to get ideas for new products). Studentswere asked “How confident are you in your ability to do each of the following at this time?” andranked their answers on a five point Likert scale from “not confident” to “extremely confident”(on a scale from 0 to 4). The scale was presented and discussed as ISE.6 construct in a recenttechnical report on the EMS (Gilmartin, S., et al, 2017). The construct shows a Cronbach’s alphaof 0.79, and the score for each students’ innovation self-efficacy is calculated by taking theaverage of these six items.3.3.2 Venturing self-efficacyThe item is adapted from Lucas et al.’s (2009) Venturing Self-Efficacy scale. Schar et al. (2014)found that there is a strong correlation between this item and engineering
-989.2. Byers, T., et al., Entrepreneurship: Its role in engineering education. The Bridge, 2013. 43(2): p. 35-40.3. Duval-Couetil, N., T. Reed-Rhoads, and S. Haghighi, The Engineering Entrepreneurship Survey: An Assessment Instrument to Examine Engineering Student Involvement in Entrepreneurship Education. Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship, 2011. 2(2).4. Dyer, J.H., H.B. Gregersen, and C.M. Christensen, The innovator’s DNA. Harvard business review, 2009. 87(12): p. 60-67.5. Clifton, J. and S. Bharadwaj-Badal, Entrepreneurial strengthsfinder. 2014.6. Miller, D., The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management science, 1983. 29(7): p. 770-791.7. Covin, J.G. and D.P
undergraduate students” witha stated mission “to graduate engineers with an entrepreneurial mindset so they can createpersonal, economic, and societal value through a lifetime of meaningful work.” Including anentrepreneurial mindset in an engineering curriculum, discussed more completely in a paper byKriewall and Mekemson’s,9 is one where unmet customer needs are coupled with traditionalengineering approaches to problem solving and can lead to potential benefits to both individualstudents and to society as a whole. Similarly, presentations from 2015’s ASEE AnnualConference and Exposition concerning Epicenter10, the National Center for EngineeringPathways to Innovation showcased another inspiring example. Their stated mission “…is toempower U.S
attributes were developed.These attributes were then used to analyze several popular canvases to create a framework forcomparing and selecting canvases. This analysis reveals that these canvases have beendeveloped for different types of systems in different stages of their life cycle. Lastly wediscussed how our general canvas framework could be used to enhance student learning in aneducational context.ReferencesBlank, Steven G. (May 2013). "Why the lean start-up changes everything". Harvard BusinessReview 91 (5): 63–72.Blank, Steven G. & Dorf, Bob. The Startup Owner’s Manual: The Step-by-step Guide forBuilding a Great Company, K&S Ranch; 1 edition (March 1, 2012).Buede, Dennis M. The Engineering Design of Systems: Models and Methods, 3rd
networks.References 1. Brennan, J., Ryan, S., Ranga, M., Broek, S., Durazzi, N., & Kamphuis, B. (2014). Study on Innovation in Higher Education: Final Report. LSE Research Online. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/55819/. 2. Bulovic, V. & Murray, F.E. (2014). The MIT Innovation Initiative: Sustaining and Extending a 3. Legacy of Innovation. Retrieved from http://innovation.mit.edu/. 4. Dhillon, B.S. (2006). Creativity for Engineers. Singapore: World Scientific Printers. 5. Gassmann, O., Enkel, E., & Chesbrough, H. “The Future of Open Innovation.” R&D Management, 40(3), p. 213-221. Retrieved from http://corporateinnovation.berkeley.edu/ open-innovation-research/articles
Triangle Park, NC) [2] French, BF, Immekus, JC, Oakes, WC, 2005, “An examination of indicators of engineering students’ success and Journal of Engineering Education persistence” 94 (4) 419–425 [3] Hall, CW, Kauffman, PJ, Wuensch, KL, Swart, WE, DeUrquidi, KA, Griffin, OH, Duncan, S, 2015, “Aptitude Journal of Engineering Education and personality traits in retention of engineering students
rights. With furtherresearch and understanding, best practices for undergraduate IP generation can be applied toavoid further IP challenges for faculty, students, and academic institutions. REFERENCESAlexander, D., Beyerlein, S., and Metlen, S. (2014). Processes to formalize sponsored educational activity agreements between industry and universities related to capstone design projects. In Capstone Design Conference, Columbus, Ohio.Running Head: FACULTY VIEWS OF UNDERGRADUATE IP POLICIESDuval-Couetil, N., Pilcher, J., Weilerstein, P., & Gotch, C. (2014). Undergraduate involvement in intellectual property protection at universities: Views from technology transfer professionals
. Crawford, “Engineering entrepreneurship: An example of a paradigm shift in engineering education,” Journal of Engineering Education, 2002, pp. 185-195.4 Lumsdaine, E., “A multidisciplinary approach to teaching invention and entrepreneuring.” Symposium conducted at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2003.5 Fredholm, S., J. Krejcarek, S. Krumholz, and D. Linquist, “Designing an engineering entrepreneurship curriculum for Olin College.” Symposium conducted at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2003.6 Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. Criteria for accrediting programs in engineering the
offer incentives to keep them in the BrazosValley. It is the intent of E4 to have two businesses transition out of the incubator and bereplaced with two new start-up ventures each semester. These start-up ventures provide a focusof interdisciplinary activities through the partnership formed between academia and the privatesector. A reasonable ownership in the new companies will be realized both by the Universityand the private sector partner(s) involved commiserate with resources provided. Through aformal agreement process, team members choosing not to be directly involved in the incubatorprocess, will have the opportunity to participate in the ownership of the new venture throughdirect financial contribution or in-kind commitment.Technology
survey results and the existing participation of engineering students in the Near IdeasFair, this paper proposes two complementary approaches to learning, namely, (i) case studies and(ii) active learning,, to make the engineering students aware of what entrepreneurship means andto help them to dispel some of the common fears and myths they hold about entrepreneurship.References1. Nichols, S. P. and Armstrong, N. E., “Engineering Entrepreneurship: Does Entrepreneurship Have a Role inEngineering Education?” IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol 45, No. 1, February 20032. Mechanical Engineering in the 21st Century: Trends Impacting the Profession, (a report prepared for theCommittee on Issues, Identification, Council on Public Affairs, The
competitive factor. Page 25.666.6In any case, would the addition of courses really be a solution for achieving an education thatallows greater competitiveness on the part of the graduate? To some degree, probably yes. But itis not a fundamental solution.How do we propose to design our curriculum? What should the goal(s) be for revamping acurriculum? The answer(s) must address the industrial competition that companies andindividuals face.What to do?How should (not could) we prepare our graduates for today’s career environment? The year 2020is too little, too late – the action will be substantially over – it is too far into the future. Weshould address
Conference, San Francisco, CA. 7. Tierney, P. & Farmer, S.F. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Potential antecedents and Relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1137-1148 8. Duval-Couetil, N., Reed-Rhoads, T. & Haghighi, S. (2011). Investigating the impact of entrepreneurship education on engineering students. Paper presented at the NCIAA Conference, Washington D.C. 9. Boyles, T. (2012). 21st Century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: A model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 15, 41-55. 10. Ozgen, E., Baron, R.A. 2007. Social sources of information in
the institutions identify their own core competencies that would benefit the other members in the dense network of schools.”7The Helping Hands Dense Network was initiated within a one-hour period during the 2010 Page 25.1303.3KEEN Fall conference. The objectives of the one-hour workshop were: To identify other like-minded institutions who share common goals and values, To identify each institution’s s strengths to determine the optimal plan to leverage those strengths, To put together a compelling one-minute presentation of vision, mission, and objectives of the newly formed dense network, and To present
the late 1990’s. The current central administration continues to support these programs, most of which are now among the graduate programs with the highest enrollment of students on our campus. • Aggressive pursuit of entrepreneurial resources by the µEP grad program, including an NCIIA class development grant, two NSF Partnership for Innovation grants, and inclusion of research commercialization support in major research grants such as NSF MRSEC. • Active promotion of entrepreneurial education in Engineering PhD curricula by Dean Ashok Saxena and Dr. Ajay Malshe in partnership with the Walton College of Business. • A central administration change in mission emphasis of the UA Technology
cultural acceptance of proposed engineering solutions 5. Social Consciousness Competency: understanding that the engineering solutions should primarily serve people and society reflecting social consciousness [3].Each university in the NAE GCSP network creates their own GCSP requirements through whichthey utilize available university resources and opportunities to support their students in achievingall five competencies. These requirements may include coursework, extra-curricularopportunities, other organized programming, or approved individual experiences. Donaher etal.’s survey of 35 GCSP programs across the US highlighted various ways in which programs arestructured to meet the competencies [4]. There is no stated level of minimum
writes a short paper about what s/he learned during the interview,followed by an informal presentation.Class Participation and Attendance (15%)Class participation requires each student to not only attend, but be engaged, committed, andattentive. Each class will require student participation in leadership projects and activities thatare designed to give him/her the opportunity to develop his/her leadership skills and makeconnections between his/her actions and reading assignments.Midterm Paper (20%)The purpose of the midterm essay is for the student to think about his/her “placement” as a Page 14.836.7leader by examining his/her leadership
coverage sometimes leads to more learning.After the introduction to course mapping, the presenters guided participants to first construct aconcept map for their course and identify connections. Lastly, the presenters briefly discussedthe use of visual syllabi.Day 1—Working Reception The objectives of Day 1’s last session were to network with members of other cohortsand the leadership team and discuss ideas for specific course development modules. Participantsreceived a homework assignment to complete before returning for Day 2: create a draft modulefor a particular course that incorporates EML and bring that module for peer feedback.Day 2—Incorporating Entrepreneurship and Innovation into the Classroom Day 2 began with a
, Maryland. Publications, Louise Dunlap”An analysis of the Legislative History of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1975,”Twenty-First Annual Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute, Matthew Bender, 1976”Environmental Perspectives on the Effectiveness of SMCRA” (with James S. Lyon), West Virginia LawReview, Spring, 1986”From Kitchen Tables They Changed the Law,” USA Today guest column, August 3, 1987”Environmental Protection, Competition, and Changes in World Energy Markets” (with Joe Browder),Papers, Volume II, American Mining Congress, April 1988 Page 23.955.3 c American Society for Engineering Education
projects aretoo large in scale to allow for prototypes, thus civil engineers rely heavily upon CAD models.Prosperi notes that the goal of creating models is, “to test and validate your design… and preventproblems that may arise during design and construction.” The last section of the ImagineeringProcess is the Epilogue: Openings, Evaluations, and Show Quality Standards. The conceptbehind the Epilogue is to simply present your project and allow your customer(s) to experience itand evaluate how well you met the original needs, requirements, and constraints. While civilengineering projects rarely provide an opportunity to make changes after the fact, the lessonslearned in this stage could be applied to future projects. Prosperi presents various
project that aligns with their topical area of interest, current skill level, andsought area of growth. The Lab engages students from first year to master’s level in varyingcapacities. Students may volunteer on a project as a trial, join in the context of a researchfellowship, or receive compensation for their efforts in the form of monetary payment, as aresearch assistant, or academic credit. They may also work on projects that have been adapted tosenior design engineering projects. Importantly, the Lab aims to meet the needs of the studentsand support their educational goals above the work product. Industry mentors, selected by thepartner organization, will consult directly with the student team and faculty mentor(s) on aregular basis
, International Journal for EngineeringEducation, 21 (2), 200-204. Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) (1994). Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks,California: SAGE. Eberle, B.F. (1977). SCAMPER, Buffalo, NY: D.O.K. Publishers. Edwards, B. (1999). Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, Tarcher Putnam, New York. Goldenberg, J. and Mazurski, D. (2002). Creativity in Product Innovation, Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press. Goldenberg, J., Mazurski, D. and Solomon, S. (1999). Creative sparks, Science 285(5433), 1495-1496. Gundling, E. (2000). The 3M Way to Innovation, Kodansha International, Tokyo. Horowitz R. & Maimon, O. (1997). Creative design methodology and the SIT method, Proceedings ofDETC’97, ASME Design
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Gross Revenue $ 9,913 $ 68,689 $ 205,336 $ 528,640 $ 1,013,480 Carbon Credits $ - $ - $ 22,650 $ 46,650 $ 79,650 Gross Profit $ 9,913 $ 68,689 $ 227,986 $ 575,290 $ 1,093,130 Operating Expenses Engineer(s) Salary $ 140,000 $ 140,000 $ 140,000 $ 140,000 $ 140,000 National(s) Salary $ 15,000 $ 30,000 $ 45,000 $ 90,000 $ 135,000 Equipment
M.B.A. from the University of Maryland. She managed her own career as a performing musician for 25 years and taught at Towson University and Jacksonville University. Ms. Thornton was a Fulbright Scholar. Page 11.289.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 “Bringing Student Innovations to Market: A Hinman CEOs Success Story” James V. Green, Anik Singal, David F. Barbe, and Karen S. Thornton University of Maryland, College ParkAbstractThis paper discusses a study of the challenges and opportunities navigated by Anik Singal
colleges and universities. This emphasis is echoed inmultiple policy documents, such as the Chinese Ministry of Education (MOE)’s “Opinions onVigorously Promoting entrepreneurial Education in Universities and Start-ups by College Students”[1] (2010) and “Opinions on Comprehensively Improving the Quality of Higher Education”[2](2012).The Chinese State Council’s annual “Report on the Work of the Government” in 2015 furtherclinches governmental support for entrepreneurial by encouraging people to “start their ownbusinesses and to make innovations” as a way to create jobs and increase their income. In May 2015,the State Council General Office provided a blueprint for implementing this national strategy inhigher education through its “Opinions on
example, those shown in Figure 4for questions 5 and 10) and in the higher variance of responses for Civil Engineering versus Mechanical Engineeringrespondents (Table 5). Although the small N’s make it difficult to suggest other patterns with a degree of confidence, it was notedthat the Computer Science respondents were often underrepresented with respect to those who strongly agreed(positive formulation) or strongly disagreed (negative formulation) as suggested by the lack of 1’s in the responses.Electrical Engineering tended to have lower results overall compared to the rest of the population. Finally, all
classroom while also seeking the additional knowledge required to create a valuable endproduct for their client. Engineers are hired to create value for their employer, and if a studentonly knows how to follow a syllabus, then they will not be prepared to anticipate unknownopportunities to create value. Learning core engineering skills is the single most important part ofan engineering education, and by teaching an entrepreneurial mindset through programs thatreinforce these skills, we are better preparing the innovators of tomorrow.ReferencesBarrett, T. W., & Pizzico, M. C., & Levy, B., & Nagel, R. L., & Linsey, J. S., & Talley, K. G., &Forest, C. R., & Newstetter, W. C. (2015, June), A Review of University Maker Spaces
possible that differencesobserved between sections is due not to the performance of teams but to the instructor(s) whosestudents examined those teams. We spoke to the faculty prior to their use of the rubric tohighlight each of the items and what they were intended to measure. The faculty have alsoworked extensively with the course’s project rubrics and hence the authors feel comfortable withwhat should be looked for in student’s report when grading.ConclusionsWe implemented a project related to the design of children’s toys, that leverage the principles ofUniversal Design, in a multidisciplinary, first-year engineering course. The project alsointentionally integrated aspects of EM by incorporating them into the overall project learningoutcomes
Paper ID #31472Exposure of undergraduate research students to entrepreneurialactivities to motivate future research careersProf. Ranji K Vaidyanathan P.E., Oklahoma State University Dr. Ranji Vaidyanathan is presently the Varnadow Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at the Helmerich Research Center at OSU Tulsa. He was previously the Director of the New Product Develop- ment Center (NPDC) and the Inventors Assistance Service (IAS) at Oklahoma State University. Dr. Vaidyanathan has eighteen U. S. patents and twenty-two pending patent applications. He has de- veloped six different products from concept stage to