residence hall. This coeducational program targeted high school students, and 2 male and 3 female counselors were rotated throughout the week so that the students were never unsupervised. The classroom was monitored by one engineering teacher and an undergraduate facilitator. Each day, the students were in the classroom from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm with a lunch break at noon in the university cafeteria. They would also take time during the class day to tour various engineering research buildings on campus, listen to speakers, and complete projects. After class, the counselors accompanied the students to their dorm room for a break, followed by various extracurricular activities (i.e. movies, games, kickball, etc.). The program lasted for seven days and
applications for the automotive industry. He has worked in the vibration test and measurement industry helping to drive new technologies to market and working with industry to meet their emerging needs. He is currently a Professor at California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo in the Department of Mechanical Engineering teaching dynamics, vibrations and controls. He is involved in several undergraduate and master’s level multidisciplinary projects and interested in engineer- ing education research. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018“Intelligent Vehicles:” Development of a new course for undergraduate engineering studentsIntroductionThe field of intelligent
college degree information, expected graduation term, and GPA with scale (e.g., 3.358/4.0). As appropriate, include additional majors/minors, concentrations, study abroad activities, or accomplishments (Dean’s List, Honors College membership, etc.). Also list professional training activities or certifications (e.g., EIT or PE status; certification in software or equipment), training completed as part of a co-op or internship, and other professional development activities you have participated in (teamwork training, communications skills seminar, etc.). Research Experience: include both paid and volunteer experiences, as well as substantial research projects completed as part of your technical
in Engineering Education (FREE, formerly RIFE, group), whose diverse projects and group members are described at feministengineering.org. She received a CAREER award in 2010 and a PECASE award in 2012 for her project researching the stories of undergraduate engineering women and men of color and white women. She received ASEE-ERM’s best paper award for her CAREER research, and the Denice Denton Emerging Leader award from the Anita Borg Institute, both in 2013. She helped found, fund, and grow the PEER Collaborative, a peer mentoring group of early career and re- cently tenured faculty and research staff primarily evaluated based on their engineering education research productivity. She can be contacted by email at
to providing information on upcoming events, we also keep archives of all of our pastevents, including photos and descriptions as well as tutorials and other resources that allowstudents to work through educational projects on their own time.The CyberCenter was developed in PHP using the ModX framework, which providesfunctionality such as user accounts and authentication, as well as a full-featured back-endgraphical user interface which allows the administration of critical site functionality and thesimple management of website resources.Tech FridaysEvery semester, the mentors offer technical workshops known as Tech Fridays. At these events,students are introduced to new technologies, new techniques, and, to some, new areas of interest.BSC
Paper ID #16323The Doctorate Journey: Mapping Perceptions of the Ph.D. ProcessDr. Stephanie Cutler, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Stephanie Cutler has a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech. Her dissertation explored faculty adoption of research-based instructional strategies in the statics classroom. Currently, Dr. Cutler works as an assessment and instructional support specialist with the Leonhard Center for the Enhance- ment of Engineering Education at Penn State. She aids in the educational assessment of faculty-led projects while also supporting instructors to improve their teaching in
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
colleges; and primarily white and Hispanic serving institutions are alsoincluded in the student data set. A subject selection matrix was employed to also maintain somedegree of balance within our sample with regards to gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomicbackground, with the project PIs helping to secure additional interviews to round outdemographic variation. We currently have N=29 interviews completed, and their mapping to thelarger project and the basic demographics of our sample are described in Table 1 & 2,respectively. Table 1: Institutional Profile of Faculty/Admin vs. Student Data Faculty/Admin Student Data
academia, most will facebalancing substantial research, teaching and service requirements. Yet, a graduate educationtypically focuses predominately on preparing students to lead research projects, without an emphasison development of pedagogical skills. Especially in engineering fields, graduate students may notautomatically be required to teach, receive pedagogical instruction, or engage in other careerdevelopment aspects beyond research. The exact reason for this is unclear but may be linked tounderestimating the positive impact of teaching by graduate students. Yet, there appear to beconcrete benefits for both the graduate students and the students taught by them. In fact, manygraduate students are interested in teaching and would like to
AC 2012-5183: EASING INTO ENGINEERING EDUCATION: AN ORIEN-TATION PROGRAM FOR GRADUATE STUDENTSStephanie Cutler, Virginia TechWalter Curtis Lee Jr., Virginia Tech Walter Lee is a Graduate Assistant and doctoral student in engineering education at Virginia Tech. His pri- mary research interests focus on diversity and student retention. He earned a B.S. in industrial engineering from Clemson University.Dr. Lisa D. McNair, Virginia Tech Lisa McNair is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Her research includes interdisciplinary collaboration, communication studies, identity theory, and reflective practice. Projects supported by the National Science Foundation include
for the NSF: HSI ”Building Bridges into Engineering and Computer Science”.Dr. Doris J. Espiritu, Wilbur Wright College- One of the City Colleges of Chicago Doris J. Espiritu, PhD is the Executive Director of the College Center of Excellence in Engineering and Computer Science and a professor of Chemistry at Wright College. Doris Espiritu is one of the first National Science Foundation’s research awardees under the Hispanic- Serving Institutions (HSI) Program. She pioneered Engineering at Wright and had grown the Engineering program enrollment by 700 % within two years of the NSF-HSI project. Doris founded six student chapters of national organizations including the Society of Women Engineers (SWE), the Society of
classes to native English speakers, he has also taught special introductory engineering classes for foreign students who do not have English as their primary language.Mr. Jamison Taylor Bair , Colorado State University Jamison Bair is a Graduate Student pursuing a Masters of Science in Mechanical Engineering at Colorado State University. He received his BS in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University in May 2016. Jamison is one of the GTAs for MECH-468, the senior design capstone class at CSU. He is also the Project Manager for the CSU Vehicle Innovation Team competing in the intercollegiate automotive engineering competition EcoCAR3 and the President of the CSU Student Chapter of the Society for the
AC 2011-1396: ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESS FOR ENGINEERING PH.D.S:PERSPECTIVES FROM ACADEMIA AND INDUSTRYMonica Farmer Cox, Purdue University, West Lafayette Monica F. Cox, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue Univer- sity. She obtained a B.S. in mathematics from Spelman College, a M.S. in industrial engineering from the University of Alabama, and a Ph.D. in Leadership and Policy Studies from Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Teaching interests relate to the professional development of graduate engineering students and to leadership, policy, and change in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Pri- mary research projects explore the preparation of
edition, Pearson.[10] James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., An Introduction to StatisticalLearning, Springer, 2017.Appendix 1Assignment-1The Nuclear power plant explosion in Chernobyl, RussiaAnswer the following three questions on the nuclear power plant explosion using thethree components of creativity: (1) Originality, (2) Value, and (3) FlexibilityWhat is the cause of the nuclear power plant failure?How did the explosion change the nuclear power plant industry?If you were the Chief engineer on the project how would do it differentAssignment-2Space Shuttle Challenger DisasterAnswer the following five questions on the Space shuttle Challenger disaster using the threecomponents of creativity: (1) Originality, (2) Value, and (3
in-depth the impact that both metacognition and epistemic cognition have on thedevelopment of the engineering mindset. To date, very little research in engineering educationhas focused on the development of either metacognition or epistemic cognition. Further, there isno research in our field that focuses on understanding the development of and the connectionsbetween metacognition and epistemic cognition.The goal of this project is to explore the decisions and processes civil engineering students useduring their senior design projects to understand how students assess the reasonableness of theirwork.Theoretical FrameworkFor this project, we will be drawing from two theoretical constructs -- epistemic cognition andmetacognition. In the
preparation, and itscourse projects have been well described in other studies [16], [18].Background and Institutional SettingAlthough many senior level engineering students at The Citadel participate in internships foracademic credit, many do not wait until their senior year for this experience. Many will seek anengineering internship, typically over the summer, primarily for the pay. As a rising sophomoreor junior, they have limited technical knowledge to contribute. However, as a rising sophomorethrough senior, they can gain considerable knowledge of collaborative problem solving and learna variety of new skills through internship experiences. Perhaps learning from both theory andexample is one of the greatest benefits of an internship, not only
use a group Think-Pair-Share15 to increase student-student interaction(during the Pair) and student-teacher interaction (during the Share). For this type of activity,students first think on a topic by themselves, pair with a partner discussing their thoughts todiscover similarities and differences, and finally, share their findings with the entire class.Incorporating informal collaborative moments such as this into a class can have a great effect interms of increased interaction. More formal implementations could involve a multi-week groupassignment with several teacher-team advising sessions. Such projects could include eitherproblem-based or project-based learning assignments16. These implementations would providefor more student-student
both the classrooms of U.S. schools and the general workforce is needed tounderstand why this is occurring and what pedagogies can be added, removed, or enhanced toslow the rapid decline of underrepresented students in engineering. The object of this research isto discover pathways of engineering undergraduate students in their first two years in order tobetter understand their engineering identity and the relationship to graduation. Assessment of theengineering identity and mindset during the sophomore year will be done to both understand thegrowing diverse student body and to suggest changes in student and faculty engagement andinstructional activities. In this project, the authors will: (1) identify biases formed by studentswhen they choose
the excerpt from Bok is often true at research-intensive engineering institutions.Perhaps even more critical than the delay to a student’s doctoral thesis completion, as identifiedby Bok, many faculty advisors view student-time spent teaching as directly conflicting withprogress on experimental testing, computational simulation, and technical publicationagreements with research sponsors. This perception of conflict is not unwarranted: faculty are atthe behest of governmental/private entities that can freeze further funding or request recompensefor previously distributed grants if project deliverables are not timely. A graduate student, orteam of students, is a significant driver in moving the research forward to meet these
earlier study was set up with afocus on diverse students and diverse student experiences, which provided a valuable entry intohow different students experienced engineering education through their encounters with boththeir peers and faculty. These encounters, both good and bad, shaped what choices they madeabout their education; whether or not to stay in engineering; and if they left, what other major tochoose based on the investments they made in their coursework so far. We discovered otherthings through this project, such as the importance of peer support groups; how peers contributedto learning; and how students learned to navigate challenges by choosing the right instructors,courses, and majors. In general, the project documented what student
Michael’s retrospective reflections on and systematic analysis of threeencounters he had with various members of his college during his freshman year. It is importantto point out that at the times when these encounters took place, Michael had not yet begunworking on the research project described above [12]. In other words, the encounters took place innatural settings and were not influenced or prompted by the goals and purposes of this study.As described above, the purpose of embarking on this exploratory study was to examine howstories ‘told’ about engineering in the public discourse influence, or “shape and reflect” [12],communications at an institutional level. The focus of the empirical analysis was therefore notthe stories that individuals
vague, researchers will often develop a codebook thatdescribes each code with a concrete definition and example quote from the data (Creswell,2014). This codebook can then be used by multiple researchers within the project or futureresearchers conducting similar studies. It is common to have multiple coders code the same dataset or split large data sets between multiple coders. Walther et al. (2013) suggested IRR as ameans to “mitigate interpretative bias” and ensure a “continuous dialogue between researchers tomaintain consistency of the coding” (p. 650). Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that an IRR of80% agreement between coders on 95% of the codes is sufficient agreement among multiplecoders(Miles & Huberman, 1994)(Miles & Huberman
to real-life scenarios inschool project, at work, and in teaching.Peer-Presentation ReviewTo specifically enhance the presentation skills of the engineering ambassadors, the studentspractice the presentation portion of the lesson their group designed to their fellow ambassadorsand faculty. During the presentation, the audience took note on the presentation skills such asposture, filler words, body language verbal tone, volume, and eye contact are ranked on anexcellent to needs improvement scale. This provided the ambassadors with a list of requiredimprovements in their presentations. The presenting ambassadors received a similar sheet withthe combined results as shown in table 3. Table 3: Sample of
the Writing Across the Curriculum initiative and coordinates the undergraduate writing courses. Currently, she is working on a project examining writing strategies used by engineers in multinational workplaces and the impact of these findings on WAC/WID programs. Her primary research and teaching interests are multilingual writers, writing across the curriculum and writing in the disciplines (WAC/WID), and first-year writing. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 The Impact of Socio-Cultural Factors in Qatar on Females in EngineeringAbstractThis paper provides a detailed insight into the Arab culture, specifically, the perceptions ofQatari culture on women in engineering. The Qatari
aerospace applications, I participate in many projects related to controls and heat transfer. Aside from my research, I focus heavily on the advancement of engineering education at the collegiate level. I work on revising and updating laboratory experiments to help improve student understanding of how concepts are applied and utilized. I also spend time writing design optimization MATLAB codes for various applications.Mr. Michael Golub, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis Michael Golub is the Academic Laboratory Supervisor for the Mechanical Engineering department at IUPUI. He is an associate faculty at the same school, and has taught at several other colleges. He has conducted research related to Arctic
Science Standards.Miss Ezgi Yesilyurt, University of Nevada, Las Vegas Ezgi Yesilyurt is a PhD student in curriculum and instruction/science education at University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She is working as a graduate assistant and teaching science methods courses. She received her MS degree and BS degree in elementary science education. She participated European Union Projects in which she conducted series of professional development programs for in-service science teachers. Areas of research interest are engineering education, inquiry learning and evolution education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Introduction: Methods
Paper ID #16707Building Professional Communities - Initiating Junior Chapters of MAES &SHPE to Increase STEM Awareness and Professional PracticeMs. Aileen Tapia, University of Texas, El Paso Aileen Tapia is an industrial engineering junior at the University of Texas at El Paso, where she gadly serves as the Region 5 Student Representative and previously served as secretary and president of the 150-member student chapter. She also helped establish a SHPE Jr. chapter at her high school alma mater. As a research assistant, she explored different techniques to effectively deliver Project Based Learning (PBL) techniques to
numberof times in the presentations and papers of Mihail Roco 1 of NSF who has projected thatapproximately 2 million nano-related jobs will be created by 2015 (40% of them in the US) andif typical multipliers are used the number of Nano-related jobs would be substantially more. Thiscorrelated with the predictions made by Lux Research (a well known contract research firm) thatnanotechnology will contribute $3.1 Trillion to the world's economy by 2015. We expect JSNNgraduates to find positions in industrial, academic and government research labs in fieldsincluding pharmaceuticals, defense, materials and electronics companies. The Joint School of Nanoscience and Nanoengineering (JSNN) currently offer twodegree programs (a Professional M.S. in
to change everything and it was a little too much”, so Saul and theprofessor worked together to find a balance. In all, Saul feels that the amount of support he getsfrom his advisor is “right. It‟s perfectly right”, and Saul is empowered to make his own changes,write exams, and develop projects for the students that meet the goals of the class.In summary, most participants report relatively low feelings of autonomy with Saul as anexception. Knowing that beliefs can impact practices, to understand GTA teaching experiences Page 22.757.8we also need to look at how perceived levels of autonomy translate to teaching actions.Autonomy in Decision
enhancement to the pilot was to expand this training into the second course in thesequence in some way. While the initial pilot training was intended to impact both semesters,many employment and grading responsibilities change between semesters, thus it was possiblethat a number of TAs could enter the spring semester without any training in grading technicalwriting. Despite the second course having fewer lab writing assignments, there is a significantadditional technical writing component added in the grading of the design project report.Therefore, it made sense to design the training program to cross both terms.While this pilot was implemented in FEH, the TA training for the FE track consisted of a shortlecture during orientation about technical