Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Laura D Hahn, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Chris Migotsky, University of Illinois

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

from the model in Buskit et al.:1. A pre-observation meeting with the Collins Scholar and two observers.2. The observation itself, often videotaped.3. Observer debriefing: The two observers discuss and write up a summary of their findings.4. Self-reflection: The Collins Scholar is invited to watch the video, and writes a self- Page 26.789.2 analysis of the class session.5. A post-observation meeting to discuss the class observed, the participants’ impressions, and strategies for continued improvement.The findings from Brinko’s review of the literature on the effectiveness of peer feedback haveframed and guided the way we train our observers

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Vishwas Narayan Bedekar, Middle Tennessee State University; Ahad S. Nasab, Middle Tennessee State University; Walter W. Boles, Middle Tennessee State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

modern technology, course redesign, grade distributions, andpedagogical techniques. The authors also report improved student evaluations and performancedata, and correlate them to the continually improved teaching practices adopted by a new facultymember, who was mentored by a senior faculty member and the department chair. Thepercentage of DFW grades earned by students were improved from 60% for Fall 2013 to 24% inSpring 2014 and further to 8% in Summer 2014. The midsemester feedback and suggestionsreceived from the students are also presented in this paper. The outcomes of this study over aperiod of three semesters emphasize: (1) connecting early with students, (2) using adequatemodern technology to assist classroom teaching, (3) giving timely

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Byron G. Garry, South Dakota State University; Suzette R Burckhard, South Dakota State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

hypothesize that improved learning shouldresult.” This process may be called scholarly teaching.SoTL can be defined6 in relation to three types of knowledge that teachers may possess:(1) content knowledge - knowledge of the facts, principles and methods in the disciplinethat is being taught, (2) pedagogical knowledge - understanding of the learning processand the conditions that facilitate and hinder it, independent of the discipline in which thelearning takes place, and (3) pedagogical content knowledge. This last term was coinedby Shulman9 to denote knowledge and understanding of the learning process in thecontext of a particular discipline. SoTL encompasses studies intended to advancepedagogical content knowledge that are made available for peer

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Juan C Morales, Universidad del Turabo; Michael J. Prince, Bucknell University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

faculty development program discussed in this paper, the SummerFaculty Immersion Program (SFIP), can be traced to the outcomes assessment process that wasstarted in 1999 at the School of Engineering to meet the requirements of ABET accreditation(refer to [1] for a full description of this assessment process). The first assessment instrumentthat uncovered teaching issues was the exit survey of graduating students. The students regularlycommented that there was “too much theory without context” presented in classes. Assessmentat the course level echoed the same issue. The desire to satisfy what seems like a reasonablestudent expectation led to the creation of this faculty development program. The proposal to obtain funding for SFIP was based

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Donald P. Visco Jr., University of Akron; Dirk Schaefer, University of Bath

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

looked at as a negative by a tenure committee and others, since goodteaching requires a time investment – time the tenure-track faculty member might better havespent on writing another research proposal, for example).If you have the perspective of an undergraduate student, on the other hand, a faculty member’sshortcomings in their ability and training to effectively run a course might encourage you toemphatically state that “yes”, there is a problem. Students (and their parents) will voice theirdispleasure through formalized teaching evaluations, through external instructor rating sites,through emails/phone calls to administrators, through letters in the newspaper, etc. However,many/most undergraduate students will “play the game”1 – which means

Conference Session

Research on Diversification & Inclusion

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Erin A. Cech, Rice University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

and transgender (LGBT) individuals in U.S.workplaces often face disadvantages in pay, promotion, and workplace experiences.1-7 It is stilllegal in many states to fire LGBT persons due to sexual identity or gender expression.8 Recentscholarship on the experiences of LGBT students and professionals suggests that thesedisadvantages may be particularly pernicious within science and engineering-related fields, giventhe patterns of heteronormativity and heterosexism documented therein.9-12 LGBT faculty inscience, technology, engineering and math (STEM)-related departments face harassment anddiscrimination, marginalization, and chilly departmental and classroom climates.10 In a study oftwo NASA centers, furthermore, LGBT professionals encountered

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Faisal Shaikh, Milwaukee School of Engineering

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

(laser pointers used by students) that aims to solve the shortcomings of these popularmethods. I have used this method in some of my classes with largely positive results. I willdiscuss how this can been used and how it compliments many of the common methods currentlyin use, while providing superior functionality.Current popular methods for in-class student feedbackThe popular methods commonly used for getting student feedback1,2 are listed in Table 1,alongwith their performance on a set of criteria listed in the first column. The first method(students raising hand) satisfies most of the criteria listed in the table but suffers majorly fromtwo big drawbacks. First, it is not able to involve introverts in an engineering classroom (thatnumber

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dimitra Michalaka P.E., The Citadel; William J. Davis P.E., The Citadel

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

encourage participation, prompt lively discussion, and support student comprehensionof class subject material content. Clicker quizzes were administered during numerous classsessions to reinforce concepts gained from previously required reading assignments. Quizzesranged from 3 to 27 multiple choice questions, with an average of quiz comprised of 14questions. A total of eleven clicker quizzes, including a total of 158 questions, were given tostudents during the 2013 Spring semester. Table 1 summarizes number of students participating,number of quiz questions, and student average percent grade for each clicker quiz. Studentparticipation varied from a low of 29 (63%) students to full class attendance of 46 (100%), andaveraged 88 percent class

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Evelyn C. Brown, East Carolina University; Mary A. Farwell, East Carolina University; Anthony M. Kennedy, East Carolina University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

shadow that engineer at his/her job for a half day.Survey feedback from this experience indicates the students who participate find it valuable.Table 1 below provides the 10 questions from the shadowing survey completed by participatingstudents, along with average responses. Note that a 7-point Likert rating scale was utilized. Table 1 – Shadowing Survey Questions and Average Responses Q1 I feel this experience was a rewarding and valuable experience. 6.9 Q2 I now have a better understanding of what a full time job in engineering is like. 6.8 Q3 I gained new knowledge by participating in this experience. 6.8 Q4 This experience supported/enhanced my career goals

Conference Session

Research on Diversification & Inclusion

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jane L. Lehr, California Polytechnic State University; Michael Haungs, California Polytechnic State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering reportpublished by the NSF, with significant variance by subfield.1 The proportion of womengraduating with a bachelor’s degree in computing disciplines has decreased. 1 In 2012, the U.S.Congress Joint Economic Committee affirmed that, “Women’s increased participation in theSTEM workforce is essential to alleviating the shortage of STEM workers” in the United States.2The ASEE Diversity Task Force has identified increasing the percentage of undergraduatefemale students to 25% by 2020 as a strategic goal.3 Explanations for the continuedunderrepresentation of women include the impacts of the social structures of society, educationand the professions on women’s participation, as well as the

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alexandra Coso Strong, Georgia Institute of Technology; Mary Katherine Watson, The Citadel; Donna C. Llewellyn, Boise State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

of their own learning while their instructors serve as facilitators inthe learning environment. The literature includes many different classifications for conceptionsalong this continuum22,23,24,25,26. In this study, the authors utilize five contemporary philosophiesof education to classify learning environments22,25. Two are instructor-centered, while the otherthree are learner-centered philosophies (See Table 1). Page 26.1727.5Table 1. Comparison of philosophies of education, including differences in focus of study andinstructor role (Adapted from Koch27 used in a previous work by the authors28). Philosophy Focus of

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rami Jubrail Haddad, Georgia Southern University; Youakim Kalaani, Georgia Southern University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

process. To initiatediscussions, students were asked to post their questions on an online discussion to triggerinteractions among themselves and the faculty outside the classroom. Based on the outcome ofthese discussions, a 15-minute review lecture was prepared by the faculty to address the issuesthat were raised during the student groups’ discussions. Following this brief lecture, the classwas turned into a studio environment in which students were able to put into practice what theyhave learned inside and outside the classroom. Before the end of the lecture session, an onlinequiz was administered to monitor the students' level of preparation and understanding of thetopics being covered. It was shown that the proposed model had succeeded in 1

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ralph Ocon, Purdue University, Calumet

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

forms of humor10.Table 1: Summary of Mark Nichol’s Research on Types and Forms of Humor (HumorousTechniques)10.Anecdotal Refers to comic personal stories that may be true or partly true but embellished.Blue A type of broad humor that is unrestrained, unsubtle humor often marked by coarse jokes and sexual situations.Burlesque Ridicules by imitating with caricature or exaggerated characterization.Dark/Morbid Grim or depressing humor dealing with misfortune and/or death and with a pessimistic outlook.Deadpan/Dry Humor delivered with an impassive, expressionless, matter-of

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Denise Wilson, University of Washington; Cheryl Allendoerfer, University of Washington; Rebecca A. Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Tamara Floyd Smith, Tuskegee University; Melani I. Plett, Seattle Pacific University; Nanette M. Veilleux, Simmons College; Mee Joo Kim, University of Washington

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

engineering), data from theWomen’s College were not included in this study.A multi-phased mixed-methods approach15,16, 17, 18 was used to investigate how often and in whatways engineering and computer science students at four diverse institutions spend time inacademic community outside the classroom (Figure 1). First, an exploratory sequential study Page 26.822.4(instrument development model) was completed in which focus groups with senior engineeringand computer science undergraduates were asked to identify the academic communities in whichthey had participated over the course of their undergraduate careers. Data from this phase offocus group

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Denise Wilson, University of Washington; Cheryl Allendoerfer, University of Washington; Rebecca A Bates, Minnesota State University, Mankato; Tamara Floyd Smith, Tuskegee University; Melani I. Plett, Seattle Pacific University; Nanette M Veilleux, Simmons College

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

. Furthermore, ifmost students favor or wind up in a Start alone, End together model of studying on their own ininformal academic activity, this would suggest the need for faculty and other instructors tostructure team or group activities to allow for a period of working alone before progressingtoward building genuine and productive teamwork among members of a group.IntroductionWorking together as a team has distinct benefits over working alone. In the educational context,working together in a learning-by-doing mode leads to more active learning, greater retention,increased motivation, improved communication skills, and strengthened interpersonal skills overmore solitary learning styles.1 Yet, when students form groups, whether via faculty

Conference Session

Research on Diversification & Inclusion

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Brewer, University of Georgia; Nicola Sochacka, University of Georgia; Joachim Walther, University of Georgia

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

development.Introduction Times have changed. There is a new message emerging. The future of engineering, and some would say of society, depends on its delivery. The new message starts with the recognition that engineering design is a social and humanistic field, as well as a technical and scientific one; and that, like other professions, human impact is placed at the center of the process [1].This excerpt is taken from Diane Rover’s Journal of Engineering Education AcademicBookshelf review of the National Academy of Engineering’s (NAE) Changing the Conversationreport. The conclusion of Rover’s article, much like the report she reviews, is clear – “in an ageof ‘messaging’”, messages have the power to transform engineering education.A

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ordel Brown, West Virginia University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

/quizzes include the slow response rate for students and the tediousness for instructors.Summative assessments in the form of tests and exams are not sufficient measures of students’understanding and application of knowledge 1-2. Students need continuous formative assessmentsto monitor their learning by actively evaluating their level of understanding. Additionally, thereis the present need to satisfy the dynamic technology-based demands of current engineeringstudents.In an attempt to address these challenges, a web-based audience response system was employedin an introductory engineering course at a large, land-grant university in the mid-Atlantic region.This introductory course is offered in multiple sections in the first-year engineering

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

session.Keywords: flipped class, inverted lecture, pedagogy of engagement, active learning1. Introduction“Flipped” classes have surged in popularity over the last three years, driven by the ease ofrecording and posting video content for students to watch, and the need during class timeto compete with distractions from portable electronic devices. Evidence for the benefitsof flipping is starting to mount. Studies have shown improved learning in architecturalengineering and chemistry courses [1], economics [2], and biology [3], among otherfields. Many other studies report student perceptions of improved learning [1, 4, 5] .The instructor who desires to “flip” a class confronts two issues: how to locate or createcontent for use outside of class, and how to

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ted Eschenbach P.E., University of Alaska Anchorage; Neal A Lewis, University of Bridgeport; Gillian M. Nicholls, Southeast Missouri State University; William J. Schell IV P.E., Montana State University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

transportation industry. Address: Donald L. Harrison College of Business, Southeast Missouri State University, One University Plaza – MS 5815, Cape Girardeau, MO 63701; telephone (+1) 573.651.2016; fax: (+1) 573.651.2992; e-mail: gnicholls@semo.edu.Dr. William J. Schell IV P.E., Montana State University Dr. William J. Schell holds a Ph.D. in Industrial and Systems Engineering – Engineering Management from the University of Alabama in Huntsville and M.S. and B.S. degrees in Industrial and Management Engineering (IME) from Montana State University (MSU). He is an Assistant Professor in IME at MSU with research interests in engineering education and the role of leadership and culture in process im- provement. Prior to his

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Monika Rummler, Technische Universität Berlin; Petra Nikol, Technische Universität Berlin

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

external guest lecturers teachers Phase 2: new academic teaching assistants Phase 1: pre-academic student tutorsFig. 1. Model of change agents within regular teaching staffThe following sections concentrate first on the program for regular teaching staff, inparticular the assistants, and second on the program for teaching change agents focusing onlearning and qualification goals, profile of competences and tasks, and continuing educationprogram.1) Regular academic teaching staff5Learning and training for scientific teaching staff of the continuing education program as atarget group is oriented towards activation and motivation, fostering exemplary learning andreduction of learning materials

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joseph Ranalli, Pennsylvania State University, Hazleton; Jacob Preston Moore, Pennsylvania State University, Mont Alto

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

may be especially true for new educators, who may be simultaneouslyworking to establish practical classroom experience. This paper provides an overview of onenovel pedagogical practice, mastery grading, and provides experience from a new educatorimplementing the technique for the first time. This guidance may help alleviate challenges facingother educators hoping to implement this technique and may shorten the “start-up period”associated with trying out new classroom practices. It is hoped that this will reduce fear aboutimpacts on teaching evaluations and increase the accessibility of the method, especially amongnew tenure track faculty [1].1.1 What is Mastery GradingIn this paper, the term mastery grading refers to assessment techniques

Conference Session

Research on Diversification & Inclusion

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael Lachney, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Dean Nieusma, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

K-12 & Pre-College Engineering, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

Page 26.616.2more as a metaphor for conveying students’ experience of disappointment than to insinuatemalicious intent.(i)In K-12 engineering programs, the overwhelming curricular emphasis is on engaging, design-based classroom activities: open-ended, hands-on projects requiring creative synthesis acrossmultiple domains of knowledge on the part of the student.1 In university engineering programs,students confront an educational philosophy that can be characterized as exclusionary and builtupon a “fundamentals first” approach to learning:2 analytically rigorous, rote learning of basicprinciples in math and science (e.g., calculus, chemistry, physics) followed by engineeringsciences (e.g. statics, fluid dynamics) followed by engineering analysis

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Mark T. Gordon, California Baptist University

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

of 65% of thefinal grade.ResultsStudents initially were not in favor of the flipped classroom format. As shown in Figure 1 below,55% of students responded that they liked the idea worse than a typical lecture. Only 36% ofstudents responded that they liked the idea of the format better. However, just five weeks into thesemester attitudes had already shifted. Only 9% of students said that they liked the format worse,36% said that they liked it better, and 45% said that they liked it much better. This trendcontinued to the end of the semester where 0% of the students said that they like the formatworse. Liked the Format Beginning 5 Weeks End of Semester 60

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Catherine G. P. Berdanier, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Monica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

these elements arewell defined, it is interesting to understand how the principles of stewardship are manifested inPh.D.-holding engineers. Before our work, the Stewardship framework was only applied to sixfields; engineering was not investigated. Past work by our group discusses this framework forengineering Ph.D.s in industry and academic careers14-16. Table 1: Overview of Three Stewardship Tenets as Identified by Golde and Walker12 Stewardship Tenet Definition Conservation Working to conserve the nature of the academic field for the future Generation Creation of new academic knowledge Transformation Translation of expertise to diverse audiences and purposesMethodsData

Conference Session

Leadership Development in Change: A Panel to Explore Experiences, Skills, and Learning in Change Management for New Engineering Educators

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ella Lee Ingram, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Julia M. Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

,including “evaluate the effectiveness of a designed experiment…verify and justify the solution toa complex civil engineering problem…develop and evaluate new, advanced technicalknowledge…synthesize and explain the relevance and application of new, advanced technicalknowledge…” and so on [1]. This list is admirable in its strong connection to the field of studyand the intended purposes of graduate studies, and is one that likely represents key desired out-comes of any graduate program. However, we suggest that this list does not capture many of theknowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) required for success in academic settings (e.g., identifiedin typical advice to faculty publications [2]). The lived roles of engineering educators includeswork well

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Edward F. Gehringer, North Carolina State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

will usuallybe able to see other reviewers’ comments, and be informed of the editor’s decision onwhether to accept the work. However, compared to reviewing for conferences or fundingagencies, you don’t get to see a range of work, and you don’t get to discuss it with otherexperts.It is also important to find a good mentor [1, 2], a more senior person who will work withyou and advise you. You may be able to be a co-PI on a proposal with your mentor. It isbecoming more common for universities to set up formal mentoring relationshipsmatching senior faculty with junior faculty [3]. But it’s also possible to set up aninformal relationship, maybe with someone at another institution.Students can also be helpful in preparing new ideas. Sometimes

Conference Session

New Engineering Educators Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Madeleine Arvold, Seattle Pacific University; Steven David Mow, Seattle Pacific University; Zachary W. Cook, Seattle Pacific University; Natalie Goode, Seattle Pacific University; Caitlin H. Wasilewski, Seattle Pacific University; Rida Y. Al-Hawaj, Seattle Pacific University ; Melani Plett, Seattle Pacific University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators

reporton the role of oral communication in the workplace. Communication Education, 52, 1-16.2. Borrego, M., Karlin, J., McNair, L. D., & Beddoes, K. (2013, October). Team effectiveness theory from industrialand organizational psychology applied to engineering student project teams: A research review. Journal ofEngineering Education, 102(4), 472-512.3. Prescott, D., El-Sakran, T., Albasha, L., Aloul, F., & Al-Assaf, Y. (2012, Spring). Teambuilding, innovation andthe engineering communication interface. American Journal of Engineering Education, 3(1), 29-40.4. Dannels, D. P., Anson, C. M., Bullard, L., & Peretti, S. (2003, January). Challenges in learning communicationskills in chemical engineering. Communication Education, 52, 50-56.5

Conference Session

Two Body Solutions: Strategies for the Dual-Career Job Search

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Shannon Ciston, University of California, Berkeley; Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University; Christopher M Weyant, Drexel University; Robert L. Nagel, James Madison University; Jacquelyn Kay Nagel, James Madison University; Amber L. Genau, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Kristina M. Wagstrom, University of Connecticut; Daina Briedis, Michigan State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

New Engineering Educators, Student, Women in Engineering

, prospecting via targetedemail, presenting the couple as a package deal, and balancing career with family responsibilitiesThe National Context for the Dual-Career Job SearchDual-career couples are increasingly common in the workforce in the United States.1 This trendis applicable to engineering in general, academia in general, and by extension to STEMacademics in particular. Recent reports demonstrate these trends and their impact on the STEMacademic job seekers and their partners.Within engineering, the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Talent Council surveyedmembership in May 2011 and found that about half of all petroleum engineers were part of adual-career pair. In a December 2011 follow-up survey of members aged 45 and younger, theyfound that