initiative strongly supports the efficacy of the QM program and provides evidence thatthe use of Quality Managers has appreciably improved activities in classroom and lab settingsand has enhanced the academic experience of the QM’s themselves.Introduction and BackgroundIn their work on engineering education, Upadhyay et al., state, “Quality consciousness hasbecome a central theme for any human endeavor in today’s competitive world. The system ofhigher education is not devoid of this concept.”9 Baldwin another educational advocate, refers tomeeting the challenges in our current STEM classrooms and considers possible innovativesolutions to such demands: “Today many of the efforts to strengthen undergraduate education inScience, Technology Engineering
students and faculty; and the 2008 Hewlett-Packard/Harriett B. Rigas Award from the IEEE Education Society in recognition of her contribution to the profession. Dr. Schrader earned her B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Valparaiso University, and her M.S. in Electrical Engineering and Ph.D. in Systems and Control from University of Notre Dame.Seung Youn Chyung, Boise State University Seung Youn (Yonnie) Chyung is a professor in the Department of Instructional and Performance Technol- ogy in the College of Engineering at Boise State University. She received her Doctor of Education degree in Instructional Technology from Texas Tech University and teaches graduate-level courses on evaluation methodology. Her research
similar strategies toincrease student engagement and encourage in-depth discussions without drastically increasinginstructor effort to re-format course content.IntroductionThere is a growing body of literature that supports an educational shift from being instructor-centered to student-centered, especially regarding science, technology, engineering, andmathematics (STEM) curriculum [14]. Student-centered learning (SCL) strategies have beenlinked to improved student learning and increased student satisfaction [1]–[3]. As a result, a largenumber of educational and governmental bodies have called for an increase focus on SCL inSTEM curriculum [1], and have even invested a significant amount of time and money towardthe research and development of SCL
informal study groups. In follow upinterviews and focus groups, students also chose to discuss their experiences in study groups(83%) or lab groups (82%) but also commented frequently on their participation in professionalsocieties. Of these students, most (87%) found benefit in participating in these groups, and amajority of the students (72%) felt that they benefitted in ways related to operating within thegroup as an integral part of the team. Most students stressed the social learning provided by thegroup as compared to a single individual working alone.IntroductionABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) requires that every undergraduateengineering student is active in teams (either formed by faculty or self-assembled) at
Paper ID #11847Using Humor to Create a Positive Learning EnvironmentProf. Ralph Ocon, Purdue University Calumet (College of Technology) Page 26.1667.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Using Humor to Create a Positive Learning EnvironmentAbstractHow to enhance student learning is a critical issue in academia. Throughout the author’sacademic career, teaching effectiveness has always been an on-going challenge.Consequently, he has experimented with different teaching techniques and approaches.The author’s
Paper ID #15913Formative Peer Assessment of TeachingDr. Stephanie Ann Claussen, Colorado School of Mines Stephanie Claussen’s experience spans both engineering and education research. She obtained her B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2005. Her Ph.D. work at Stan- ford University focused on optoelectronics, and she continues that work in her position at the Colorado School of Mines, primarily with the involvement of undergraduate researchers. In her role as an Associate Teaching Professor, she is primarily tasked with the education of undergraduate engineers. In her courses
2006-1447: RESEARCH IN THE UNDERGRADUATE ENVIRONMENTPeter Schuster, California Polytechnic State University Peter Schuster is interested in automotive safety, impact, biomechanics, finite element analysis, and design. He earned a Physics BA from Cornell University, MSME in design from Stanford University, and Ph.D. in biomechanics from Michigan Technological University. After ten years in body design and automotive safety at Ford Motor Company he joined the Mechanical Engineering department at Cal Poly. He teaches mechanics, design, stress analysis, and finite element analysis courses and serves as co-advisor to the student SAE chapter.Charles Birdsong, California Polytechnic State University
; Learning, vol. 24, p. 38, May2004.[10] R. Bloede, “Rubrics for drafting and engineering classes,” Tech Directions, vol. 60, pp. 30-31, Dec. 2000.[11] G. Boyd and M.F. Hassett, “Developing critical writing skills in engineering and technology students,” Journalof Engineering Education, vol. 89, pp. 409-412, Oct. 2000.[12] J. Brocato, B. Chapman, and J. Harden, “Improving the writing-evaluation abilities of graduate teachingassistants in ECE labs,” in Proc. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, 2005.Appendix A Survey of Digital Devices and Logic Design (ECE 3714) Students Concerning RubricsOf the six labs completed to date, for how many labs have you used the grading rubrics toprepare?For each of the following statements, rank your
AC 2008-2089: MEETING THE MENTORING NEEDS OF NEW FACULTY: ANINTERDISCIPLINARY EXPERIENCEB. Elizabeth Jones, Tarleton State UniversityDenise Martinez, Tarleton State University Page 13.886.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Meeting the Mentoring Needs of New Faculty: An Interdisciplinary ExperienceAbstractEvery new job presents its challenges, especially when an employee has the feeling of beingisolated. This paper will describe how a campus-wide faculty mentoring and networkinginitiative evolved from a one-day new faculty orientation into a university-supported new facultycohort program utilizing web resources, brown
AC 2008-2407: COMMERCIAL BREAKS IN THE CLASSROOMSeth Norberg, United States Military Academy Page 13.301.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 “Commercial Breaks in the Classroom” by Seth NorbergAbstractAfter teaching a required undergraduate thermal-fluid systems course in the spring of2006 to a broad assortment of engineering students at the United States MilitaryAcademy, many of whom saw no point in their enrollment in the course, various methodswere attempted to spur their interest, keep their attention, and liven the discussion. Thenecessity of a “commercial break” in the classroom was recognized
15 5 *STEM: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math based coursesTable 4 shows that while nearly half of the freshmen (49%) believed that math and science courses weremore suited to lecture, an equal percentage also believed that engineering courses (Engineering Design inparticular) were more suited to active learning. An additional 13% believed that STEM courses in generalwere more suited to active learning. The higher top values may be due to the fact that this is the first timethat these students are exposed to engineering; thus, active learning allows them to grasp the complexitiesinvolved in the engineering curriculum. Further, this population has only had limited exposure to theother types of courses at the
Paper ID #33769A UDL-Based Large-Scale Study on the Needs of Students with Disabilitiesin Engineering CoursesDr. Jennifer R. Amos, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Dr Amos joined the Bioengineering Department at the University of Illinois in 2009 and is currently a Teaching Associate Professor in Bioengineering and an Adjunct Associate Professor in Educational Psychology. She received her B.S. in Chemical Engineering at Texas Tech and Ph.D. in Chemical En- gineering from University of South Carolina. She completed a Fulbright Program at Ecole Centrale de Lille in France to benchmark and help create a new
for Engineering, at the National Science Foundation from 2017-2019. In 2018, Dr. Martin represented the Foundation in an interagency group, managed by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, charged with writing the 5-Year STEM Education Strategic Plan ”Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for Stem Education for the US government.” Dr. Martin served as a member of the writing team for that document, published in December of that year. Dr. Martin has held faculty appointments at Clemson University (2008-2019) and the University of Hous- ton (2004-2008) where she was the Director of Recruitment and Retention for the Cullen College of Engineering. Since 2004, Dr. Martin has held a
, Ireland. Page 26.1776.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Writing and Implementing Successful S-STEM ProposalsAbstractFor over 10 years, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has been funding S-STEM proposals.The S-STEM program “makes grants to institutions of higher education to support scholarshipsfor academically talented students demonstrating financial need, enabling them to enter theSTEM workforce or STEM graduate school following completion of an associate, baccalaureate,or graduate-level degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics disciplines1.”Currently
– The Bonds Between Us Website at Mississippi State University, http://www.msstate.edu/org/reubonds/index.php, Accessed 3 December, 2007.[5] Minerick, A.R. "Outcomes of a Novel REU Site in Chemistry & Chemical Engineering." Chemical Engineering Division - American Society of Engineering Education, published in meeting proceedings, 2008.Adrienne R. MinerickAdrienne Minerick is an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at Mississippi State University. She receivedher PhD and M.S. from the University of Notre Dame and B.S. from Michigan Technological University. Sincejoining MSU, Dr. Minerick has taught the graduate Chemical Engineering Math, Process Controls, Introduction toChemical Engineering Freshman Seminar, Heat Transfer
AC 2009-1738: WORKING EFFECTIVELY WITH TEACHING ASSISTANTSEdward Gehringer, North Carolina State University Ed Gehringer is an associate professor in the Department of Computer Science and the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at North Carolina State University. He has been a frequent presenter at education-based workshops in the areas of computer architecture and object-oriented systems. His research interests include architectural support for memory management, garbage collection, and computer-supported collaborative learning. He received a B.S. from the University of Detroit(-Mercy) in 1972, a B.A. from Wayne State University, also in 1972, and the Ph.D. from Purdue
AC 2009-555: EFFECTIVE CRITERIA FOR TEACHING AND LEARNINGAdrian Ieta, State University of New York, Oswego Adrian Ieta holds a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering (2004) from The University of Western Ontario, Canada. He also holds a B.Sc. in Physics from the University of Timisoara, Romania (1984), a B.E.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from the Polytechnical University of Timisoara (1992), and an M.E.Sc. from The University of Western Ontario (1999). He worked on industrial projects within the Applied Electrostatics Research Centre and the Digital Electronics Research Group at the University of Western Ontario and is an IEEE member and a registered Professional Engineer of Ontario. He
2006-1168: EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT PEDAGOGICAL TECHNIQUESJohn Marshall, University of Southern MaineJune Marshall, St. Joseph's College JUNE MARSHALL received her doctorate from North Carolina State University and is Director of Education at St. Joseph’s College in Maine. Her specialization is learning strategies focusing specifically in cooperative leaning and character education. Page 11.514.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Effective and Efficient Pedagogical TechniquesThe purpose of this paper is to identify and describe teaching tools and techniques thatwill help new faculty
professionals”who move “away from formulaic answers towards authentic engagement.”My higher-ups supported and sent me to [this workshop] to "learn from the trainers" at“school” to “learn the Olin way of thinking” and "understand how Olin is achieving suchsuccess." Our disciplines may include engineering, but we also want to bring the useful artifactsto business, economics, general studies, math, physics, and science/technology studies, to name afew.I can’t wait to meet and learn from my peers and "interact a lot" with "future collaborators"from "different experiences and backgrounds.” If I’m “willing to share my successes & failures"and "ask how they would solve problems,” I can "learn what other institutions have done" and"feel the differences
Paper ID #21186Improved Pedagogy Enabled by Assessment Using GradescopeDr. Sara A. Atwood, Elizabethtown College Dr. Sara A. Atwood is an Associate Professor and Chair of Engineering at Elizabethtown College in Penn- sylvania. She holds a BA and MS from Dartmouth College, and PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of California at Berkeley. Dr. Atwood’s research interests are in creativity, engineering design, first-generation and low-income students, internship experiences, and criterion-based course structures.Dr. Arjun Singh, Gradescope c American Society for Engineering Education
Information Systems and Entrepreneur- ship. Her research interests include Information Systems Mergers and Acquisitions, Cross-Cultural Infor- mation Systems and Commercialization of Intellectual Property. Baker’s research has been published in a variety of academic journals including the Information Systems Journal, Journal of Global Information Management, Journal of Information Privacy and Security, and Journal of Decision Systems.Prof. Anthony Evan English, Western New England University Anthony English received the Ph.D. degree in medical engineering and medical physics from the Harvard- MIT division of Health Sciences and Technology in 1996, where he received a Raytheon Fellowship. He is currently a professor at the
component.Specifically, Norris and Palmer describe a doctoral teaching intern program for engineeringstudents at Georgia Institute of Technology.1 They adopt a team-teach approach between afaculty member and doctoral student, and pay students for conducting one to two-thirds of theircourse for the quarter while the instructor is present for at least half of them. Wankat andOreovicz clarify the need for instructional programs for Ph.D. candidates specifically, provide aframework for successful programs, and describe the value of such programs at severaluniversities.2,3 Such programs also exist in doctoral programs outside of engineering. Utect andTullous describe the context and approaches used in business schools and their literature can be
large projects and portfolios, butthese are typically more time-consuming and difficult to evaluate. Page 23.1151.3 2The SurveyIn order to find out how others were using textbook exercises, we developed a web survey usingGoogle Forms and sent it to three listservs for college educators and educational researchers: thePOD Mailing List, the ACM SIGCSE Members List, and the Engineering Technology* listserv.Most of the questions on the survey were open-ended.The survey collected 142 responses. Due to the uncontrolled nature of a web survey, this
: What Do They Promise And How Can They Be Used?IntroductionStudent portfolios have been listed as a possible means of assessment under the basic levelaccreditation criteria for ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)Engineering Criteria 2000. Since then, engineering educators and researchers have started to useportfolios in their teaching and are trying to explore the potentials of portfolios. Various effortshave focused on using portfolios in engineering instruction and the results of those efforts havebeen reported in the engineering education literature. This research provides educators usefulinformation on how to use or adopt portfolios efficiently in their classrooms.However, because of the diversity of the efforts to
Assistant Professor in Industrial and Man- agement Systems Engineering at MSU with research interests in engineering education and the role of leadership and culture in process improvement and serves as an Associate Editor for both the Engineer- ing Management Journal and Quality Approaches in Higher Education. Prior to his academic career, he spent 14 years in industry where he held leadership positions focused on process improvement and organizational development.Dr. Neal Lewis, University of Bridgeport Neal Lewis received his Ph.D. in engineering management in 2004 and B.S. in chemical engineering in 1974 from the University of Missouri – Rolla (now the Missouri University of Science and Technology), and his MBA
Paper ID #16699Teaching with Graduate Teaching Assistants: Tips for Promoting High Per-formance Instructional TeamsDr. Shannon Ciston, University of California, Berkeley Shannon Ciston is a Lecturer and Director of Undergraduate Education in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Ciston holds degrees in chemical engineering from Northwestern University (PhD) and Illinois Institute of Technology (BS). She teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in technical communications and applied pedagogy, and conducts engineering education research.Dr. Colin Cerretani
Introduction to Engineering program, Engineering Transfer Success program, Engineering UGTA program, and the Elec- trical Engineering department at ASU. She is a 3-time winner of the ”Fulton Top 5% Teaching Award” and 2-time winner of ”Badass Women of ASU”. Her philosophy boasts incorporating large scale systems engineering techniques into collegiate engineering curriculum to better prepare upcoming professionals and develop a student’s resume from day one.Dr. Stephanie M. Gillespie, Arizona State University Stephanie Gillespie joined the ASU@EPICS program after finishing her Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. She has extensive experience in K-12 outreach and
in science, technology, engineering and mathematics(STEM) fields in higher education. Some institutions had extensive resources online; for theseinstitutions we focused on the 1-2 programs that we felt were most relevant and useful toengineering faculty and graduate students. Our search was limited to institutions in the UnitedStates and we did not profile any K-12 teacher education programs that require pre-serviceteachers to create teaching portfolios. We realize that future research about teaching portfolioactivities available to engineering faculty, graduate students and post-docs could includecontacting teaching and learning centers, as well as other campus units at specific institutions tofind out about teaching portfolio activities
hasgraduated more than 40 graduate students (PhD/MS), trained numerous (18) post-doctoral fellows, and providedresearch experience to several undergraduate (24) and high school students (8) and 6 school teachers, and 5corporate engineers. His graduates are leaders at key organizations, such as IBM at Almaden, University of Florida,Qualcomm Technology, Texas Instruments, etc. He has received 34 awards/recognitions, including Fellow ofAmerican Society of Materials (ASM), Fellow of American Society of Mechanical Engineering (ASME), Fellow ofthe Institute of Physics (InstP), London, UK, Frost and Sullivan Technology Excellence Award and others. He hasan extensive track record of global collaborations with academic institutions and companies from Australia
) embrace the tension between diversity and redundancy, (2) provide enabling constraints bybalancing coherence and randomness, and (3) promote trans-level learning through neighbor Page 22.1116.2interactions and decentralized control.In this paper, we provide further detail on these two sets of instructional principles anddemonstrate how we have instantiated them in cases situated in two different teaching contexts:(1) an undergraduate course involving technology and design and (2) a graduate course devotedto helping students learn to critically assess research in their field. We anticipate that byintroducing new engineering educators to these two