following week. Most of the problems built to the final two challenge problems. The eightchallenge problems given in Fall 2005 and planned for Spring 2006 are briefly reviewed below.1. Song Script: The first problem was to rewrite a simple MATLAB script. Students were Page 11.945.4provided with the code for a MATLAB script that would play a simple song. This script isshown in Appendix A and was based on suggestions by Dr. Shreekanth Mandayam at RowanUniversity.7 The code in appendix A includes annotations that are provided to the students.Students were then asked to rewrite this script so it played a different tune. It must include atleast
; and tobring them into the engineering community here at the University. It is a project-based class inwhich students work in teams and individually to master first-year level technical content in oneof the major engineering disciplines and to become competent in the major genres of technicaland professional communication.The current form of the course is the end result of a process that began in 1991, when the Collegeof Engineering faculty involved in the development and implementation of the communicationcurriculum, working with a small group of technical faculty interested in reaching out toengineering students at the beginning of their college careers, created a plan for a first-yearengineering class that would couple communication with an
. Since 2006, entering freshman take an “Introduction to Engineering” course, a two credithour course that meets the university’s “freshman experience” requirement. The course also givesfreshman engineers an introduction to the engineering profession, engineering design, differentengineering disciplines, and critical thinking. In the fall of 2011, there were 450 students in 12 sectionstaught by an instruction team of four faculty and six graduate teaching assistants. Critical Thinkingbecame an explicit part of the course in response to the University’s Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP),and the introduction to engineering course is responsible for teaching students the critical thinkingframework adopted by the university. Another significant
, and common expectations in the workplace.Program Description - Student SelectionCandidates were initially screened in collaboration with the Director of UndergraduateRecruiting and Retention in the Lyle School of Engineering. The screening process consisted ofthree phases: initial review, admissions file review, and interview. The initial review began withthe program directors reviewing the pool of admitted students who were US citizens, met theminimum financial need based on their FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid)application, and were planning to enroll in the Lyle School of Engineering. The programdirectors also reviewed the academic potential of the candidates. The academic potential of acandidate was determined by their
/ Yes ‐ it affirmed what I originally thought It has dissuaded me from continuing in engineering / Has this project influenced your commitment to continuing in engineering in general? Neutral ‐ No influence positive or negative / Yes it has affirmed my plans to continue in engineering 11 12 How well do you feel your team has worked together on this project? Low 1: Poorly to High 5: Very well Please rate your level of enjoyment in working on this project. 13
and to help peer mentor troubleshoot any potential issues that come upduring the weekly meetings. Students who earn a 3.0 or higher GPA after the fall semester haveto meet with their mentor only on a monthly basis during the spring semester. All students whoearn a 2.99 GPA or below must continue weekly meetings with their peer mentor through thespring semester. A mid-semester community activity is also planned both for the fall and springsemester to encourage the students to continue their relationship with their teams as well as theentire learning community. In addition, students are encouraged to discuss their next semestercourse plans to foster students enrolling in the same or similar courses.Students are also prepared to participate in a
they have utilized their skills.In the fall 2011 semester, FSE 294 students were assigned to read: Trowbridge, L. W., Bybee, R. W., & Carlson-Powell, J. (2000). Questioning and discussion. Teaching Secondary School Science: Strategies for Developing Scientific Literacy. Prentice Hall, pp. 183-193. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30(4), pp. 26-35.For both readings, students were asked to post to a Blackboard discussion forum and provide anexample of the reading’s applicability to their UGTA role, discuss the merits or weaknesses ofthe article, and outline a plan for implementing what they learned
Teaching from the Association of Former Students.Cesar O. Malave, Texas A&M University Dr. Csar O. Malav is the Associate Dean of Engineering in the Dwight Look College of Engineering and Assistant Agency Director of the Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES) at Texas A&M Univer- sity. He earned a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and a M.S. in Operations Research from the Georgia Institute of Technology. He obtained a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering from the University of South Florida. He has taught in the Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering since 1987. Dr. Malav’s current research interests are on the development of operational planning models for manufacturing sys- tems. He teaches graduate
discussed, as well as aresearch plan for analyzing the effectiveness of the course adjustments.IntroductionThe problem of retaining students is pervasive throughout all of the engineering disciplines.1, 2Within the aerospace community, the impact of an aging workforce is a cause for alarm withrespect to both the national economy and national security.3 Several U.S. governmentcommission reports have investigated the problem, one observing4, 5:The industry is confronted with a graying workforce in science, engineering and manufacturing,with an estimated 26 percent available for retirement within the next five years… Clearly, thereis a major workforce crisis in the aerospace industry. Our nation has lost over 600,000 scientificand technical aerospace
students the course objectives and how the course was structured to deliver thoseobjectives. In addition, course format and operation were more clearly explained to theincoming students, so that their expectations would be more in line with what they wouldexperience.The Donahue Institute will be conducting focus groups with this cohort of GPS students thisspring to identify the perceived impact of these courses a year later. These data will also beavailable in June.Assessment of 2009 Offerings: A similar set of assessments is planned for the most recentofferings of the GPS.ConclusionThe Great Problems Seminars were designed as an experiment to bring WPI first yearengineering students into meaningful contact with current events, societal problems
, andEnvironmental Engineering Design uses active, collaborative and cooperative learning Page 24.922.5 techniques; course structure and its alignment to the confluence model of creativity of Sternbergand Lubart8 is displayed in Figure 2.Figure 2. Introduction to Chemical, Food, and Environmental Engineering Design course structure and its alignment to the confluence model of creativity of Sternberg and Lubart.8“Concepts” (Figure 3) introduce students to the engineering design process, problem-solvingtechniques, working in teams, engineering as a profession, and planning for success that studentsthen apply in “Laboratory
Interest Groups (FIGs)” in each First-Year Transition Class of ~24 Students.[1:FIGs are 6 to 8 students, 2:FIG Peer Mentors are older students,3:FIG Industrial Mentors are local practicing engineers linked to one first-year transition class Section.]Additional FIG ComponentsIn the fall, as part of the engineering version of the University’s first-year transition course, theFIG activities are launched with a DVD seminar entitled Success4Students.9 The 3+ hourseminar has six segments that address the following topics: Select your destination (where do you want to be in five years?) Determine your path (focusing on goal setting for the semester) Planning to succeed (emphasizing the importance of planning your schedule for the week
or interesting they were. Not all of the activities were used by every Professor, in whichcase students were instructed to place an ’n/a’.While Engineering Design sections are taught by individual instructors, the course is conducted with a Page 13.164.3team-planning approach. All three of the authors were involved in co-coordinating this course over thesemesters of interest. Team meetings were conducted for all instructors every two weeks throughout thesemester. It was established that instructors of this course conduct the learning modes in a similar fashion.Accordingly, the results across the sections were combined to yield
it is oriented to fact, verbal because of the written and spokenwords, active because of the teaming, and sequential because of the natural order of the process.Minor Design Project: Planning & Building / Preparing Demo & Demonstrating. This firstproject is assigned early in the course to individual students or small teams. The same task isgiven to the entire class. They are to build and demonstrate a device of their own design. Theyexperience the design process hands-on with a strong emphasis on the design steps of problemformulation, abstraction and synthesis, and implementation, with some iteration. There aremultiple demonstration days, during which the students review others’ projects and show theresults of their own work. Some
resources.While students felt competent in their abilities to pursue an engineering degree, they describedcompetence as individual knowledge and understanding of engineering and access to resources.These resources were described as people (e.g., advisors, tutors), and as non-human resources(e.g., libraries, relevant laboratories, tutorials). Having access to resources made them feelcompetent and confident in themselves in the present and in their future. Often studentsconflated competence with confidence, which we plan to discuss in a separate study, but ingeneral, students felt like competent learners. Therefore, they felt confident they can becomeengineers in the long run. Access to resources made sense as contributing factors to students’competence
the latter. It is from these roots that the premajor orientation was developed.Project ApproachDesign & Implementation of Premajor OrientationIn fall of 2019, a small group of faculty and staff began planning a new student orientationspecifically designed for engineering & design premajor students. With the knowledge that manyof these students had already participated in university-wide orientation sessions, this sessionwas created to focus on department specific content including norms, expectations, andstandards. Understanding the importance of creating a welcoming, inclusive, and equitablelearning environment, the development team placed a strong emphasis on sharing behavioralexpectations, creating a common language, and engaging
were not wellenough defined, and that some very good projects received a lower grade than poorer projectsthat were selected for exhibition by the client.These student criticisms are not easily addressed since no single client can provide a project ofsufficient breadth to support all engineering majors and interests. In the future, we plan to solvethese problems by agreeing that the theme would be “inventions of historical significance” andtraining our judges to accept and exhibit the best explanatory/demonstration exhibits regardlessof whether they addressed the client’s themes and teaching objectives. Alternatively, or inaddition, we are considering adding the College of Engineering itself as an SL client for studentsto develop exhibits that
awareness of each other’s thinking and shareddecision making associated with their design process and final reporting. What an effective teamneeds are executive skills for managing a design process that transitions their ideas into a plan,research, build, test and refine cycle. Project management tools can support the processes ifteam leaders know how to track and facilitate the process. One of the goals of this first yearengineering course is to develop these skills in the team members so they can effectively usethem for future design activities like senior design and multidisciplinary projects in industry. In this paper, we present results from a qualitative analysis of student responses to open-ended questions designed to elicit their
university, the University of Toronto. In order to address theseconcerns, both the first-year engineering students’ and course coordinators’ perspectives must beunderstood. By considering both perspectives, this study provides insights that may informcourse scheduling, course curriculum development and integration of campus resources toimprove student experiences with the first-year engineering workload. Further, this informationwill help our faculty to better support students' transition to university. The result of thisresearch may also lead to improved recruitment efforts and better planning of engineeringprograms. We hope that by tackling the issue of workload we will enrich and further improve thestudents' experience. Numerous research studies
completed the course. Table 2 Fall 2011 master schedule; max enrollment indicated in parentheses. Time Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri 4:00 Plenary Module Plenary 4:30 (90) (60) (90) 5:00 Module Module Module 5:30 (30) (30) (60) 6:00Plenary SessionsThe plenary sessions were delivered by a team of two instructors who focused on topics of theengineering profession that are common across the disciplines and majors. Given that the plan
, they must become socially and academically integrated into theuniversity44 and the associated communities found within. One area of research stemming fromthis concept has been the study of the relationship between student sense of community andintentionally planned learning communities. There are a number of studies supporting thebenefits of learning communities and the positive associated outcomes45-48. However, very littleresearch on STEM learning communities reported providing a residential component. For thosethat did boast residential learning communities (RLC), assessment on the residence portion wasminimal. Further, residential learning communities identified by Ohland and Collins49 and othersevolving since that time50-54, found
. The engineering college offers at least three undergraduate degrees in engineering,including chemical, electrical, and aviation-related disciplines. Most students in the introductoryengineering course were seeking degrees in engineering, and a small number were pursuingbusiness degrees. The two-hour course sections were delivered in a traditional classroom setting(in contrast to the lecture theater/lab split at RU). Because students are in class fewer than twohours per week, course activities that were not completed during the class session were oftencompleted outside of class.Course Context: Major Assignments & Course ActivitiesIn spite of some contextual differences described above, the courses were planned together andsyllabi were
mentees with well thought-out and level-appropriate projects appreciatedthat they liked being included in the research.The mentees with ill-defined projects mentioned that their project didn’t have a direction or agoal and criticized their mentor’s lack of a plan they could follow. Several studentsrecommended that future projects have more structure. Overall, while the mentees credited theirmentors for being understanding and having the ability to explain their research projects, thementees were of mixed opinions about their mentors’ abilities to create a well-structured projectfor them to accomplish in a short time frame. Not surprisingly, we found that the most effectiverelationships included those with a well-defined scope and mentor who
earned her undergraduate degree in Biological Engineering from the University of Georgia.Lt. James Edward Roethler, Spalding University My name is James Edward Roethler. I am a Doctoral Student at Spalding University, specializing in forensic and adult psychology. I am also a 2LT in the United States Army, and plan to be a career psychologist with the military.Dr. Aimee M. Frame, University of Cincinnati Aimee Frame is an Associate Professor-Educator and current Undergraduate Program Director for Me- chanical Engineering at the University of Cincinnati. She received her MS in Mechanical Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology, USA and her PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the Uni- versity of
objective of this course is to provide project-based learning (PBL) andintroduce these students to major projects in Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, and ComputerEngineering projects so that they can make an informed decision about their major. The PBL is anactive learning method that aims to engage students in acquiring knowledge and skills throughreal-world experiences and well-planned project activities in engineering disciplines. The coursecomprises four team-based unique projects related to Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, and ComputerEngineering. The project involves using a variety of engineering tools like AutoCAD, Multisim,and Arduino platforms. For the first time, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the hands-on project-based EGGN-100 course was
make these projects seem more real andpurposeful to students.2 Despite struggling and expressing frustration with the open nature of theseprojects3,4, students involved in these open-ended projects reported greater enjoyment, increasedinterest, and increased learning through the open-ended projects4-9. In contrast, students who chosefrom a few strictly planned (predefined) projects expressed more dissatisfaction with their projectchoice than those completing open-ended projects8. This increased level of interest may havelongitudinal benefits, as students participating in open-ended projects have been shown to expressgreater interest in participating in new projects in the future8.First-year open ended design projects often include some form of
and thought-provoking curriculums for the engineering department at UC San Diego. My master’s degree background is aimed towards the field of medical technology, where I am able to work in a design laboratory that specializes in researching and developing medical devices. I plan to continue my education to obtain a Ph.D., directing my impact on engineering education and translational research at UC San Diego.Mr. Edward I Lan, University of California, San Diego Edward Lan earned his B.S in Mechanical Engineering from the University of California, San Diego in 2017. He moved on to work in the aerospace industry at Applied Composites San Diego (Formerly San Diego Composite) directly after graduating, developing new
andstudent affairs, and adequate resources), as well as a supportive academic (e.g., common courses,faculty advising, academically supportive climate) and co-curricular (e.g., study groups, socialactivities, career workshops) environment. The pinnacle of the best practices is an integration ofthese various layers and an assessment plan that allows practitioners to make changes.There are two types of research that has been conducted on LLCs: those that compare acrossmultiple programs and those that focus on one particular program. Research comparing LLCsacross programs have shown that they can have a positive impact on first-generation participants'transitions to college [2]; increased sense of belonging in their college [3]; and increasedopenness to