and supported by theMechanical Engineering program. As such, only the course sections taught by MechanicalEngineering faculty participate in this project.The limited participation is necessary due to the limited access to the prototyping equipment.The course instructor works with the students to download and print the prototypes. Eachprototype requires 5-8 hours of print time. With careful planning, 3 complete prototypes can beprinted within a 24 hour period. Most of the prototypes are printed in the final week of thecourse, so the maximum production is approximately 21 complete blowers (which requires thecourse instructor to be available on the last weekend as well). Fortunately, a few groups printtheir models early (end of second to last
session between thegroup members.Table 1 – In-lecture activities involving collaborative documentsWeek Dates Activities involving collaborative documents 1 Sep 11-13 Students signup in groups. Each student instructed to create Google Docs (GD) account Google Apps Scripting used to create directories for all teams. 2 Sep 16, 19 Seating plan used to help students sit in their group of three in lecture. Gravity Light Scenario: analysis and modeling of product for potential investment in lecture. Collaborative team work in GD. 3 N/A 4 Oct 2-3 Teams finish Gravity Light activity in GD. Completed task
Microelectronics, conducting research and development in the realization of advanced semiconductor technologies. From 1992 to 2008 he was with Louisiana Tech University, where he was the Entergy/LP&L/NOPSI Professor of Electrical Engineering, in recognition of his teaching and research contributions in the microsystems and nanotechnology areas. From September 2000 to June 2008 he was the Director of the Institute for Micromanufacturing, where, from 1992, he had contributed to the growth and development of the Institute, including through planning and setting up of laboratory resources and facilities, development and implementation of major sponsored research efforts, and realization of academic courses and curricula, on the
Education, 55(1), 40-76.9. Knight, W. (2003). Learning communities and first-year programs: Lessons for planners. Planning for Higher Education, 31(4), 5-12.10. Meath-Lang, B. (1997). Dramatic interactions: Theater work and the formation of learning communities. American Annals of the Deaf, 142, 99-101.11. Johnson, J. (2001) Learning communities and special efforts in retention of university students: What works, what doesn’t, and is the return worth the investment? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, and Practice, 2(3), 219-238.12. Johnson, W. G. (2006) Strategies for enhancing student learning in the residence halls. New Directions for Student Service, 75, 69-82.13. Schroeder, C. C., Minor, F. D., & Tarkow, T. A. (1999
tocollaboration between academic and student affairs can be attributed to background and training;a habit of isolation; differences in language, culture, and theoretical bases; poor communication;organizational structures, goals, and priorities; and a lack of mutual understanding.19,20 Truecollaboration requires understanding the culture, language, and organizational characteristics aswell as philosophical and programmatic approaches. It will also involve identifying the roles offaculty and student affairs staff in student development and the opportunities for interactionbetween the two units,21 and joint planning, implementation, and accountability, and institutionalcommitment.22 The purpose of collaborative partnerships between academic and student
-build approach culminating in a tangible project by the end of the semester. About half the firstyear cohort (~700) enrolls in the course; of these, 66% fulfill a major requirement and the restvolunteer for the course. Previous research has not found differences in retention betweenvolunteers and required takers.[1] FYEP survey and focus group assessments indicate growth intechnical areas as well as satisfaction with the course from the variety of classroom experiencesthat enhance students’ engineering abilities while helping to develop their identity as anengineer. Hands-on and teamwork experiences also contribute to students’ knowledge ofengineering as a career.The FYEP course follows a curriculum plan that is uniquely different from the
Introduction to EngineeringDesign course has been considered for a number of years. Implementation by first-year facultywould require coordination and development of nearly 160 projects involving multiplecommunity partners providing a wide range of services. Before embarking on this majorundertaking of first-hand service learning, the faculty developed major design projects withservice and humanitarian foci –referred to as service-oriented projects– for students to work onin teams. The research analyzes the change in students’ attitudes, and reveals that learningservice through selected project types has an impact similar to that of service learning. Resultsshow that there are some changes in attitudes and future planned activities after participation
planning, cost estimating,teamwork, and oral and written technical communications. Calculus I is a co-requisite and onlyCollege of Engineering students may enroll in the course in the fall semester. Enrollment is eachsection is limited to 28 students to facilitate student-student and student-faculty interactions. Ateaching assistant (TA) is assigned to each section to serve as a mentor and grader. Studentswork in small teams to complete three hands-on projects that require them to design, build, andtest their solutions. In fall 2009, 357 students enrolled in ENGR 1201.Selected sections of ENGR 1201 are reserved for students in the College of Engineeringresidential Freshman Learning Community (FLC). Over 200 students, which representapproximately
Christian University in 2005 after twelve years of industry experience. Dr. Miller earned his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering (1987), Master of Science in Electrical Engineering (1989) and Doctor of Philosophy (1999) degrees from Texas A&M University in College Station, Texas.Robert Andrew Stevenson, Oklahoma Christian University Robert Andrew Stevenson is a graduate level Engineering student at Oklahoma Christian University with a bachelors in Mechanical engineering from the same school. For his senior design project he and his team entered the regular class of the SAE Aero Design East competition and won first place in the presen- tation portion. After completing his masters he plans on entering into
promoting racial understanding),self-efficacy, leadership, choice of a service career, and plans to participate in serviceafter college 2.In the past few years service-learning has become increasingly common pedagogy inengineering programs around the globe. One reason for its popularity is the industry’sdesire for individuals with the communication and collaboration skills who are betterequipped for working in a global context 3,4.In the United States, many different universities have also incorporated service-learninginto their curricula5. Perhaps the best well-known example is the Engineering Projects inCommunity Service (EPICS) program8 created by Purdue University in 1995 and now itincludes 18 universities. Under this program freshman to senior
or competition; • Understand and map the design space of operational parameters and performance constraints relative to how students would go about their designs; • Develop methodologies to measure the energy efficiencies of such hybrid vehicles; • Develop several advanced energy hybrid model-scale vehicles that can be used to introduce the course material and train teaching faculty and staff; • Given the successful completion of the proposed project, develop a plan to incorporate the advanced energy vehicle design-and-build project into the first-year engineering curriculum.The short- and expected long-term impact of the AEV design-build project for the first-yearengineering students are to
andmaking presentations, all while working as a part of a team. This project was designed to meetmany of the course objectives as well as to develop skills that will be needed in many of theirfuture engineering classes.This paper presents an overview of the project and individual assignments as well as theoutcomes and feedback from the students that participated in the project. The plans for furthermodifications and improvements to this project and assignments will also be presented.IntroductionThe Introduction to Engineering course at Grand Valley State University (GVSU) is a one creditcourse that is designed to be an introduction to engineering as a career. It discusses the majorfields of engineering and the typical responsibilities of an
that with respect to industrial and systems, one institution may be disproportionatelyinfluencing the results.ConclusionComplementary to single institution studies8-11, this multi-institutional study finds that a requiredintroduction to engineering course can be beneficial to undecided students in making an informeddecision and help retain all students in engineering. Additionally, a required introduction toengineering course has significant effects on the way that undesignated students sort into majors.Future work will incorporate interview data to better understand this phenomenon from thestudent perspective. We also plan to look at outcomes for students who opted to take anintroduction to engineering course when they were not required to do
classroom in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a case study," 2012.7. G. C. Gannod, J. E. Burge, and M. T. Helmick, "Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering," in Proceedings of the 30th international conference on Software engineering, 2008, pp. 777-786.8. C. Papadopoulos, A. Santiago-Román, and G. Portela, "Work in Progress–Developing and Implementing an Inverted Classroom for Engineering Statics," in Proceedings–40th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, 2010.9. R. J. Gustafson, J. A. Merrill, A. W. Fentiman, R. J. Freuler, and J. T. Demel, "Developing and Implementing a Facilities Plan for a Freshman Engineering Course Sequence," in Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering
surrounding this space, increasing the planned and unplannedencounters among Cornerstone students and faculty. This space has become very well utilized,and it is common to hear students from different sections of Cornerstone help each other afteroverhearing a conversation about a problem that they are experiencing.Support Staff and “Red Vests”Staff for the FYELIC has also grown. In 2016, a technical operations manager was put in placeto provide continuous technical expertise on every topic. This person had taught Cornerstone, hewas uniquely familiar with the course and students, and is knowledgeable technically as amechanical engineer. In addition, the manager had previously advised a FIRST Robotics teamand brought considerable dedicated technical
unlimited potential. I have a feeling we’d see less dropouts in the field of engineering.” - FranklinParticipants also articulated their recognition of the potential pitfalls going forward. Thisincluded an expectation that it will be difficult to hold themselves accountable to maintain agrowth mindset and that maintaining positive attitudes of intelligence as malleable will beespecially difficult during times that are personally difficult. “Making effective plans is hard and holding yourself accountable is even harder. Holding myself accountable will definitely be my largest hurdle in adopting the growth mindset.” - Don “A major barrier will always be to keep a positive/growth mindset at times when things get tough … but hopefully I can
expressly devoted to the first-year Engineering Program at Northeastern University. Recently, she has joined the expanding Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at NU to continue teaching Simulation, Facilities Planning, and Human-Machine Systems. She also serves as a Technical Advisor for Senior Capstone Design and graduate-level Challenge Projects in Northeastern’s Gordon Engineering Leadership Program. Dr. Jaeger has been the recipient of numerous awards in engineering education for both teaching and mentoring and has been involved in several engineering educational research initiatives through ASEE and beyond.Dr. Courtney Pfluger, Northeastern University Dr. Courtney Pfluger received her Doctoral degree
) servicelearning project where 240 freshmen mechanical engineering students worked together in smallteams to design and deploy an engineering outreach experience for a designated age-group of 4th-11th grade students. This educational experience is designed to expose the freshmen engineeringstudents to a variety of concepts and skills necessary for successful negotiation of theirengineering careers. The project encourages the freshmen to challenge their assumptions andconceptions of what an engineer is and does. Other knowledge and skills gained includeunderstanding and using the engineering design process, effectively working on engineeringteams, effectively communicating, planning and making decisions, all while solving an open-ended problem. The
Paper ID #11616Characterizing Student Music Preference and Engineering Major ChoiceMr. Frank Blubaugh, Purdue University Frank Blubaugh is a graduating senior in Multidisciplinary Engineering at Purdue University. He has a diverse academic background in acoustical engineering, education, and music performance.Dr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, West Lafayette Joyce B. Main is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate
findingsfrom previous work with GE students, in particular a study conducted by Hutchison-Green et al.[2] Using data collected from the NSF funded project “A Mixed-Methods Study of the Effects ofFirst-Year Project Pedagogies on the Retention and Career Plans of Women in Engineering,” [5],[6] this secondary analysis of data was conducted to answer the research question, How doengineering students from a declared first-year matriculation structure develop engineering self-efficacy, through first-level and pattern coding methods [7].Perceptions of self-efficacy are formed by four sources: mastery experience, vicarious experience,social persuasions, and somatic and emotional state [8]. The most influential of these sources ismastery experience – the
carefully plantheir courses. A male student (IE, upper division) commented, “Plan out your entire collegecareer… You need to take it and figure out if it is do-able…”Aspects of this advice include beingaware of intermittent course offerings, seeking professor and course recommendations fromupper division students in the major, taking courses at a local community college, and payingcareful attention to discipline-specific foundational courses. Get course advising very early and an idea of recurrence very early. One of the reasons it took me five years, one issue is because I was out of the rotation for the course schedule so I had to wait for these courses to come around so I just take other fillers at a time. (male, ECE
about where they come from, what their plans and Help answer their questions helping them achieve them” (factors that help) students “As far as MEAs, there is a huge dis-connect from a classroom” (factors that Help regarding MEAs hinder) Page 23.588.5IV. ResultsIn this section, the first results reported are the frequencies of times that G/UTAs discuss theirvarious responsibilities along with their general perceptions of their positions. The three maintopics that both GTAs and UTAs discussed are training, grading, and helping students
Skill Building Academic Advising √ graduate from middle Research Planning/ Summer Academic Enrichment √ school with algebra 1 Initiation successfully completed. Tutoring
withmicrocontrollers does not mean that students will respond positively. Instructors used the “buzz”about the Arduino to motivate students, by indicating that the students were using a new andpopular technology. Instructor observations of student reaction showed that students were notuniversally inspired by or interested in the technology. This makes sense because the definitionof “cool” is not uniform for engineering students. Assessment was performed with an end-of-term survey of student attitudes toward thecourse and how it affected their career plans. Students were asked whether the use of theArduino platform changed their attitude toward computer programming and electromechanicalsystems. The complete survey is included in Appendix B. Results from
were created for each team instead of a monetary budget for each team. This was done to reduce the amount of time required students to attain mate- rials, to emphasize planning their designs before construction, and to increase student Page 22.149.3 creativity. Figure 1: Upper and lower boundaries on test area sizeFigure 2: A student team taking photographic data on test day Page 22.149.4 • Integration of Matlab programming as an integral component of the final project. Previously the Matlab programming project consisted of a 2D elliptical orbit simulation
strategies within a time management structure. c. Note the importance of building teamwork skills. d. Student product is a table/spreadsheet containing their weekly schedule to include classes, work schedule, study plan, and time allocated for sleep, meals, and social events. This is a first draft, so students may estimate items they don’t know. 3. Explore cross-curricular lesson design to heighten awareness and share strategies. a. Make connections across math, physics, and engineering courses through examples of engineering analyses using both physics base principles and algebraic and calculus processes to validate findings. Establish the expectation that
the role of menteecould promote relational identity development as the mentee creates a bond with their mentor,and later on the role of mentor might promote communal identity development as the mentorshifts focus to giving back to the community. The researchers plan to further explore thesepossible relationships as they relate to RQ3, particularly relating to the complexity of developingrelationships and community against the backdrop of the global pandemic. In an effort to supportmentors and mentees in their academic careers both as they participate within and beyond thecontainer of the Program, future research will begin the consideration of a systemic frameworkthat is capable of registering the relationships between more discrete
activitiesfacilitated by OSDS.History of Freshmen Student Support ProgramsGoing on 20 years, MAPS and the EFLC are the longest running student support programsdeveloped by OSDS. The MAPS Program exists to increase the retention and academicperformance of all students who are pursuing a COE degree. Although MAPS was originallydeveloped and implemented through National Science Foundation (NSF) funding, it is now fullyfunded by the University as a key component of the Southern Association of Colleges andSchools (SACS) Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP), known as Prospect For Success (PFS). PFSis designed to foster academic engagement through three specific learning outcomes:Commitment to Success, Inquiry, and Cultural Awareness. For more information regarding
year, an intervention is planned which will include sophomore students and will againutilize the senior students as mentors. In this next iteration, however, the context will be morestructured and related to a project assignment the sophomore students are completing for acourse.AcknowledgementsFunding for this research was provided by the National Science Foundation through grant EEC-1927144.ReferencesAustin A. E. (2002). Preparation of the next generation of faculty; Graduate school as socialization to the academic career. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 94-122.Blimling, G. The Resident Assistant: Applications and Strategies for Working with College Students in Residence Halls. 7th Edition, Kendall Hunt PublishingBurke P.J. and Reitzes
% ofthe cause the attrition [3]. Therefore, an ancillary research question is: Can mandatory studygroups formed in an introductory engineering course, help students succeed in other gatewayclasses? The results to the two research questions are reported with links to supporting videos.An Introduction to Human Centered DesignIn order to discuss design thinking and, by extension, IBM Enterprise Design Thinking (EDT) -paraphrased as human-centered design at scale (and speed) - we must first ground ourselves in thedefinition of general human-centered design (HCD) and the root meaning of design. A design isdefined as the purpose, planning, or intention that exists behind an action, fact, or material object.In and of itself, design is neither good nor