by analyzing in detail the context where the negotiations were made, and seestep-by-step how the teams were able to reach agreement. Figure 5. Images from “Sticky Notes” Tool 02: Using Sticky Notes, a boundary object to negotiate in larger teams These boundary objects shown in Figure 5, were usually present with large groups of individualsinvolved in the negotiation (i.e. when externals were invited to a meeting). “There were just toomany people to have everybody write on the board,” a student remarks. Sticky notes entailedlittle squares that have an adhesive on one of its sides and that could be placed on a surface. Theyshowed to be useful when there were large amounts of
proposition, its commercial feasibility, the various risk factors, and the resourcesrequired. The class was divided into five separate groups, but all groups worked on the sameoverall problem. Additionally, excerpts from the writings of thought leaders on innovation, suchas Carlson, Christensen, and Porter, were included. To give us more time for extendeddiscussions, the class met twice a week, for two lecture hours each time. The syllabus for the fallof 2009 is shown in figure 1.Our institution operates on a somewhat unusual academic calendar where each semester is splitinto two seven-week terms. Terms A and B are taught in the fall (September to December) andterms C and D are taught in the spring (January to April). During each academic term
]. In short,students with low self-efficacy and self-confidence are less likely to persist in science andengineering compared to their peers with higher levels of self-efficacy and self-confidence [2].Gleason et al. [31] found a strong correlation between math placement and retention rates inengineering. They found that students who placed in College Algebra or below accounted foronly 10% of engineering graduates and those who placed in Pre-calculus accounted for nearly40% of dropouts. Likewise, Santiago and Hensel [32] found that 34% of students who leftengineering due to academic difficulties noted specific difficulty with Calculus I. Students takelonger to complete core requirements when they fail to place into Calculus I or above
.Two students will be in each team. The customer need the teams to complete the project withintwo weeks.The project has design suggestions found in the problem description given as: • Each design team need to consult with customer and write the requirements specifications of the design • Be aware of regulation issues • Determine the design deliverable • Research different sources when you conduct the design in order to provide alternative designs • Suggest using the top-down and bottom-up “V” model to conduct the design process. The system might be divided to two subsystems: “Bridge Rectifier and Filter” and “Regulated DC Power Supply” • In order to finish the design and test on time, each team
writing, this office action is being addressed by thecorresponding student group.E.2. Changes in ESIP ConceptsDescriptive statistics were computed for each survey item. Next, the items were checked forinternal consistency reliability by computing Cronbach’s alpha. The data evidenced acceptable(α > .70) to excellent reliability (α > .80) [12] for nearly every construct, with the exception ofpre-course responses to the Careers in Patent Law construct, which was minimally acceptable (α= .69). Given its proximity to the proposed threshold of .70 for acceptability, and the excellentinternal consistency reliability evidenced from post-course responses (α = .83), the construct wasretained as originally designed.Next, the data were aggregated into
Engineering.The philosophy for this course centered on the exploration of the similarities and differences thatdisciplines use when they approach innovation. We wanted to not only mix up the studentbackgrounds, but also increase their awareness of the innovative activities that occur acrosscampus. We intentionally place the students outside of their comfort zone repeatedly throughoutthe semester with the assignments, lectures, and activities. We also wanted to make the courseworkload challenging so that students felt a strong sense of accomplishment when finished. Thisexpectation was enhanced by requiring students to apply for enrollment by writing a brief essayabout why they wanted to enroll. Enrollment was then managed to ensure a broad mix ofstudents
trying to rewire a747…while it is in flight! Attempting to integrate the curriculum as smoothly as possible, thefour pieces of the curriculum (freshman-year component, sophomore-year component, etc.) wereintegrated one year at a time. At the writing of this paper, the freshman and sophomorecomponents are firmly in place, the junior year component had just been integrated, and thesenior year component is being integrated (i.e., piloted). In short, the first two years of thecurriculum introduces the student to the foundations of leadership and allows for some “basic”training with some practice. The final two years of the curriculum are heavily experiential wherethe student will put to practice the skill sets learned during the first two years. In
Systems Engineering coursesoffered by the Department of Engineering Systems at Florida Tech have greatly enriched thestudents’ educational experience, broadened their perspectives, served as community outreachforums and integrated experiential learning with academic programs. Students work in E-teamsand write NCIIA proposals to commercialize innovative product or university/research labdeveloped technology.This paper describes a unique course series in Systems Engineering (SE) Entrepreneurship.Innovation in product/service design and commercialization that enables entrepreneurship can besuccessfully leveraged by applying SE principles/ techniques which parallel entrepreneurshipsteps such as Customer Requirements Engineering and opportunity
courses in engineering economics, technical and professionalwriting, professional speaking, entrepreneurship and global awareness into these degreeplans is shown to be insurmountable given the very scant elective space.A surprising and encouraging result, however, is that by combining topics into a verymulti-disciplinary, two-course sequence that substitutes for required, traditional coursesin economics and technical writing stand-alone courses, engineering students actuallyachieve higher performance in both economic analysis and in technical writing. Wehypothesize that this is because all their work is tied to relevant projects that bring in afull range of entrepreneurial, global issues to which they would otherwise have had noexposure, and
’ educational experience, broadened their perspectives, served as community outreachforums and integrated experiential learning with academic programs. Students work in E-teamsand write NCIIA proposals to commercialize innovative product or university/research labdeveloped technology.This paper describes a unique course series in Systems Engineering (SE) Entrepreneurship.Innovation in product/service design and commercialization that enables entrepreneurship can besuccessfully leveraged by applying SE principles/ techniques which parallel entrepreneurshipsteps such as Customer Requirements Engineering and opportunity recognition; Project/QualityEngineering, Decision/Risk Analysis, Systems Modeling, Engineering Economics and businessplanning, Systems
is so great how come no one thought about it before”, to “I knew thatthis design will not work” (…no alternative suggested). When I told the idea to peers at FAU andbeyond the response was “Ha-ha, sounds like another cold fusion…”, “There is nothing newabout it”, and (semi-happily) “We heard that it failed”. The sponsor decided that it was going to work on a particular day, invited more than fiftypeople (too late for us to undo), and … nothing happened. This was the time when I felt thatmore motivation meetings were essential to keep the moral high. We came up with morealternative designs, but unfortunately none of them worked. By then the sponsor had investedmore than half of the project budget and had applied for multiple patents
verification and validation. He has headed the corporate product and technology innovations and quality and delivery innovation departments. Pradeep was on the apex senior management group before proceeding on to pursue his academic, research and social interests. Before Patni, he has worked at IIT Delhi, IIT Bombay, SGGS College of Engineering and Crompton Greaves R & D Electronics in different research and academic positions. Pradeep Waychal has also published papers in peer reviewed journals, presented keynote / invited talks in many high profile international conferences and I involved in a few copyrights / patents. His teams have won a range of awards in Six Sigma and Knowledge Management at international events
produced by approximately 130 participants. 3. “Innovative Thinking” is the course described in this paper. 4. “Bridge to Engineering” is a ready to launch 3-credit 6-module course aiming at bridging thegap between Science and Engineering. Students are engaged in a creative problem solving processfrom exploration to demonstration. They: • Explore historical, current, and new technologies, • Discover new knowledge, • Become more creative and inventive, • Interact with peers and team members and lead teams, • Share their knowledge and solutions with others, and • Put it all together for the betterment of the community. 5. Workshops. Dr. Raviv has been delivering workshops and seminars on Innovative Thinking
draft business and marketing plans being an end-product of the workshop. 5. Provide a step-by-step approach on how to take an idea and make it into a product. 6. Provide the presenters with information about the participants, and their projects, via a short write-up of what projects they were involved in and projects they have worked on in the past, so the instructors could find relevant case studies from journals, or better yet take one of the examples of the participants firms and discuss that in detail. 7. Create 'glossary' of terms that participants can go through before they attend the seminar, so less time is spent on concepts and much more time on application. 8. Devote more time to opportunity
instructorsand peers in the classroom and a sense of belonging. These basic needs cultivate learning goalsas part of the students’ identities [52].5. Contextualizing Inclusive Practices in EM PedagogiesInclusive curriculum signifies curricular practices that promote student success across allstudents [56]. The salient characteristics of inclusive practices that the authors have focused onin the third year core classes include representation of diverse STEM figures, providing safespaces for failure, promoting collaboration over competition, and supporting student autonomy.Each of these practices is founded in the literature as ways to support inclusive learningenvironments (e.g., [57], [58]). While all characteristics are featured in both courses, the
, students create a learning portfolio using Googlesites that tells their story of initial entrepreneurial mindset growth over the course of their firstsemester at Georgia Tech. They also share their portfolios with faculty, peers, and upper levelstudents from BMED4000 (described below) at an ePortfolio showcase event at the end of thesemester.At the other end of the curricular framework is a unique culminating course called BMED4000The Art of Telling Your Story. In this upper level course, students learn to make connectionsbetween their experiences throughout their time at Georgia Tech and reflect on these experiencesthrough the lens of an entrepreneurial mindset. While BMED1000 focuses on folio thinking as ameans of developing entrepreneurial
Paper ID #17176Towards a Sustainable Engineering Entrepreneurship EducationDr. Benedict M. Uzochukwu, Virginia State University Benedict M. Uzochukwu is an Associate Professor of Technology at the Virginia State University. His research interests include Human Factors and Ergonomics, Sustainment, Logistics, Supply Chain Man- agement, Life cycle Systems, Systems Integration and Management of technology systems. He has a Ph.D. degree in Industrial Engineering from the North Carolina A & T State University, Greensboro and has several peer reviewed publications to his credit. He belongs to a number of professional
project team of three to four students is assigned a corporate mentor.For a period of eight weeks, students are expected to work no less than 8 hours per week, hold atleast one weekly team meeting to discuss progress, and send minutes of these weekly meetings totheir corporate mentor and the University. At the end of the term, each team presents their finalreport and submits a detailed written report on their assigned project to the corporate client andthe University.Each student is supported with a $1,000 assistantship funded by the corporate client and payableupon successful project completion and positive peer evaluation feedback. With $20,000dedicated annually to student assistantships plus $5,000 allocated for University projectmanagement
2015, he joined the BEARS Lab (B&E Applied Research and Science) in the nuclear engineering program at the University of Florida as postdoctoral researcher where he investigated spent fuel storage and cancer treatment. Throughout his graduate and postdoctoral experiences he participated in teaching, student mentorship, and faculty development as an instructor and advocate for learning inno- vation. He joined the Temple University faculty in 2015, where he focuses on Engineering Entrepreneur- ship, Social Networking and Connections in Higher Education, Peer-to-Peer Mentorship, and Open and Inclusive Education.Dr. Dustyn Roberts P.E., Temple University Dustyn Roberts received her B.S. in Mechanical and Biomedical
understand which characteristics of team development during the eventhad the highest correlation with team success. Knowledge of which characteristics best predictteam success amongst focused peers could influence the development of targeted interventionsaimed at increasing team cohesion and potential for success.BackgroundJim Clifton, in his book “The Coming Jobs War”, writes that “Entrepreneurship is moreimportant than innovation. Innovation is critical, but it plays a supporting role to almightyentrepreneurship… [I]t’s far better to invest in entrepreneurial people than in great ideas.”(Clifton, 2011) . Clifton’s central argument is that entrepreneurship is about creating jobs andthat for countries, particularly the US, it is critical that
than simply an “obedient engineer”. The framework proposes that theentrepreneurial mindset of students is increased by promoting curiosity, encouragingconnections, and creating value. The results from this work provide insight into the impact andimplications resulting from applying the KEEN framework to the engineering classroom viaonline discussions.Keywords: writing, journals, reflections, assessment, KEEN, curiosity, connections, creatingvalue.1 IntroductionThe entrepreneurial mindset is a “growth-oriented perspective through which individualspromote flexibility, creativity, continuous innovation, and renewal” [1]. While theentrepreneurial mindset can be useful in starting a new company, this mindset is also critical toexisting
, the presentations themselves took place in two sessions, oneweek apart.After each presentation, both independent judges and peers assessed what they had just heard,using the following survey prompts:1. Rate how well the presenter told a story. Was it dynamic and engaging? Was there an easily identifiable impact, lesson or takeaway? Did the presenter adhere to the time limit? (On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best)2. What is the most important takeaway you learned from this presentation? (Open response)3. Rate how important you think the key lesson identified above is to our students for their future. (1 = not important; 5 = very important) 4. Please enter any other specific feedback for the presenter here: (Open
branding strategy can achieve to promote thegrowth of the business.IP is considered an ‘asset’ of the organization and can have real value. The form of that valuevaries from the type of IP and the increase in freedom to operate that it affords. For patents,particularly in technology-driven companies, patents represent legitimacy to prospectiveinvestors. Like peer-reviewed papers, issued patents present to the world that an idea, indeeddoes have merit according to a separate panel of experts that do not have a vested interest in thecompany. This translates to many investors as a due diligence checkmark toward investability.Similarly, crowdfunding platforms that invest in consumer product-based companies may havean easier time raising capital than
shift in recruitment highlighted thetension between keeping the program open to students with unfulfilled academic potential andadmitting students with the requisite skills to graduate with a bachelor’s degree from UM. Therewas a particular concern that some incoming freshman had not proven themselves with college-level classes and needed to be placed into remedial courses. This need for remediation is notunusual at PGCC, where many highly motivated students may arrive from disadvantagededucational backgrounds.Thus, a Provisional Status was created for promising, but unproven recent high school graduateswho are unable to pass PGCC’s entrance exams in reading, writing, and/or mathematics1. AtPGCC, students failing any of these exams are required
edition36, and the TechnicalInnovation Center published The Innovation Algorithm: TRIZ, Systematic Innovation and Page 24.1177.8Technical Creativity, 2nd edition2. The guest lectures were provided on innovation, design anddevelopment of a business plan, marketing and selling, and technology entrepreneurship infinance.The course was assessed by means of surveys, individual and team interviews, journals,examinations, performance-based assessment, informal conversations with students and mentors,and email and oral feedback from mentors. The surveys included pre/post student assessment oftheir learning gains (SALG), peer evaluations, student course
related to the core competencies that the school desires for itsstudents.” 13When we first began, these lunchtime seminars focused on the fundamentals of excellence inteaching. The topics included: • What are our core competencies with regard to teaching? • How to write and assess a test • The importance of oral communication • The making of a great syllabus • The importance of writing in engineering and computer scienceThese lunchtime faculty development seminars have continued, with a focus on collaborativeteaching and cross-university project-based learning; the importance of curiosity, makingconnections, and creating value; and remembering the core mission of Baylor University as aChristian University. Again, topics have
also fostergreater buy-in from the faculty, the majority of whom in the department were hired after theprevious assessment plan was developed. However, while the engineering programs in thedepartment decided to write all of their performance indicators from scratch, the computerscience program took a different approach.There were two “Aha!” moments that critically shaped the development of the CS assessmentplan. As mentioned earlier, the first occurred when examining the list of 52 eKSOs and realizingthat they were performance indicators, some with a noticeable degree of alignment to indicatorstypically used in assessing ABET Student Outcomes. By choosing those eKSOs that exhibitedsuch alignment, the program could form the nucleus of an
title and abstract were carefully reviewed to find studies pertaining to theexperiences of racially minoritized populations in STEM entrepreneurship. For exclusioncriteria, all results were limited to peer-reviewed journals published in English if they fit all otherrequirements and studied underrepresented populations’ experiences or perceptions in STEMentrepreneurship. There was no time period specified in the exclusion criteria due to the limitedamount of literature published in STEM entrepreneurship so all research regardless of thepublication date was considered. Once all inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to thisliterature review search and all duplicates were removed there were eight articles remaining to befurther explored
“current entrepreneurship education tends to migratetowards its natural focus of ‘least resistance’ – the traditional business management processareas”32 is thankfully expanding to include growth in curricula and programs.34 However, withthe offerings serving 18 to 22 year-old students so similar to MBA-level activities to includebusiness plan writing, case studies, and guest speakers, one must ask if undergraduates are beingeducated in a way that aligns with their unique needs and interests.If the opportunity discovery experience by traditional undergraduates differs from adult nascententrepreneurs (to include MBA students), the questions become “how” and what are thepedagogical methods that will increase students’ abilities to discover
Shirpur campus and at College of Engineering Pune (COEP) as the founder head of the innovation Center. Dr Waychal earned his Ph D in the area of developing Innovation Competencies in Information System Organizations from IIT Bombay and M Tech in Control Engineering from IIT Delhi. He has presented keynote / invited talks in many high prole international conferences and has published papers in peer- reviewed journals. He / his teams have won awards in Engineering Education, Innovation, Six Sigma, and Knowledge Management at international events. Recently, his paper won the Best Teaching Strategies Paper award at the most respected international conference in the area of engineering education - Annual conference of