AC 2012-3762: LOOKING AHEAD: SOME TRENDS IN GRADUATE ED-UCATION AND THEIR IMPACT ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNOL-OGYProf. Joy L. Colwell, Purdue University, Calumet Joy L. Colwell, J.D., is currently Director of Graduate Studies at Purdue University Calumet, and profes- sor of organizational leadership and supervision. Page 25.903.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Looking Ahead: Some Trends in Graduate Education and Their Impact on Engineering and Technology AbstractIn order to plan for and meet future needs, graduate education in engineering and
COMPUTER ENGINEERING DEGREE PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA By G E Crain, James J Sluss, Jr, Monte P Tull, and Sam C LeeAbstractA new requirement for assessment of graduate programs at the University of Oklahoma wasestablished in 2003. Program Goals and Program Objectives were established and reported inour earlier work. Outcomes of the Program Objectives can be measured with students active inthe program. The tactical plan to assess the effectiveness of meeting the Objectives of AdvancedDegree programs in Electrical and Computer Engineering is discussed in this paper. Keyelements of the plan include1) identifying strategic opportunities for measurement,2) developingthe instruments and processes to collect this data, 3
concentrations thatrequire one or more of the courses that use the simulation approach: OrganizationalManagement, Project Management, Project/Organization Management, Technical InnovationManagement, and Quality Management. The simulation approach courses are also electives forthe Master of Science in Systems Engineering.Project ManagementThe first course in which the student encounters this simulation is entitled Introduction to ProjectManagement. In this course, the students learn about planning, organizing, and monitoring aproject. The scenarios involve the sequences of activities involved in bringing a new project intoAVI. Each student takes on the role of the manager of this new project and learns about all theactivities and interactions with others
within the nationalorganization was unclear. To help clarify their role and interests, a survey of ASEE studentmember needs was conducted by the Student Constituent Committee (SCC). An invitation toparticipate in a web survey was sent to all student members of ASEE (N=635). Ninety-seven(15%) students responded to the invitation. Ninety-three percent of respondents were graduatestudents.This paper presents the aggregate results of all 97 respondents. It includes a profile of surveyparticipants, motivations for joining the ASEE, experiences with the ASEE, interests andsuggestions. Additionally, this paper will discuss the implications those results had on the SCCExecutive Board's immediate plans for the 2009-2010 year, as well as on the longer
Strategies.Clifford Bragdon, Florida Tech Dr. Bragdon is a Distinguished Research Professor, and Associate Provost and Dean at Florida Institute of Technology. He has authored five books and over 100 articles as well as either a PI or Co-PI on over $50,000,000 worth of university based research. Previous to FIT he was Associate Vice-President, Associate Dean and Professor at Georgia Institute of Technology. Previously he was Vice President and Dean of the School of Aviation and Transportation at Dowling College and the Director of the National Aviation and Transportation Center in New York. His Ph.D. is in the field of City Planning from the University of Pennsylvania.Dennis Kulonda, Florida Tech
presentation component, butis most evident during research, writing, and presentation aspects of a graduate student’seducation.In the following section, we introduce our online MSME program, and show how these threetheories ground our vision and decisions, yielding success in growing a thriving online MSMEprogram.II. Program planning and design: Grounding the program theoreticallyThe early vision for this program was grounded in foundational theories that permeated everydepartmental level of decision-making and program management while balancing pragmatic andfinancial considerations. Here, we introduce the pragmatic requirements of the program; in therest of the paper we describe features of the program that demonstrate how our three primarytheories
are followed by a debrief toprovide constructive feedback for improving teaching effectiveness. TAs are required toconduct two surveys during first semester in which they are appointed. The Early SemesterSurvey (ESS) enables students to provide critical early feedback so that TAs can makeadjustments to their teaching practices. At the end of the semester, the TA version of theuniversity’s Course Instructor Survey (CIS) is conducted. This paper presents an overview of theprogram with a focus on the certification curriculum, data analyses of the effectiveness of the TACertification Program, along with lessons learned and plans for further development of theprogram.Program Motivation and ObjectivesThe development of the Engineering TA
University of California, Berkeley. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineering at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Dr. Crockett is a specialist in technology development and commercialization of advanced materials and manufacturing processes. Prior to joining Cal Poly, he was founder and President of Xeragen, Inc., a San Luis Obispo-based biotechnology startup company. He has also served as an Assistant Professor at Milwaukee School of Engineering and was employed by McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company, where he was a lead engineer and Principal Investigator on projects to develop technology evolution plans for the Space Station
followed procedures discussed in Lavallee et al.6 with a few modifications,as explained later. There are eight stages in the iSLR process: 1. Review planning: Plan the review effort and training activities. 2. Question formulation: Define the research questions. 3. Search strategy: Define the review scope and search strings. 4. Selection process: Define inclusion and exclusion criteria. 5. Strength of the evidence: Define what makes a high quality paper. 6. Analysis: Extract the evidence from the selected papers. 7. Synthesis: Structure the evidence in order to draw conclusions. 8. Process monitoring: Ensure the process is repeatable and complete.6Furthermore, Lavallee et al.6
revisitthe material for several years; in the interim, she completed her doctorate, spent a year as a post-doctoral researcher while teaching as an adjunct at a regional comprehensive university, workedin industry for a time, and then accepted an academic position.BackgroundGraduate students in engineering have a variety of motivations for pursuing their education.While some are focused primarily on research and plan to continue that focus in industry oracademia, others have a strong interest in teaching, and plan to pursue an educational career at ateaching-focused institution. Some universities, in their efforts to promote outreach and expandthe population of future engineering students, recruit these graduate students into outreachprograms
to ensure that all students have a common knowledgebase in engineering, plant sciences, and data sciences, no matter their background. The goal is toget all students communicating in the same language. The course “Fundamentals of PredictivePlant Phenomics” was developed to meet this challenge. The course planning took nearly oneyear and incorporated input from faculty with various disciplinary backgrounds. The actualcourse is coordinated by an engineering faculty member and taught through a series of guestlecturers covering various plant science, data science, and engineering topics over a 15-weekperiod. In addition to the three 50-minute lectures per week, a 3-hour laboratory each weekprovides an experiential learning opportunity where
in engineering and developing a betterunderstanding of their experiences and motivations as compared to direct-pathway students,those students who begin a PhD shortly after completing their undergraduate degree. This paperfocuses on the findings of this first survey phase, specifically findings related to describingreturners’ past work and education experiences, their processes for deciding to pursue a PhD andselecting an institution, information about their PhD programs, and their plans upon completingthe degree. We aim to use findings from our study to inform efforts to better recruit graduatereturners, support these students throughout their academic careers, and learn more to betterutilize their unique skills and perspectives within both
purposeful ‘creativeproblem-solving’ that is needs-driven, encompassing all phases of problem recognition,formulation, and solution. In its broadest sense, the essence of creative engineering practiceencompasses the functions of needs-recognition, vision, conceptual planning and creative designfor the generation and development of new technology and executive engineering leadershiproles of organization and responsible leadership to bring new, improved, and breakthrough ‘ideasand concepts’ to practical use in the creative solution of the hopes, wants, and needs of people Page 13.561.4for the advancement and improvement of the quality of life (both
a longitudinal tracking assessment. The annual evaluation has been an assessmentfixture of the program since the mentoring program began in 1998. It asks participants questionsabout the frequency and type of contact between mentors and mentees, questions related toperceived impacts on retention and career planning, as well as others ways participants feel theprogram may have benefited them. The university’s student database is used to follow the Page 12.1059.2degree progress of mentoring students. The student database allows program staff to collectaccurate enrollment data about graduate students. Additionally, it allows program staff to
Students for the Academic Job Market through a Training Program Inspired by Peer ReviewIntroduction The existence of a gender gap in the STEM fields is very prevalent across universities inthe United States1. According to data collected by the National Science Foundation, from 2002-2012 roughly 40% of doctoral degrees in STEM fields were conferred to women, yet in 2010,women accounted for only 27% of tenure-track assistant professorships in engineering.2 Thislowered representation of women in upper divisions of academia is not due to a lack of interest.The Royal Society of Chemistry in London found in a 2006 survey that 70% of first year femalestudents planned to be in a research career, yet only 37% had that goal by their third
American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 A broader impacts course for engineering graduate studentsAbstractThis paper describes the development and first offering feedback of a course for engineeringgraduate students aimed at introducing students to the notion of broader impacts of engineeringresearch. During the course, students explored ways in which an engineer’s activities canpotentially benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societaloutcomes. The course incorporated lectures from the instructor and invited speakers. Studentsdeveloped a personal broader impacts plan that is aligned with their personal and professionalinterests and goals. Students demonstrated attainment of course outcomes
transfer in the marketplace.The Board of Governors for the University of North Carolina (BGUNC) system echoed theawareness that the UNC system must play a “more direct, active role in economic development”in the state in its 2004-2009 Long Range Plan 17. In a study for the UNC system by the ResearchTriangle Institute on technology transfer capacity, it was noted that some campuses lacked theinfrastructure to support the process of bringing technology to the commercial stage. Among itsaction steps to improve outreach and engagement, the BGUNC identified the need to foster anenterprising university culture. In July 2000 the North Carolina General Assembly gave theBGUNC the authority to designate areas of campus land as Millennial Campuses which are
-credit course offered in beginning of the second year of the MID program duringthe residency week. It is designed as a weeklong intensive course in which the students work onit from Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Figure 1 depicts the design and scheduleof the course. FRIDAY FINAL PRESENTATION ¾ RESULTS PRESENTATION ¾ CHANGE IN MANAGEMENT PROCESS IDENTIFIED THURSDAY MONDAY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Award, 1998, and the ASEE College Industry Partnerships Division Best Session Award, 1997. Page 25.68.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 A MODEL FOR DIVERSITY AND EQUITY: DIVERSITY IN ENGINEERING GRADUATE EDUCATIONAbstractA model of Diversity and Equity for building inclusive excellence in graduate engineeringeducation is proposed as a systemic action plan for achieving high diversity and equity impactsin women and underrepresented minority (URM) STEM graduate education. The proposedmodel is implemented through the following six strategic dimensions
globalizing profession, the challenges facingengineers in a developing country, the development of professional “soft skill” learningoutcomes not easily taught in traditional classrooms and to get first-hand experience inwhat engineering is ultimately about: building things that make people’s lives better.Components of the program include service learning project development, managementand installation and the development of leadership, teaming and communication skills setwithin a developing country - Peru. The service learning component was the installationof 18 solar panels in three remote Peruvian Amazon villages. The service part of thegraduate course, built upon previously established UA-Peru connections, involved theconception, planning and
within the CoE, planning, organizing, and staffing variousactivities and events throughout the year. These activities and events generally centered onengineering and higher education but covered a very broad spectrum, ranging from hostingpanels such as “Getting into Graduate School” and “Applying for an Academic Position,”organizing a multicultural fair: “The Martin Luther King Celebration,” managing a summer longresearch seminar series. This approach was driven by the lack of alternative sponsors within theCoE and the interest of the student members. Over the years this led to recognized success in theform of winning - two years in a row - the University of Michigan Elaine Harden Award,awarded to the Michigan Engineering student society that
the assembly of existingcourses, curricula, or educational programs that already exist across the country. Rather, the NationalCollaborative Task Force is taking a deliberate planned, engineering systems approach to the situation inorder to re-engineer a professional component of graduate engineering education, that is professionally-oriented, practice-centered, and focused on accelerating innovation in industry, specifically designed tomeet the progressive needs, skill-sets, and responsibilities of upward mobile engineers who are pursuingengineering and engineering leadership careers directly relevant to the practice of engineering.3.2 The Power of Collaboration in theAdvancement of Professional Engineering Education in the National
Creative group.Creative opportunities provided by the assignments given to the students: Throughout the coursecreativity was persued in the form of fourteen assignments. Once every week an assignment wasissued. In each assignment students were required to plan, design or optimize a trafficengineering component. The following traffic engineering components were selected during thecourse; volume adjustment, saturation flow adjustment, capacity analysis, level of service andsplit of green, amber and red times. Creativity comes from the need. Therefore creativity wasgenerated by creating the necessity for the students in each assignment. The necessity wasorganized in the form of restrictions and challenges. The restrictions created the challenges to
institutional type (community colleges, liberal artscolleges, research universities, etc.). Faculty roles and responsibilities, the academic job searchand hiring process, promotion and tenure, diversity in academia, disciplinary paradigms andassessment, are the topics discussed within the five contexts of teaching, research, service,faculty development, and balancing academic and personal life. GRAD 59000 is posted to theacademic transcript and cannot be used to fulfill Plan of Study requirements.(2) Professional development workshops. Based on a building block framework, each buildingblock is composed of a student learning outcome, content supporting the learning outcome, agroup activity to engrain the content, a self-reflection activity to facilitate
AC 2011-355: IMPLEMENTING THE MASTERS FOR ENGINEERINGPROFESSIONALS DEGREE AT NJITStephen J. Tricamo, New Jersey Institute of Technology Page 22.825.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Implementing the Master’s for Engineering Professionals Degree at NJITAbstract This paper reports on a plan for implementing a Master’s for Engineering Professionals atNew Jersey Institute of Technology. The Master’s for Engineering Professionals is intended forthe early career development of engineers in industry. It teaches the skill sets and abilitiesrequired of these
than what is required to sustain economic need (President's Council of Advisors onScience and Technology Policy Report, PCAST, 2012). Poor quality introductory courses are citedas reasons why STEM students do not persist in their planned majors (O'Neal et al., 2007; PCAST,2012). Graduate TAs teach many of these courses, and although they are not cited as a majorreason for STEM majors leaving, can certainly contribute to overall success or failure of a course(O'Neal et al., 2007). TAs may not have prior teaching experience and/or any training to teach, as graduateprograms typically focus largely on research training. Furthermore, they may not haveopportunities for teaching professional development. This can lead to challenges, not only
programs. After an overview of the PEGS program, thequalitative analysis tools used and their results are presented. The paper concludes with adiscussion of results and future plans to improve the PEGS21 program and its assessment methods.PEGS21 ProgramThe PEGS21 program at UC Davis seeks to examine the transition from undergraduate to graduatestudy in engineering, extending the research of Gardner (2007), Gardner and Holley (2011) andTate et al. (2014) who identified five following challenges to graduate degree attainment in first-generation students. 1) Breaking the Chain: Low-income, academically-talented, first-generation (LIATFG) graduate students may have to overcome obstacles to enter and persist in graduate study and their
recommendations for individuals wishing to try such a courseformat.IntroductionThe Research Methods course evolved from restructuring the graduate program in 2001 initiatedby a new department head joining the Department of Mechanical Engineering. At that time, thegraduate program offered a thesis only BS/MS (and MS option for those who had alreadycompleted their BS degree), and had done so for the past thirty years. Over the years, a largenumber students accepted into the program were not research oriented, and were more focusedon getting to work in industry in the shortest possible time. Many of these students completedtheir coursework, and accepted a job before completing their thesis, planning to finish it in theevenings and on weekends. For many
completed online, in response to an email distributed through the surveysoftware. In an effort to encourage faculty mentor participation (and avoid the appearance of“checking up” on the mentors), it was decided to conduct both surveys anonymously. The pre-experience survey explored the research mentors’ preparation for working with undergraduateresearchers. Mentors were asked about how they planned to communicate with theirundergraduate researchers, and whether they had discussed general expectations (e.g., student’srole in the research, working hours) and more specific concerns (e.g., responsible conduct ofresearch, lab safety or procedures). For classification purposes, the pre-experience survey askedmentors about their prior experiences with
. Include industrial and/or sponsor decision makers in the program planning right from the beginning. This is essential for such considerations as intellectual property, confidentiality and program content delineation. 8. Provide sufficient (more than anticipated) support to both faculty and students for using distance learning technologies. 9. Showing faculty the opportunities for converting such activity into tangible scholarship that affects their promotability and merit evaluations. 10. An absolute requirement for responsiveness of faculty, i.e., maintaining frequent contact, via any means available with their advisees in the program. Because of the nature of business, this clientele has far