Paper ID #23985Growing Character Strengths Across BoundariesDr. Peter Golding, University of Texas, El Paso Professor and Engineering Leadership Undergraduate Program Director in the Department of Engineering and Leadership at UTEP, Director for the Center for Research in Engineering and Technology Education, and Provost Faculty Fellow in Residence at the Center for Faculty Leadership and Development at UTEP.Celena Arreola, University of Texas, El Paso Celena Arreola graduated on May 13, 2017 with Bachelors of Science in Engineering Leadership at the University of Texas at El Paso with a concentration in Mathematics and
Paper ID #6062Putting the Fun in Programming Fundamentals - Robots Make ProgramsTangibleDr. Todd R Hamrick, West Virginia University Todd has over 20 years of engineering experience in industry. He has worked in process engineering, product development, product design, and technical sales. He recently returned to academia, and today he teaches and advises first year engineering students at West Virginia University. His interests include transition from high school to college, hands-on STEM education including robotics, and first year engi- neering curriculum development.Dr. Robin A.M Hensel, West Virginia University
of Electrical Engineering and Elementary Education, is also the Director of Women in Engineering and The Engineering Place at NC State University. She has been working in the field of engineering education for over 20 years. She is dedicated to conveying the joint messages that engineering is a set of fields that can use all types of minds and every person needs to be literate in engineering and technology. She is an ASEE and IEEE Fellow and PAESMEM awardee.Ms. Raegan Santana Reeves, North Carolina State University I am currently a student at North Carolina State University, as well as a Goodnight Scholar Class of 2020. I am majoring in chemical engineering and would like to work with renewable energy, focusing on
rewarding experience and help me to always keep the fundamentals of engineering in my mind. – Current Student Assistant I loved it! My experience with being a student assistant actually encouraged me to be a TA in graduate school as well. I loved the camaraderie with the other student assistants and getting to know the "behind the scenes" for the class that I took. The pay was good, I liked the professors, and I liked my students. – Post Graduate Student AssistantAlthough respondents indicated it met their expectations, when asked if there were any surprises Page 25.1026.7we did get some very important feedback that
comparative study on undergraduate and practicing engineer knowledge of the roles of problem definition and idea generation in design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2008. 24(2): p. 226-‐233. 2. Newstetter, W.C., Of green monkeys and failed affordances: A case study of a mechanical engineering design course. Research in Engineering Design, 1998. 10(2): p. 118-‐128. 3. National Research Council, How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. 2000: National Academies Press. 4. Ambrose, S.A., et al., How Learning Works: Seven Research-‐Based Principles for Smart Teaching. 2010
Paper ID #23636A Second Year Review of a New FYE ProgramDr. George D. Ricco, University of Kentucky George D. Ricco is an assistant professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Kentucky. He focuses his work between teaching in the first-year engineering program at UK and research in student progression. Previously, he was the KEEN Program Coordinator at Gonzaga University in the School of Engineering and Applied Science. He completed his doctorate in engineering education from Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education. Previously, he received an M.S. in earth and planetary sciences
for a more systematic approach to evaluation ofthe Product Challenges quiz and data analysis, both quantitatively and qualitatively.13The author’s would like to thank the Pennsylvania State University, College of Engineering, Page 24.612.14Leonhard Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Education for support of this project.Bibliography1. Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: NationalAcademy Press.2. Rowe, Christopher and Stacy Klein. "A study of challenge-based learning techniques in an introduction toengineering course." ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. Honolulu: American
AC 2010-420: THE EEES/CONNECTOR FACULTY PROGRAM: SURVEYS OFATTITUDES, EXPERIENCE AND EVALUATIONSDaina Briedis, Michigan State Univesity Dr. Daina Briedis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at Michigan State University. Dr. Briedis has been involved in several areas of education research including student retention, curriculum redesign, and the use of technology in the classroom. She is a co-PI on two NSF grants in the areas of integration of computation in engineering curricula and in developing comprehensive strategies to retain early engineering students. She is active nationally and internationally in engineering accreditation and is a
Paper ID #31125Continuing to Promote Metacognitive Awareness in a First-Year LearningStrategies CourseDr. Elizabeth Anne Stephan, Clemson University Dr. Elizabeth Stephan is the Director of Academics for the General Engineering Program at Clemson University. She holds a B.S. and a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Akron. Since 2002, she has taught, developed, and and now coordinates the first-year curriculum. As the lead author of the ”Thinking Like an Engineer” textbook, currently in its 4th edition, she has been the primary author team–member in charge of the development of the MyEngineeringLab
themselves.” Second, a four-item scaleof cohesion22 was collected to measure the extent to which members get along, remain unitedand enjoy working together. An example item from this scale is, “We enjoy spending timetogether.” Responses for both competitive CM and cohesion were provided on a seven-pointresponse scale, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Third, team efficacy forinnovation is the belief about the team’s ability to innovate. This construct was developed in thecurrent research with engineering students specifically in mind. The five item scale includeditems such as: “How confident are you that your team can develop new techniques?” and “Howconfident are you that your team can invent new things?” (α = .93, ICC[1] = .29
2006-1936: LESSONS LEARNED: IMPLEMENTING A LARGE-SCALE PEERMENTORING PROGRAMBevlee Watford, Virginia Tech DR. BEVELEE A. WATFORD, P.E. is the founding Director of the Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Diversity, established in 1992. Watford received the ASEE 2003 Minorities in Engineering award due to her efforts to increase the recruitment, retention, and graduation rates of under-represented students in engineering. She is currently working for the National Science Foundation as a rotator in the Division of Undergraduate Education.Carrie Slater, Virginia Tech CARRIE R. SLATER is a graduate assistant in the Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Diversity at Virginia
conceptual rigor. It is calledphilosophy and early efforts in iFoundry were devoted to (and continue in) better connecting Page 15.1130.3philosophy and engineering in ways that help change engineering faculty minds through themaking of better arguments.Together, the need for appropriate organizational and conceptual change efforts have played arole in iFoundry’s development from the beginning. However, the coming of the first freshmenin Fall 2009 necessitated more focused thinking about students, their engagement, and how tocreate an experience that would be maximally impactful with modest resources and a relativelysmall footprint in the curriculum
Paper ID #30145Work in Progress: Development of a General Education First-Year DesignCourseDr. Courtney Hollar, Boise State University Dr. Courtney Hollar is a lecturer in the Department of Mechanical Engineering within the College of Engineering at Boise State University. Hollar earned a B.S. and M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Boise State University and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Idaho. She is passionate about methods to attract and retain women and underrepresented minorities in STEM fields.Dr. Sondra M Miller, Boise State University Dr. Sondra M. Miller is an associate professor in the
dimensions of the GrandChallenges and helps them to identify what they are interested in focusing their work on in thefuture.To help students learn more about the interdisciplinary Grand Challenges for Engineering and toidentify or confirm their interests, students first participate in an introductory activity to create anoverview of the Grand Challenges, and then explore the challenges in each of five GrandChallenge theme areas over the course of several weeks. In the introductory activity, studentswork in groups and utilize various resources to create a mind map for one of the assigned GrandChallenge theme areas to show the specific challenges the world is facing and how they arerelated. Students are encouraged to think broadly about the
AC 2012-3993: PROMOTING STUDENT CONNECTIONS AND RETEN-TION THROUGH AN ON-CAMPUS RESIDENTIAL LEARNING COM-MUNITY FOR FIRST-YEAR UNDERREPRESENTED AND LOW-INCOMESTUDENTSDr. Jess W. Everett, Rowan University Dr. Everett is a Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering. He is interested in sustainable engi- neering and education innovation.Dr. Patricia Dee Zobel, Rowan University Page 25.1088.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Student Connections and Retention through an On-Campus Residential Learning Community for First-Year Underrepresented and Lo-Income
environment; however, students vary in their approaches and ability to acquiremetacognition [2],[5]. It is well established in the literature that metacognitive awareness ispositively correlated to favorable course outcomes [6]-[9]. Further, introducing students tometacognition and related concepts has also been shown to lead to improved learning outcomes[10]-[15]. Importantly, benefits have been observed with minimal interventions consisting ofsimply introducing concepts of metacognition to students [16].With the above in mind, a series of online resources was developed and deployed within a corefirst-year engineering course at the University of British Columbia, a large Canadian research-intensive university. The intent was to aid students in their
Paper ID #18884Grade-a-thons and Divide-and-Conquer: Effective Assessment at ScaleMs. Brittany Ann Kos, University of Colorado, Boulder Brittany Kos is a PhD student at the ATLAS Institute at the University of Colorado Boulder. Her primary work is in undergraduate Computer Science Education and studying student hackathons from a feminist lens.Dr. Sarah Miller, University of Colorado, Boulder Sarah Miller provides vision and leadership for the recruitment, retention, and success of outstanding and diverse students, faculty, and staff to the University of Colorado Boulder’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. As
AC 2010-323: ENGAGING STUDENTS WITH GREAT PROBLEMSBrian Savilonis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Brian Savilonis is a professor in Mechanical Engineering; he has been at WPI since 1981. His teaching and research is primarily in thermofluids and biofluid mechanics. Email bjs@wpi.edu, phone 508-831-5686.David Spanagel , Worcester Polytechnic Institute David Spanagel recently joined WPI in the Department of Humanities and Arts; his scholarship is in history of technology and science. Email spanagel@wpi.edu, phone 508-831-6403.Kristin Wobbe, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Kristin Wobbe is Associate Dean for the First Year and associate professor in Chemistry and Biochemistry. She has
2006-1001: ACTIVE TEACHING, ACTIVE LEARNING: INFUSING THE DESIGNPROCESS IN A FIRST-YEAR COURSESusan Freeman, Northeastern University Susan Freeman, Beverly Jaeger and Richard Whalen are members of Northeastern University's Gateway Team, a selected group of faculty expressly devoted to the first-year Engineering Program. The focus of this team is on providing a consistent, comprehensive, and constructive educational experience in engineering that endorses the student-centered and professionally-oriented mission of Northeastern University.Beverly Jaeger, Northeastern UniversityRichard Whalen, Northeastern University
important goals of this course, in addition to recognizing thatethical issues pervade engineering – to be open-minded yet critical in our approach to ethicalproblem solving.In addition to the pedagogical value of Star Trek, I like using it because it is fun. Even though asa boy I was fascinated and impressed with the imagery and sets of the original series, today itappears primitive and campy. That combined with the acting style of William Shatner make fora lot of laughs. All of the series include moments of humor and good-natured teasing.Course StructureThe course meets once a week for a 75-minute period. The basic weekly pattern is to view acomplete episode of Star Trek every other week, with the alternating classes for discussions thatbuild upon
AC 2012-4011: PROGRAMMING IS INVISIBLE OR IS IT? HOW TOBRING A FIRST-YEAR PROGRAMMING COURSE TO LIFEDr. Beverly K. Jaeger, Northeastern University Beverly Jaeger, Susan Freeman, and Richard Whalen are members of Northeastern University’s Gateway Team, a group of teaching faculty devoted to the developing and enhancing the First-year Engineering program at Northeastern University (NU). They also each maintain a close affiliation with the Mechan- ical and Industrial Engineering program at NU, bringing expertise from their majors to the first-year classroom. The focus of this team is to provide a consistent, comprehensive, and constructive educational experience that endorses the student-centered, professional, and
skills upon entry to the university. Students are cohorted in three primarySTEM courses, math, chemistry, and engineering, as well as a two-credit hour learning strategiescourse that focuses on building skills around being an effective learner and STEM student.Entangled Learning was used as the pedagogical framework guiding the design of the learningstrategies course, and the course aims to enhance students’ self-regulatory behaviors, learningskills and strategies, and habits of mind. Among other assignments, student learning is assessedthrough a series of learning journal assignments, including an extensive set of exam wrapperactivities, which will be the subject of this paper.This paper will present a focused exploration of the exam wrapper
a member of the educational team for the Network for Computational Nanotechnology (NCN).Dr. Johannes Strobel, Texas A&M University Dr. Johannes Strobel is Director, Educational Outreach Programs and Associate Professor, Engineering & Education at Texas A&M, College Station. He received his M.Ed. and Ph.D. in Information Science & Learning Technologies from the University of Missouri. His research/teaching focuses on engineering as an innovation in pK-12 education, policy of STEM education, how to support teachers and students’ academic achievements through engineering, engineering ’habits of mind’ and empathy and care in engi- neering. He has published more than 140 journal articles and
are advisers and peers. With this in mind, McCormick decided to hire four advisers that also taught classes in the FirstYear sequence. This decision was key in developing a AdvisingasTeaching Model. The advisers teach sections of Design, Thinking and Communications I and II, the Cornerstone Design classes, departmental service classes, or Engineering Problem Solving classes. The goal is to get the advisers in front of the students in either FirstYear, Basic Engineering, or Departmental Core Classes. While it would have been easier to hire professional advisers, but the administration thought the advisers would have more credibility if students interacted with them as professors
use of PRS and lecture as wrap up demands that studentsengage and prepare themselves, and when they come to lecture, promotes the development of aknowledge framework.References1. Sticklen J, Urban-Lurain M, Hinds T, Eskil T, Amey M. Multi-section Freshman Classes with Laboratories: Lecture as Intro vs. Lecture as Wrap-up. 2005; Portland, OR. American Society for Engineering Education. p paper #2005-1601.2. Bransford JD, Brown AL, Cocking RR. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Academy Press; 1999.3. Hall SR, Waitz I, Brodeur DR, Soderholm DH
Paper ID #34240Learning a Second Language and Learning a Programming Language: AnExplorationMs. Jutshi Agarwal, University of Cincinnati I am a PhD candidate in Engineering Education with a research focus on professional development for future faculty. Currently, I am the Lead Graduate Teaching Assistant for the first year engineering design course with an enrollment of 1300 students across all engineering majors.Dr. Gregory Warren Bucks, University of Cincinnati Gregory Bucks joined the Department of Engineering Education at the University of Cincinnati in 2012. He received his BSEE from the Pennsylvania State University
true freshmen who enter with substantialadvanced placement (AP) or dual enrollment credit.Introduction Today, many people are opting to begin their engineering education at communitycollege and then transfer to a four-year institute. Escalation of college costs1-4 is the majormotivation driving this trend,5 but community colleges offer more than just a less expensive trekthrough the first two years. They often provide a smaller, more intimate campus, and a greaterflexibility in class scheduling, with more evening classes. They also offer an opportunity to pickup remedial math and science for those who decide to pursue engineering too late to prepare forthat path in high school.6 With a transfer in mind, taking fundamental freshman
Creative Thinking) creativity exercises thatmeasure creativity primarily by discrete, non-judgmental tasks that focus on fluency of thought,flexibility of thought, originality of thought and elaboration on one’s own thinking. Theseactivities were followed up by a discussion of creativity in engineering design. The instructor ofthe second section provided opportunities for small group and individual creative problemsolving throughout the semester. In both sections, students were encouraged to keep theprinciples of creativity in mind as they worked through their design projects.E101 Common Rubric AssignmentWhile some differences existed in the strategies employed in both sections the common rubricassignment was the same. Students’ prior experiences
Paper ID #22582Using Design Challenges to Develop Empathy in First-year CoursesJordan Orion James, University of New Mexico Jordan O. James is a Native American Ph.D. learning sciences student and lecturer at the University of New Mexico’s School of Architecture and Planning in the Community & Regional Planning program. He has served as a graduate research assistant on an NSF-funded project, Revolutionizing Engineering De- partments, and has been recognized as a Graduate Studies student spotlight recipient and teaching scholar. Jordan studies learning in authentic, real-world conditions utilizing Design Based Research
AC 2011-1659: PEER-LED SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTION IN AN NSFSTEP PROJECT: THE EEES EXPERIENCEColleen A. McDonough, Michigan State University Colleen A. McDonough is a graduate research assistant at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University. She is the coordinator of two component projects of a National Science Foundation grant focusing on retention issues and engaging early engineering students, and also serves as an academic advisor. McDonough earned a bachelor’s degree in sociology from William Smith College and a master’s degree in Public Administration from the University of Southern California. She is currently a third year doctoral student in the Higher, Adult and Lifelong Education program at