literature [8],[16],[14]. These include different operating methods, lack of knowledgeabout other disciplines, steep learning curve [8],[14], and many more. And even then, simplyforming multi-disciplinary design programs or adding entrepreneurial teaching is not enough.Strategies to assess the impact of such programs and collaborations are the key to continuousimprovement [10],[13].Authors have noticed in general two types of programs across the board; the ones that teachentrepreneurship mindset and engineering innovation as part of engineering education [9],[12],and the others that focus on core multi-disciplinary engineering design [5],[17], each with theirunique learning outcomes and skill development. In general, between
: Creating Linkages between Business and EngineeringAn innovative program at this University has proven to be an excellent vehicle for permittingcollaboration between Engineering and Business faculty and students. Students are given theopportunity to develop exciting new products and to pitch their ideas and designs to seniorleaders of regional corporations. The Ideation Challenge provides this vehicle. In addition todriving students to perform their best in front of leaders of industry, it is an outlet for innovationand creativity, the first steps in the entrepreneurial mindset. This year, for the first time, theIdeation Challenge will have a second phase. The second phase will be to take one of thoseinnovative ideas to the point where it is a
way hegemonic ideologies and cultures reinforce powerrelations in each of the other domains [15]. Figure 1: Domain of Power Framework, adapted from Collins [15]Applications of intersectionality in STEM and entrepreneurshipAlthough there is a significant landscape of literature in STEM entrepreneurship that focuses onwomen, gender differences, entrepreneurial efficacy and entrepreneurial mindset, research onracially minoritized populations remains understudied. Most of the literature examining theexperiences of racially minoritized populations in STEM entrepreneurship focuses on programdesign and evaluation for entrepreneurship and innovation programs that seek to supportunderrepresented students (e.g., racially minoritized
practical way of thinking about designing and learning.” (coded for infusion of EM, funding, and continue previous efforts) “I was motivated to apply for the [professorship] because it would afford me the opportunity to integrate learning methods into my classroom that I would have otherwise not been able ... I was also excited to apply to become part of a community of faculty looking for ways to advance their current pedagogical methods through an integrated focus on fostering the entrepreneurial mindset.” (coded for infusion of EM, student development, course innovation, and recognition) “Four mini-projects were added to my [course] for the first time in the Spring 2016 semester to
process of evolving as a profession cannot be achieved unless an entrepreneurial mindset iscreated amongst the engineers of 2020 and beyond. To foster this entrepreneurial mindset,engineering programs are undertaking various initiatives. However, there is no clear agreementregarding the entrepreneurship content that should be included for engineers.In this paper, the authors have done a comprehensive review of entrepreneurship course offeringsin engineering programs. This includes analyzing whether the programs are offered by theengineering schools themselves or in partnership with a business school and what other offeringsthey have for their students in addition to course work. This enabled the authors to identifypatterns about the required
entrepreneurial endeavor with little or no instruction onhow to work and orchestrate dissonance. This paper showcases context sensitive qualitativeinformation from a team negotiation study conducted in two educational settings in North andSouth America. We describe two bottom-up negotiation strategies that become a shared patternbetween the two research sites. Additionally, both group of students described a new mindset fordoing things and solving real problems. Being comfortable with ambiguity is an emergentexpected outcome from a new way of teaching and learning engineering. A convergence in thenegotiation patterns is expected from collecting information in other research sites. Thetechniques are visual in nature and have the potential to be
papers, and provides faculty development workshops on effective teaching. In 2006, the Kern Family Foundation named Dr. Carpenter a Kern Fellow for Entrepreneurial Education recognizing his efforts to bring innovative team based problem solving into the engineering curriculum to promote the entrepreneurial mindset. In addition to his work on ethics and entrepreneurial skills, Dr. Carpenter is an accredited green design professional (LEED AP) and practicing professional engineer. As founding Director of the Great Lakes Stormwater Management Institute, he conducts research on water management and routinely provides professional lectures/short courses on innovative stormwater treatment design and its role in Low Impact
to address the cognitive abilities of entrepreneurial mindsets betterthan traditional classroom lecture.5 Providing this learning environment for STEM students inthe liberal arts university is challenging. Gone are the days of ivory tower universities whosescholarly work is secluded from the external world. Today, universities are called upon – evenexpected - to bring value to their community, their country, and the world. For instance, the LillyEndowment recently awarded $62.7 million to 39 Indiana universities to implement programs toimprove job prospects for degree holders. The Vice President for Education for Lilly Endowmentemphasized the role of the university in supplying industry with qualified employees, “TheEndowment has seen
addition, weidentified interdisciplinary and university-wide approaches that, while not exclusivelyfocused on technology or engineering entrepreneurship, provide opportunities forstudents to acquire entrepreneurial skills to complement their undergraduate engineeringmajor. This paper describes our approach to the analysis of the technical entrepreneurshipprograms and shares findings from this effort thus far. Specifically, we examined thetopic areas of core and elective courses, identified where programs are administered atthe university, and developed an initial framework for analyzing curricular andextracurricular opportunities (e.g., field experiences, venture development activities,internships, competitions, networks, entrepreneurship centers
couple their hard work and independence with an entrepreneurial spirit. For too long, that spirit has been seen as the sole domain of business schools. We must expand that view. Entrepreneurship and innovation must be valued in every discipline across our campuses. Temple students must learn to adapt to constant change and find success in fields that have not yet been invented."In view of our president’s commitment and our participation in Pathways to Innovation, theCollege of Engineering decided that it was time to refocus the major capstone design experience,required by the EAC of ABET, and re-imagine the Senior Design Curriculum to include
the ability to solve problems in novel ways, the capacity to envision alternativesolutions, and the knack for design. However, traditional instructional and evaluation methodsmay make students overly risk averse, impacting their willingness to innovate to the extentnecessary to make disruptive changes to technology. Fostering an entrepreneurial spirit inengineering undergraduates may allow them to be more creative and less risk averse in theirapproach to solving multi-faceted, ill-defined problems. Analysis of student feedback fromreflection essays, self-report attitudinal surveys, and instructor assessment in two very differentcourses that promote the entrepreneurial mindset through student-driven projects will be used todistill the
. She received a BA from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, an MBA from Babson College, and MS and PhD degrees from Purdue University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020Running Head: FACULTY VIEWS OF UNDERGRADUATE IP POLICIES Faculty Views of Undergraduate Intellectual Property Policies and Practices ABSTRACTThis study investigated faculty attitudes related to IP policies and practices associated witheducating and guiding undergraduate students in intellectual property (IP) development in lightof their increased involvement in research and entrepreneurial activities. We surveyed a sampleof 143 faculty members from both engineering and
Paper ID #33509To Inhibit or Invite: Collaboration from Far AwayDr. Barbara A. Karanian, Stanford University Barbara A. Karanian, Ph.D. , Lecturer, formerly visiting Professor, in the School of Engineering, in the Mechanical Engineering Design Group at Stanford University. Barbara’s research focuses on four ar- eas: 1)grounding a blend of theories from social-cognitive psychology, engineering design, and art to show how cognition affects design; 2) changing the way people understand the emotion behind their work with the intent to do something new; 3) shifting norms of leaders involved in entrepreneurial-minded
team efforts, there have been a handful of new innovation andentrepreneurship initiatives on campus. These initiatives have been driven by students, facultyand Colorado School of Mines college Deans within the past year, and all have helped lead to thesuccess of creating an innovation and entrepreneurship mindset on campus. 3 Student led efforts have included the creation of new student clubs and organizations. Examplesinclude the Colorado School of Mines Maker Society, a hackers club, a rejuvenated studentEntrepreneur Club, new hack-a-thons, a new freshman residential learning community based onthe ASE Grand Challenges in Engineering.8 Faculty
philosophy,curriculum, instructional strategy, preliminary assessment results and the teaching toolsemployed to enhance the students’ entrepreneurial experience.IntroductionFrans Johansson, in his book The Medici Effect1 recounts the story of the Medicis, a bankingfamily in Florence who were patrons in a wide range of disciplines. Due to the Medicis and afew other like-minded families, sculptors, scientists, poets, philosophers, financiers, painters, andarchitects from all over Europe and as far as China converged upon the city of Florence. Therethey found each other, learned from one another, and broke down the barriers between theirdisciplines and cultures. Together they formed a new world based on new ideas—what becameknown as the Rinascimento or
addition to present industry demand for mostly contract workers9, students are increasinglyembarking on entrepreneurial ventures instead of pursuing regular employment10. Research onentrepreneurship revealed that over 6% of adults are creating new business enterprises11,12 in theUnited States, a country where a person is relatively more likely to engage in entrepreneurshipactivities and where companies with plenty employees of the entrepreneurial mindset tend tobecome more entrepreneurial13. Moreover, the highest levels of entrepreneurial activity tends tobe among individuals who are generally college educated12 and more specifically earned aspecialized technological, professional, or business degree14,15. “Better-trained, more
market lens. The entrepreneurial Page 11.1255.9engineer understands industries, markets, and the financial manifestation of their inventions.They understand that their work, if demanded by markets, can produce jobs and impact nationaleconomies. They understand that invention is only half the battle. Commercialization is an artthat requires understanding the process to market, which includes consideration of timing,strategy, resource needs, and growth opportunities. Babson-Olin SyE3 aims to train engineeringeducators to build the entrepreneurial mindset and skills of their students. Entrepreneurship willbe the catalyst of change and progress for the
enhance their engineering and computer science education.2. Context: The University and the Center for Leadership, Entrepreneurship, and InnovationEntrepreneurship is widely recognized as a fundamental building block of competitive advantageand business success [3, 4, 7]. Creativity, passion, opportunity recognition, a willingness to takerisks, strategy execution, a can-do mindset – these entrepreneurial traits and skills are the driversbehind the creation of new innovative business units, companies and organizations. These samecharacteristics are needed to solve complex global engineering challenges to enhance quality oflife [5]. The Center for Leadership, Entrepreneurship, and Innovation (CLEI) at the University ofPortland is positioned to be a
extraordinary contributions to the projects. Page 14.76.8Outcomes AssessmentThe students were issued pre- and post-course surveys with various questions related tothe development of an entrepreneurial mindset. These same questions will be usedthroughout the engineering entrepreneurship minor program to assess how well theirunderstanding of the various facets of entrepreneurship is developing. The question onthis survey most relevant to the present course was: “How confident are you in yourability to create new products and services?” The question had four possible answers:Not confident, somewhat confident, confident, and very confident. Ten studentsresponded
schools in KEEN (Kern Engineering Entrepreneurship Network). KEEN wasformed to develop an entrepreneurial mindset in today’s engineers. Founder Robert Kern(successful entrepreneur of Generac® fame) had a vision to differentiate American engineers bybringing an entrepreneurial mindset to undergraduate engineering education. Since most oftoday’s graduating engineers do not start their own businesses but join established corporationsor institutions, a key focus of this four school grant was to understand intrapreneurship, which isthe term used to describe successful entrepreneurial efforts in an existing corporation orinstitution. This usage is consistent with the general usage of the word, if one searches theinternet, as well as in published
, isn’t that what engineering is all about? VIII. Assessment of the Innovation Challenge Module1. Assessment using KEEN framework In order to assess the impact the module had on the students, the students were given the KEENframework on skillset and mindsets and were asked to circle the skillset they thought they acquired throughthe innovation challenge. In most design courses, majority of the focus is on the objectives listed under the“Design” in Figure 8 and rarely any thought goes into the objectives shown under “Opportunity” and“Impact” category. Figure 8 KEEN’s framework for entrepreneurial minded
Paper ID #9031A Critical Review of Measures of InnovativenessMs. Jessica Menold Jessica Menold is a doctoral student in mechanical engineering at the Pennsylvania State University. As an undergraduate at Penn State she was heavily involved with a STEM outreach program called the engineering ambassadors. She currently works as a graduate mentor for entrepreneurial student groups on campus as a part of Penn State’s Lion Launch Pad team. Her interests in entrepreneurs, as well as engineering education, has led her to the study of innovation in engineers, working with Dr. Kathryn Jablokow. Her current research focuses on
’ retention. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Integrating Innovation Curriculum - Measuring Student Innovation to Assess Course and Program EffectivenessAbstractThe USA is falling behind other nations in innovation, creating serious threat to the health,stability, and influence of our country. Industry is desperate to hire engineers able to innovate,and universities are developing programs to instill the innovative mindset required to improveglobal competitiveness [1].Innovation requires collaboration between engineering, business, and creativity to realisticallyprepare students to be innovators. Researchers at the University of Arkansas's College ofEngineering and Sam M
and C9 who are of junior status and engineeringmajors (to be consistent with the national sample population).The UIF students come into the program with a higher sense of an entrepreneurial mindset andgreater inclination towards leadership than college students in the EMS. Table 6 shows thatFellows enter with a similar score on the Innovation Self-Efficacy construct and a much higherscore on Career Goals: Innovation work construct than the national sample, suggesting they havea desire to be innovative but are not yet equipped with the skills. By the end of training, theirscores on both these constructs dramatically increase, suggesting that the program is attracting1 http://epicenter.stanford.edu/page/engineering-majors-survey#FAQstudents who
El Paso Roger V. Gonzalez, Ph.D., P.E., is the Director of the Leadership Engineering program for the College of Engineering and Professor and Chair of Engineering Education and Leadership. Dr. Gonzalez earned a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering in 1986 from UTEP. He earned his M.S. in Biomedical Engineering and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from The University of Texas at Austin and was a Post-Doctoral Fellow and the premier Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago and Northwestern Medical School. Professor Gonza- lez has been recognized for scholarly work, education innovation and socio-entrepreneurial humanitarian efforts. He is known and respected for actively incorporating students into all three of these
structure. c. Conflicts that arise from the non-academic environment Fellows come to Tulane with limited non-academic experience. For some, the FDA internship is their first time in a professional role, and the contrast between the academic and professional environments was a challenge. Also, Bioinnovation fellows tend to possess an entrepreneurial mindset that embraces the rapid translation of research to product; however this can cause conflict with the mission of a government agency such as the FDA. As one fellow noted in the follow up interview, “it wasn’t an environment of ‘hurry up and get stuff done’ it was an environment of ‘do things right.’” Dr. Chang noted that one fellow made the observation that ‘in the workplace
reach a logical conclusion about the issue.Course Content and Theoretical ModelsThe course introduces students to foundational theories of innovation and evaluation methods toengage students in thinking critically about product development from a broad range ofperspectives. Specifically, students learn to evaluate innovations from technological, business,human, and environmental perspectives. Figure 1 shows a breakdown of course content.Students are introduced to foundational theories for promoting innovation through companyculture [4], individual mindset [5], and design thinking methodology [6]. Additionally, studentsare exposed to various tools to evaluate innovation from financial [7], social [8], andenvironmental perspectives [9] as well as
. Page 26.1531.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 The EPA P3 Program: an Opportunity for Growing Student EntrepreneursAbstract – In this paper we will share our experiences of fostering entrepreneurial spirit throughprojects funded by EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) P3 (People, Prosperity, and thePlanet) Program which hosts the P3 collegiate competition for designing solutions for a sustainablefuture. Since 2012, we have integrated the P3 competition with the capstone design course of CleanEnergy Systems track in mechanical engineering as an effective educational vehicle forintroducing the concept of sustainable design. Since the
, December 2011.[5] National Academy of Engineering, The Engineer of 2020 : Visions of Engineering in the New Century, Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2004.[6] K. C. Davis and F. R. Beyette Jr., "Developing and Assessing Elevator Pitches in Capstone Design," in ASEE Annual Conference, Columbus, Ohio, 2017.[7] University of New Haven, "KEEN: Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset through integrated e-learning modules," [Online]. Available: https://www.newhaven.edu/engineering/kern- entrepreneurial-engineering-network/elearning-modules/. [Accessed 2 January 2020].[8] J. Bell, "Student business plan competitions: who really does have access?," in Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Small Business Institute
Paper ID #28955Student responses to active learning strategies: A comparison betweenproject-based and traditional engineering programsDr. Elizabeth Pluskwik, Minnesota State University, Mankato Elizabeth leads the Engineering Management and Statistics competencies at Iron Range Engineering, an ABET-accredited project-based engineering education program located in northern Minnesota. She enjoys helping student engineers develop entrepreneurial mindsets through active and collaborative learning in the classroom, on project design teams, and while out on co-op placement. Her prior education and industry experience are in