Engineering Kimberly Cook-Chennault is an Assistant Professor in the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering De- partment at Rutgers University and Associate Director for the Center for Advanced Energy Systems (CAES). She holds B.S. and M.S. degrees in mechanical engineering from the University of Michigan and Stanford University, respectively, and a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from the University of Michi- gan. Prior to receiving her doctorate, Cook-Chennault worked at Ford Motor Company, Cummins Engine, Visteon, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories as a summer intern and Project Engineer. As a product engineer with Ford and Visteon, she designed seat and washer bottle assemblies, and established design
. Her work also focuses on improving access and equity for women and students of color in STEM fields.Janet Yowell, University of Colorado, Boulder Janet Yowell is the Associate Director of K-12 Engineering Education at the University of Colorado’s Integrated Teaching and Learning Laboratory. Involved in the College’s outreach initiative since 2000, she oversees the ambitious K-12 engineering initiative, including the capacity-building and school partnership programs. She is a collaborator on the NSF-funded TEAMS Program (Tomorrow’s Engineers... creAte. iMagine. Succeed.) and the TeachEngineering digital library for which she is a contributing curriculum writer and editor.Jayne Aiken, University of Colorado at Boulder
theparents and children sat in quiet apprehension until we started the welcome ceremony. Only 21out of 25 students arrived; this would require us to call “alternate” students that would arriveTuesday morning. In total, 23 students attended the SVCC; thirteen boys and nine girls. Threestudents were African-American and nineteen were Hispanic. The average age of the SVCCparticipant was fifteen years old.Once the parents left, we led the students to the engineering computer labs to start their week ofcomputer lessons. We used the Engr 10: Introduction to Engineering laboratories for thisproject. In 2007-2008, the College invested over $300K in updating the Engr 10 laboratories.The Engr 10 labs consist of two adjacent rooms with computer workstations on
, especially in mathematics. Mathematics should be taught in such a way that peoplenot only will be able to use mathematics to solve problems, but also will want to usemathematics, and will think of mathematics as a friendly, useful tool, rather than a nemesis to beavoided at all costs.8 Page 12.628.4 2Research on Computer Based Laboratories for teaching mathematics is encouraging. Accordingto Van Dyke, by introducing the Computer Based Laboratory (CBL) tool, teachers will be able towitness that by using a tool to help students (and teachers) visualize
Paper ID #12025A Robotics-Focused Instructional Framework for Design-Based Research inMiddle School ClassroomsMr. Matthew Moorhead, NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering Matthew Moorhead received his B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Nevada, Reno, in 2014. He is currently pursuing a M.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering at NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering, Brooklyn, NY, where he is a teaching fellow in their GK-12 program. Matthew also conducts research in the Mechatronics and Controls Laboratory with an interest in robotics and controls.Dr. Jennifer B Listman, NYU Polytechnic School of
Paper ID #12024Using Robotics as the Technological Foundation for the TPACK Frameworkin K-12 ClassroomsAnthony Steven Brill, NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering Anthony Brill received his B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Nevada, Reno, in 2014. He is currently a M.S. student at the NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering, studying Me- chanical Engineering. He is also a fellow in their GK-12 program, promoting STEM education. He conducts research in the Mechatronics and Controls Laboratory, where his interests include controls and multi-robot systems.Dr. Jennifer B Listman, NYU Polytechnic School
in-depth project provided by the industrial mentor or communitypartner. The experience was enhanced through field trips to the industrial mentors’ sites, guestspeakers, laboratory experiences and tours, technical writing seminars, as well as history andethics of engineering innovation sessions. Additionally, the participants were guided through awell-structured curriculum writing experience modeled after that used for a highly successfulregional STEM teacher professional development program. Through this experience, the teamsmade use of a curriculum template that was developed to ensure that the resulting lessonsprovided high quality inquiry based STEM experiences for the students that included concepts ofengineering innovation and design
attack.Field Trip to Mississippi State UniversityThe Mississippi Governor’s School is held at the Mississippi University for Women, a primarilyliberal arts institution located in Columbus, MS. As part of the course, all of the students weretaken on a one-day field trip to Mississippi State University, located approximately 20 milesaway in Starkville, MS. The students were given guided tours of three research facilities. Thefirst was the Aerospace Engineering wind tunnel laboratory. The tour included both a subsonicand supersonic wind tunnel. The students were shown a demonstration of drag in the subsonictunnel, including a demonstration of the effects of dimples on the drag for a sphere, a topic thatwas later discussed in more detail during the
they already know and careabout 3) demonstrate that women can make a positive impact on the world with a career inengineering. WIT is currently surveying past participants to see if the increased positiveperception is maintained over time.Women in Technology has hosted a Girl Technology Workshop 2-3 times per year since the2008 academic year. This workshop is led by female Engineering Technology students with Page 22.1671.14support from female faculty members. The workshop introduces engineering concepts to 4th -7thgrade girls through a series of interactive laboratory experiments. The day-long workshops wereoriginally exclusively offered
be considered as creating new knowledge––the teachers were afforded the uniqueopportunity to explore those distinctions during the program. Several teachers participated in thedesign and implementation of engineering apparatus that were in turn used in addressing theirresearch questions. Another teacher designed and supervised the implementation of anengineering measurement system from the low cost materials available in the laboratory fordeveloping the stress-strain curve for hydro-gels reinforced with nano-particles.16The National Research Council publication, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, andSchool,3 describes best practices for supporting students as they develop flexible knowledge. Oneoutcome of the “How People Learn” (HPL
Student Association Outstanding Mentor Award, the Drexel University ECE Outstanding Research Achievement Award and the International Liquid Crystal Society Multimedia Prize. In 2003, he received a NASA/ASEE Summer Faculty Fellowship to research NEMS/MEMS adaptive optics in the Microdevices Laboratory at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.Eli Fromm, Drexel University Dr. Eli Fromm is the Roy A. Brothers University Professor and Director of the Center for Page 15.1273.1 Educational Research in the College of Engineering of Drexel University. He has held a number of academic leadership positions and
content knowledge, consisting of prior experience, knowledge of heuristics, ability to work within tight constraints, ability to make trade-offs, ability to change design in the course of a project, ability to design for manufacturability, and ability to conform to the needs of a customer. (p. 44)It is important to note that although there is the zone of divergence, in many instancestechnology educators are already providing many important aspects of engineering designcontent in high schools. Technology education classrooms and laboratories provide studentswith opportunities to work on ill-structured problems in realms of energy, construction,manufacturing, communication and transportation.9 Lewis notes that “students
while living in aresidence hall on campus or a field site, supervised by undergraduate student mentors.One of the goals of the programs is to encourage participating students to become academicallyprepared for careers in the STEM fields. Explorations are led by Michigan Tech faculty andgraduate students, and take place using Michigan Tech’s research and clinical laboratories andother facilities. Tech’s precollege programs began with the Summer Youth Program (SYP),initiated in 1973 to offer students the opportunity to investigate academic and career areas, and tospend time on a university campus. Today Youth Programs offers competitive scholarships -funded by state and corporate partners - for a variety of outreach workshops designed to
students are female, 35% are non-White/Caucasian, 22% are special needs students, and about 14% have been designated as“gifted.” He spends about 25% of this teaching in lecture/demonstration, with the rest of itsupervising students working in the classroom or laboratory components of the TechnologyEducation course. He believes that 67.7% of his instruction “engages students in problem-solving activities” and believes that nearly half (48.7%) of that instruction “engages students inlearning mathematics or science.”We found significant differences between Middle School Technology Education and HighSchool Technology Education. Table 1 identifies some of these differences.Table 1: Differences between Middle School and High School Technology Education
30 4.53 4.67 4.37 Page 14.1363.4 Up, Up, & Away 27 4.52 4.44 2.93 Airplane Design 28 4.50 4.54 4.64 Nestlé: Scale-Up Design 16 4.44 4.56 4.38 Cholera 27 4.30 4.30 3.74 Parallel Sorting 29 4.14 4.31 3.59 High Voltage Laboratory Tour 28 4.11 4.29 4.25 Engineering Drawing 29 4.10
(6), 356-361. [3] Koszalka, T. (2002). Technology resources as a mediating factor in career interest development. Educational Technology and Society, 5(2), 29. [4] Ogot, M., & Kremer, G. (2006). Developing a framework for Disassemble/Analyze/Assemble (DAA) activities in engineering education. Chicago, IL. [5] Donovan, E. (1982). The influence of the eighth grade science teacher's gender, classroom laboratory emphasis, level of understanding of science and career interest on eighth grade girls' science and engineering career interests. Florida Institute of Technology, University Microfilms International. [6] Sheppard, S. D., 1992, "Mechanical Dissection: An Experience in How Things Work," Proceedings of the
variables intervene.Researchers have used the TPB5,28-29, and its predecessor, the theory of reasoned action30 topredict education-related behaviors. Butler31 found that attitudes toward science and social normsregarding science were significant predictors of elementary and middle school students‟intentions to complete their laboratory and non-laboratory science assignments, readings, andprojects. Crawley and Black32 showed that attitudes, norms, and perceived control significantlypredicted 8th through 11th graders‟ intentions to enroll in a high school physics class. Davis andcolleagues33 found the TPB to be an accurate model in predicting African American high schoolstudents‟ intentions to complete high school, which predicted graduation three
in 1991, the same year he received a Ph.D. in chemical engineering from Prince- ton University. He also holds an M.A. (Princeton, 1981) and a B.S. (Rice, 1980) in chemical engineering. For three years prior to joining the UA, Baygents was a Visiting Scientist, then a Research Fellow, at the Space Science Laboratory of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. In 1995, he received the Arizona Mortar Board Senior Honor Society award for outstanding faculty service. In 1997, he was awarded an International Research Fellowship by the National Science Foundation for study at the University of Melbourne. In 2009, he was recognized by ChEE and the College for Excellence at the Student Interface. He is a
scanners and other mobile devices in Holtsville, N.Y. His largely experimental research is focused on parametric studies of novel lightweight composites and simulations of functionally-graded materials under load.Vikram Kapila, Polytechnic Institute of New York University VIKRAM KAPILA is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Polytechnic Institute of NYU, Brooklyn, NY, where he directs an NSF funded Web-Enabled Mechatronics and Process Control Re- mote Laboratory, an NSF funded Research Experience for Teachers Site in Mechatronics, and an NSF funded GK-12 Fellows project. He has held visiting positions with the Air Force Research Laboratories in Dayton, OH. His research interests are in cooperative control
) program at Tennessee TechUniversity during the summer of 2009. The program provided the teachers with the opportunityto experience the full cycle of research from formulating a research question and a research plan,to carrying out the research plan along side mentors who acted as consultants to the teachers.The two of the participants were a high school math teacher and a pre-service high schoolchemistry teacher. Although the two participants worked in the same fuel cell laboratory andshared to some extent the same mentor, the focus of their research and how they would take backtheir experience to class was completely different. The math teacher focused on research aimedat trying to identify patterns in the response of a PEM fuel cell under
PhD in 2000, Page 24.868.4Dr. Seybold took a position with Cal Tech / NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) inCalifornia. During the period from 1993 to 1999, TSGC handled the agenda, application processand logistics while LPI handled the production of learning materials, speakers, and tours. Whena full-time Education and Outreach Coordinator (the first author) was hired at TSGC, a LiftOffplanning committee was formed and the program became much more tightly structured.Members of the committee include NASA engineers, NASA education staff, former participants,space industry staff, and TSGC staff.Initially, our focus was on providing teachers with
? Page 12.712.7 Figure 2. Advanced Scientific Process and Application Skills For the morning session of the second workshop day, the teachers were divided into twogroups. One group went to the Auburn University Solar House shown in Figure 3. This housewas constructed for the 2002 Solar Decathlon competition held in Washington D.C. by the USDepartment of Energy. The operation of the electrical system in the solar house was describedand related to the ideas and concepts presented on the first day of the workshop. The solar housewas utilized as a platform to discuss energy efficiency in the design and construction ofresidential dwellings. A second group convened in a computer laboratory to discuss weatherdata. A real-time
by Engineering Faculty: Lectures, laboratory tours, and hands-on activities were conducted by biomedical, environmental, and chemical engineering faculty who presented university-level science content. • Demonstration and Practice with EiE Modules: a) Best of Bugs: Agricultural Engineering - Students learn about the role of insects in the natural system of pollination and the concept of Integrated Pest Management. Students design a hand pollinator. b) Just Passing Through: Bioengineering - Students learn about the ways bioengineers use their knowledge about the basic needs of organisms when designing technologies. Students design a model membrane
techniques16,17. The DTEACh program demonstrates toteachers how the engineering design problem-solving process provides a way for students tolearn math and science concepts through Active Learning. DTEACh is supported by the CockrellSchool of Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin, and is led by engineeringprofessors. The program provides guidance to K-12 teachers on how to use open-endedproblems in their classrooms. Each institute comprises one week of instruction in engineeringconcepts through the use of everyday technology, directed laboratory activities, and designbriefs. The pedagogy used in the institutes, summarized in the next section, is similar to the 5Emethod (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate)18. The institutes are
Engineering. Until recently, she served as a research faculty member of the department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering (NAME). Through her tenure in the NAME department, she became an integral and managing member of the department’s Ocean Engineering Laboratory, and more recently the Marine Hydrodynamics Laboratories. Her main research experience and interests lie in the development of understanding of the influence of physical processes on the nearshore zone. Most of this work has focused on the Great Lakes and associated larger inland water bodies, with some work on ocean coastal regions as well. Many of the research projects in which she has been involved host an
the product’s behavior during testing cannot shapeiterative design efforts if they go unnoticed. What students learn as they iteratively plan, buildand test their designs depends in part on whether their attention is focused or diffused. Helpingteachers to get students to notice critical and problematic features in their designs is a challengethat may be helped with the simple application of the 4-item diagnostic reasoning protocol usedin this study, though the efficacy of such actions will require future testing in laboratory andclassroom settings. Page 13.1259.9REFERENCESAxton, T. R., Doverspike, D., Park, S. R., & Barrett, G. V. (1997
AC 2009-918: TEACHING ENGINEERING IN SINGLE-GENDERMIDDLE-SCHOOL CLASSROOMSJoy Watson, University of South CarolinaJed Lyons, University of South Carolina Page 14.1134.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Teaching Engineering in Single Gender Middle School Classrooms AbstractStudents in middle school are often given pre-planned laboratory experiments which providelittle or no opportunity to develop creativity or problem solving skills. This paper describes aninvestigation of middle school students’ reactions to an open-ended engineering design problem,specifically to create a machine to move a Cheerio™ or a plastic egg seventy centimeters. If theproblem was solved
undergraduate students in the COE.Departmental Tours/DemonstrationsIn general the participants spent the mornings of the camp with the 12 departments in the COE.This time was intended to introduce the participants to the various engineering disciplinesincluding future career opportunities, and the types of classes they would be taking in that major.The tours varied in content and style from department to department. For the most part, theyincluded presentations, laboratory tours, and/or hands-on demonstrations.Design ProjectsThe afternoons and evening were used to prepare a design project. The participants at each campwere divided, roughly equally into 3 groups of approximately 20 participants, and assigned to aparticular design project. This division
providesguidance to K-5 teachers on how to use open-ended problems in their classrooms. The institutesinclude one week of instruction in engineering concepts through the use of everyday technology, Page 14.383.2directed laboratory activities, and design briefs. The institutes are designed to model the teachingmethods the participants will use in their classrooms. Previous assessment has focused on theimmediate and long term effectiveness of the institutes using surveys and focus groups4,5. Thisstudy focuses on how the prototyping process with LEGO Mindstorms in open-ended designprojects can be improved.Focus groups consisting of DTEACh practioners have