thirty-five core required courses have had S-L. Four of the undergraduate programs (ME, EE, CE, and Plastics E) have essentially reached the objective of one course every semester. The remaining program (ChE) in the fall 2008 semester had four courses and is getting close to the objective. Of these 48 faculty members, 6 are female, 5 are part-time, 30
technical curriculum. Ibelieve that we need to do more to connect how we understand technology to the world’smost pressing challenges, and I attempt to emphasize this in my own teaching.Through this proposed research, I am working in a relatively new area that isn’t well-defined by existing theory and methodology formed in higher education. Although thereis a body of research on the teaching of engineering ethics and the integration of thesocial sciences with engineering, and that is certainly relevant to examining thetechnology/society interface, I am examining faculty beliefs and processes aroundcurriculum choice with respect to contextualizing science and technology curriculum.After some early reviews of existing literature, I decided that the
University. He currently has research activity in areas related to thin film materials processing and engineering education. He is author of the text Engineering and Chemical Thermodynamics, which includes an integrated, menu driven computer program ThermoSolver. He is interested in integrating technology into effective education practices and in promoting the use of higher level cognitive skills in engineering problem solving. Dr. Koretsky is a six-time Intel Faculty Fellow and has won awards for his work in engineering education at the university and national levels. Page 12.904.1© American
Paper ID #25881Creativity Exercises and Design Methods to Enhance Innovation in Engineer-ing StudentsDr. Michael Lawrence Anderson P.E., United States Air Force Academy Lt Col Mike Anderson is an Associate Professor and Director of Capstone Programs, Department of Engineering Mechanics, US Air Force Academy. He has pursued research in engineering education for several years in the areas of curriculum design and assessment, capstone design experiences, innovative design methodologies, and enhancing student creativity. In addition, he pursues technical research in autonomous systems, design of terrestrial and aerial robots