Bioengineering and graduate degrees in Industrial Engineering, all from Arizona State University.Mr. Aisosa Ayela-Uwangue, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus Aisosa Ayela-Uwangue is a doctoral student in the Engineering Education and Systems Design program at Arizona State University. He received his Bachelor of Science and Masters of Science degrees in Electrical Engineering from Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester New York. Aisosa is a research assistant for an NSF funded project titled IUSE/RED: Additive Innovation: An Educational Ecosystem of Making and Risk Taking.Dr. Samantha Ruth Brunhaver, Arizona State University Samantha Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Ira A. Fulton
program is to provide students with real-life engineering challenges before graduation. Dr Guti´errez focuses his efforts on accelerating the academic success of underrepresented and first gen- eration students, creating professional development opportunities for undergraduate students, and imple- menting best practices for engineering education.Mr. Christopher A. Butler, University of California, Merced Since 2012, Christopher Butler has served as the Assistant Director of the Engineering Service Learning program at the University of California, Merced. In this time as Assistant Director, the Engineering Service Learning program has provided design experience to more than 1,800 students, completed over 15
level tohelp students develop a cohesive computational knowledge based on computing principles that iswell integrated with the engineering practice. Principally, it is very important to develop validand reliable assessment instruments for pedagogical or research purposes. We will build on ourexisting assessment framework to refine the design and further develop performance-basedassessment tools (formative and summative) and scoring rubrics to measure computationalcompetencies for engineers.Acknowledgments We would like to especially acknowledge the participation and collaboration of the facultyteaching the target courses; they have been instrumental during the implementation of theproject. This material is based upon work supported by the
elaborate processes inquiry and organization-specific implication per uniquecontexts.Study of education interventions, thus, must attend to a variety of intended, as well as unplanned, “levels”of impact. Yet studies investigating organizational change in higher education have predominantlyconsidered the university as the unit of analysis, a macro-level analysis[24]. In fact, researchers studyingeducational change in PEOs have called for more attention to the understudied meso-level of disciplines,departments, programs, and the schools and colleges within a university setting[52]. Fumasoli &Stensake[24] called for attention to departmental-level practices as, “factors of change…the [potential]link between the micro and macro” (p. 490
theycan enable others to change their own experiences, usually in an educational setting 12. As hestates, “in developmental phenomenography, as opposed to pure phenomenography, the researchis designed with the intention that there will be practical outcomes. Implications for learning andfor practice abound. The research is intended to inform and influence practice” 2 (p. 35).Additionally, Bowden describes, “the aim is to describe variation in experience in a way that isuseful and meaningful, providing insight into what would be required for individuals to move Page 26.1676.4from less powerful to more powerful ways of understanding a phenomenon
taught courses on the development of reflective teaching practices, and has presented workshops on learning how to learn and developing metacognitive awareness. He has published and presented on engineering design, engineering pedagogies, and instructional development topics. Page 26.80.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Pedagogy of Larger Concerns: Grounding Engineering Faculty Development in Research on Teaching ConceptionsAbstract:This paper presents how the results of a study on teaching conceptions have come to exert both aphilosophical and
requirements and how they may influence time to graduation. There is also a general lack of awareness about the process involved in transferring ECC to Iowa State. Policies/programs that use student credit hours earned (classification: freshman, sophomore, etc.) as a determining factor need to be revisited based on the ECC trend.Research QuestionsWhile there is a growing body of research of the impact of early college credit at theinstitutional-level or on student success as a whole, research specifically related to early collegecredit within a College of Engineering or for engineering students is lacking. By furtheranalyzing the data collected as a part of the Early Credit Task Force, this paper will answer threebroad research
Your Processes." BPM (Demos) 940 (2012): 40-44.[10] Blaisdell, Stephanie, and Catherine R. Cosgrove. "A theoretical basis for recruitment and retention interventions for women in engineering." age 1 (1996): 1.[11] Belgarde, Mary Jiron, and Richard K. Lore. "The retention/intervention study of Native American undergraduates at the University of New Mexico." Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice 5.2 (2003): 175-203.[12] Ross, Sheldon M. Introduction to probability and statistics for engineers and scientists. Academic Press (2014).[13] Freivalds, Andris, and Benjamin Niebel. Niebel's Methods, Standards, & Work Design. Mcgraw-Hill higher education (2013).
possess [17].We are seeking to understand how a unique co-op based engineering program, designedspecifically for increased access, impacts the experiences of participating students. Additionally,we are using CCW and funds of knowledge to understand what assets students bring into theprogram and their co-op jobs, and how they gain from participation in the program itself. Ourprimary research question is: What assets do students in a co-op based engineering programbring to that program, and what assets do they gain from participation in the program?Background of the Bridge AcademyThe Bridge Academy presented within this WIP is a two-and-a-half-year (five semester) upperdivision engineering program, designed for off-campus students. It is housed in
AC 2008-768: SAME COURSES, DIFFERENT OUTCOMES? VARIATIONS INCONFIDENCE, EXPERIENCE, AND PREPARATION IN ENGINEERING DESIGNAndrew Morozov, University of Washington ANDREW MOROZOV is a graduate student in Educational Psychology, College of Education, University of Washington. Andrew is working on research projects within the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) and the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE).Deborah Kilgore, University of Washington DEBORAH KILGORE is a Research Scientist in the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) and the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE), University of Washington. Her areas of specific
students, first-year engineering programs, mixed methods research, and innovative approaches to teaching. Currently, she teaches within the first-year engineering program at Ohio State while maintaining an active engineering education research program.Dr. Elizabeth G. Creamer, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Elizabeth G. Creamer is professor, Educational Research and Evaluation in the School of Education at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University where she teaches graduate level courses in mixed methods research. She is working on a manuscript for a new introductory textbook, Introduction to Fully Integrated Mixed Methods Research
five-year period. Extending this study beyond graduation to look at careerchoices and graduate study will also be considered. We also propose to increase studentinvolvement in the research design and data analysis process, and continue involving students aspeer-facilitators. Finally, looking closely at variables that might affect student success such associoeconomic class, family support, high school preparation, race/ethnic background, and socialnetworks, and using this information to create a supportive, beneficial environment for allengineering students through all stages of their academic careers is a goal as we continue thisresearch
? THE VALUE FOR STUDENTSBased on our experiences, and student surveys and reflections from the students participating inthe course, we found the students top learning experiences were the challenges of functioning ina team environment, the need to learn how to communicate in a technical setting effectively witha client, and the positive feeling they had because of their impact on the community. The factthat their project was part of a service learning course served more to motivate the students andto make them aware of their ability to solve a problem of value to their community, comparedwith the value of the specific methods of engineering analysis or design learned to solve thevarious problems. Of course the principles of the design process
, colleges and/or institutions to guide them insystem-wide development and measurement of policies, practices and procedures to ensure notonly sustainability, but also to positively impact student, faculty and staff learning for continuousimprovement purposes. In this paper, we focus on student learning by coursework program andpresent the results and analysis of a pilot study using a case study methodology. Included is adiscussion on the presented comprehensive evaluation tool’s usefulness for the continuousimprovement at programmatic and institutional levels, as well as for collecting and providingevidence for quality assurance and accreditation organizations, such as ABET.IntroductionFrom development, ecology, energy, to biology, sustainability
types of student behaviors in the classroom thatmay serve as indicators of what lifelong learning looks like after college. With access to suchinformation, engineering educational practices can be more explicitly designed to fosterdevelopment of the range of behavioral and affective learning outcomes necessary for a dispositiontoward lifelong learning.We are in the midst of a study investigating how instructor choices affect a range of studentoutcomes related to their development as lifelong learners. This study examines a variety ofundergraduate engineering courses at four different institutions throughout the U.S. We chose thetheoretical basis of self-regulated learning (SRL) 8 as a platform for the linkage between thebehavioral and affective
South Korea. She currently works as graduate research assistant in engineering education department. Her research interests are assessment for learners in diverse settings, and teacher education in multicultural settings.Prof. Jeffrey F Rhoads, Purdue University at West Lafayette Jeffrey F. Rhoads is a Professor in the School of Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University and is affiliated with both the Birck Nanotechnology Center and Ray W. Herrick Laboratories at the same insti- tution. He received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees, each in mechanical engineering, from Michigan State University in 2002, 2004, and 2007, respectively. Dr. Rhoads’ current research interests include the predictive design, analysis, and
Paper ID #34332Thinking as Argument: A Theoretical Framework for Studying how FacultyArrive at Their Deeply-held Beliefs About Inequity in EngineeringJeremy Grifski, Ohio State University Jeremy Grifski is a Graduate Research Associate in the department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. Previously, he completed an undergraduate degree in Computer Engineering at Case Western Reserve University and went on to work for General Electric Transportation as a part of their Edison Engineering Development Program. Recently, Jeremy completed a Master’s in Computer Science and Engineering under Dr. Atiq and is
Polytechnic Institute. He has six years experience as a practicing engineer in industry, and holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering, an M.S. in environmental engineering, and a Ph.D. in chemical engineering; all from the University of Connecticut. His recent research efforts are primarily directed at investigating novel treatment methods for emerging contaminants, and the development of systems and methods to sustainably treat water and wastewater.Prof. John M. Sullivan Jr, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Professor John Sullivan joined WPI in 1987. He has had continuous external research funding from 1988 thru 2013. He has graduated (and supported) more than 75 MS and PhD graduate students. He has served as the ME
they complete research boot campexperiences,especially translation, including entrepreneurship. Participate in a clinical immersion Another lecture will cover graduate school experience in summer to grasp theclinical preparation. Students create a mock FDA impact their research may haveresearch document for a new device submission. ECE 398 Innovation and Engineering Design (2 credit hours) provides the tools Continue research throughout yearYear 3: needed for problem identification, solution Interact with research mentor andFocus on assessment, market
design education (especially in regards to the design of complex systems), and student preparation for post-graduation careers.Dr. Dia Sekayi, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Dia Sekayi earned a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration, an Ed.M. in the social foundations of education, and a Ph.D. in the sociology of education with foci on qualitative research and urban edu- cation from the State University of New York at Buffalo. Prior to her nearly 20 year career as a full-time faculty member, she taught mathematics and science in a small private elementary school. Dia has pub- lished refereed journal articles, books, and books chapters on various topics in the sociology of education. Dia’s current scholarly
approaches for developing an identity to their impact onengineering identity development. This research paper investigates the difference in students’engineering identity, engineering performance/competence, engineering interest, recognition inengineering, and affect towards six professional engineering practices in two differenceengineering departments: a traditional program that implicitly supports engineering identityformation and a non-traditional program that explicitly supports engineering identity formation.Survey data was collected from a total of 184 students (153 from the traditional department and31 from the non-traditional department). Using independent samples t-tests, results show thatengineering identity was higher for students in the
Specialist in the Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering, Dwight Look College of Engineering at Texas A&M University, 3122 TAMU, College Station, TX, 77843-3122; larissap@tamu.edu Her research interests include faculty development, curriculum development, assessment of teaching practices and learning outcomes.Debra Fowler, Texas A&M University Debra Fowler is the Associate Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at Texas A&M University. Dr. Fowler's current interests include research-guided faculty development with an emphasis on the development and use of learning outcomes in both course and curriculum design. In addition, she is committed to helping faculty
insights were provided by the literature on best studying practices, curricula of similarprograms at analogous institutions, and students’ performance on individual exam questions inone gateway course. Two SMEs were STEM professors (one in mathematics and one inbioengineering) who contributed to the design of Rice’s STEM summer bridge program (theRice Emerging Scholars Program), and the third was a director of Rice’s programming for less-prepared STEM students. The mathematics professor, who has worked at Rice University since1988 and is past chair of the mathematics department, is also co-founder and faculty director ofthe university’s NSF-funded STEM four-year transition program. The bioengineering professorco-designed a first-year engineering
Institute of Technology. She received a B.S.Ed. in Mathematics and Education at Northwestern University, a M.S.Ed in Mathematics Education from National College of Education, and a Ph.D. in Education at Northwestern University. Judith teaches mathematics education courses to practicing teachers and doctoral students. Her research interest is in the use models and modeling for the development of problem solving experiences as sites for research and assessment in the context of program improvement.Margret Hjalmarson, George Mason University Margret Hjalmarson is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics Education at George Mason University. She received a B.A. in Mathematics from Mount Holyoke College
have a long history in the K-12 schooling system and are wellintegrated into the preparation and continuous training of teachers. Similarly, the many conceptsof science and mathematics are shared amongst educators. Engineering in K-12 is yet to be fullyconceptualized1, 34, which does not only impact practice of teaching engineering in K-12 but haslarger impacts for this study. A limitation of this study is that it presumes a definition ofengineering, which might not be shared by all members of the community and not shared by allparticipants of the study. Our comprehensive literature review addresses some of the concerns,yet future research on the impact of different conceptualizations of engineering in K-12 and theirimpact on teachers’ self
forth their best effort. These issues will be addressed during the remainder of thisstudy. Future work will involve exploring whether students’ problem solving performance willbe improved by enhancing their spatial thinking abilities or understanding of key concepts inmechanics. In addition, we are planning on extending this research to other areas of application,such as engineering design or other disciplines and recruiting participants at various levels ofacademia (i.e. graduate students, instructors, and faculty members) to examine the impact ofexperience/expertise. Although eye-trackers are becoming more accessible and affordable, theyare not widely used and it requires trained personnel to manage every stage of the study. Inaddition
discussing future goals, Sugar Cone studentsgenerated detailed descriptions of their future possible selves and the steps needed to achieve theseselves: I’m going to stick with the undergraduate Bioengineering program, pursue a Master’s and then, my goal is to ultimately work for a medical device company in research and design so, yeah, that’ll be the ultimate goal. Probably a Ph.D. also after I start working too. (Jeremy, male bioengineer junior) I plan to do the five year Master’s program here. And then, I’m thinking about med school. I’ve taken the practice MCAT a couple of times, but I’m not sure that’s really something I want to do, but I know that I’m very interested in the imaging, bioimaging type
, Teaching and Learning with the Division of Engineering 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 implementation of various teaching learning and assessment initiatives. Lisa teaches undergraduate courses in engineering & society, and graduate courses in engineering edu- cation. Her research interests include teaching and assessment practices in engineering. Lisa also serves as Associate Director for the Institute for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education & Prac- tice (ISTEP) in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, which serves as a hub
-Total Correlations. Fall 05 Fall 05 Construct and Item Content Item-Total Alpha Correlation 1a. Academic Persistence n/a Do you intend to complete a major in engineering? n/a 1b. Professional Persistence n/a Do you intend to practice, conduct research in, or teach engineering n/a for at least 3 years after graduating? 2a: Motivation (financial
Department. He has done has done institutional research work at UPR Mayaguez and also has worked in the ABET accreditation process for the School of Engineering . c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 WIP: Incorporating the engineering design process to solve real-life programming problems in an introductory engineering courseAbstractFor many students, the concepts involved in courses about algorithm and programming are verydifficult to understand. Many professors pay more attention to the programming skills and rulesthat are not as critical for students in their academic career in engineering. As a result, studentshave high proficiencies for coding but are presenting