and aspects of tech- nological and engineering philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the human side of engineering, new ways of teaching engineering in particular Electromagnetism and other classes that are mathematically driven. His research and activities also include on avenues to connect Product Design and Engineering Education in a synergetic way. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021The challenge: The role of the student in Engineering and TechnologicalLiteracy programs, perspectives, discussions, and
AC 2012-3366: IMPROVING LEARNING TECHNOLOGY DESIGN THROUGHTHE IDENTIFICATION OF ANTHROPOLOGICALLY INVARIANT LEARN-ING BEHAVIORS IN THE ADOPTION OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOL-OGYMr. Steven R. Walk, Old Dominion University Steven Robert Walk, P.E., is an Assistant Professor of electrical engineering technology in the Frank Batten College of Engineering and Technology at Old Dominion University. He is Founder and Director of the Laboratory for Technology Forecasting. His research interests include energy conversion systems, technology and innovation management, and technological forecasting and social change. He is owner and founder of Technology Intelligence, a management consulting company in Norfolk, Va. Walk earned
Paper ID #34340A Critical Thinking Paradigm for Materials and Manufacturing EducationProf. Sayyad Zahid Qamar, Sultan Qaboos University Dr Zahid Qamar, Sayyad is currently working as a Professor at the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Department, Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Muscat, Oman. Recipient of several research and teaching awards, he has over 25 years of academic and research experience in different international universities. He has also worked as a professional mechanical engineer in the field for over 6 years in the heavy engi- neering and fabrication industry (Manager Research and Development; Deputy
AC 2012-2992: CREATIVITY FOR ENHANCING THE TECHNOLOGI-CAL LITERACY FOR NON-SCIENCE MAJORSDr. Robert M. Brooks, Temple University Robert Brooks is an Associate Professor of civil engineering at Temple University. He is a fellow of ASCE. His research interests are engineering education, civil engineering materials, and transportation engineering.Jyothsna K. S., Jyothsna K. S., Department of English, St.Joseph’s College, Bangalore, eecured a gold medal for the high- est aggregate marks in the Post Graduate English Literature course at St.Joseph’s College (autonomous). K. S. has been working for the Department of English, St.Joseph’s College for almost two years now, teaching both undergraduate and postgraduate
M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Wyoming in 1992, 1994, and 1998, respectively. During his Ph.D. studies, he also obtained a graduate minor in statistics. He is currently an Associate Professor and Undergraduate Coordinator with the Electrical and Computer Engineering department at North Dakota State University, where he teaches courses and conducts research in signal processing. Since its inception in 2008, Dr. Green has been an active member of the NDSU Advance FORWARD Advocates, a group of male faculty dedicated to effecting departmental and institutional change in support of gender equality. As part of this group, he regularly trains men, at NDSU and other institutions
Electromagnetics Laboratory in the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He was an assistant professor with the Department of Elec- trical Engineering, the University of Texas at Arlington from 2005 to 2012. He joined the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, West Virginia University Institute of Technology in 2012, and he is currently an associate professor. His current research interests include wireless power transmission, radar systems, microwave remote sensing, antenna design, and computational electromagnetics. He was the recipient of the first prize award in the student paper competition of the IEEE International Antennas and Propagation Symposium, Boston, MA in 2001. He served as the chair of Antennas
industrial management, financial management, computer technology, and environmental technology, as well as leading seminars in the university’s general education program. Prior to academia, Mr. Hilgarth was employed as as engineer in the aerospace industry in laboratory and flight test development, facilities management, and as a manager in quality assurance. He has contributed papers on management, ground-test laboratory and flight test facilities, and ethics to several technical and professional organizations. In education, he has served as a consultant and curriculum developer to the Ohio Board of Higher Education and the Ohio Department of Education. He holds an M.S. in engineering management from the Missouri
conference proceedings. He has been either PI or Co-PI for numerous grants and contracts, totaling more than $10 million in the past 15 years. NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Texas Instruments and Lucent Technologies have funded his research projects. He is the recipient of the excellence in engineering research award at the College of Engineering at UTSA in 2010; the best teacher award in the College of Engineering at UTEP in 1994 and NASA monetary award for contribution to the space exploration. He has been the General Chair, Session Chair, TPC Chair, and Panelist in several
theoretical and less practical elements of engineering education . Until recently, most engineering programs were happy to have packed and information-‐pleasing curricula based on physics, mathematical foundations, and problem-‐solving exercises based on theoretical aspects. The more such classes were added to the curricula, the less space was allowed to open design and design iteration activities. Students tended to spend more time and focus on instructional laboratories and procedures, and less on building and designing challenges. This model worked very well for technician training. So, it seemed to be useful for engineering training. The
learningare collaborative learning, co-operative learning, and problem-based learning. Various studies,from using interactive, hands-on lessons and activities designed to teach research process toundergraduate engineering students 1 , to preparing manufacturing engineering students throughcompetitions, projects sponsored by industry, capstone projects, laboratory exercises or projectssimulating real-life scenarios 2 , have shown that active learning increases student performance inSTEM subjects.Critical thinking, identified by The U. S. Department of Labor as the raw material of a number ofkey workplace skills such as problem solving, decision making, organizational planning, and riskmanagement, is highly coveted by employers of engineering graduates
modules. A team of EOT specialists is developing a curriculum that uses educational shake tables for teaching fundamentals of earthquake engineering design19. Three of the testing sites have developed curricular modules to allow students to engage in remote laboratory experiences using research-grade equipment. The first involves remote real-time video monitoring, tele-control, and execution of experiments using the geotechnical centrifuge facility20, 21. The second involves remote control of a shaker on a research structure located in the California desert and the collection and analysis of time history data22. NEES research projects have developed educational modules and made them available on NEESacademy to fulfill their
easy to construct by hand,however computer-based aids are available11.The potential of concept maps in engineering education has been explored by several groups.Concept maps have been applied to improve teaching and evaluation in biomedical engineering12 ; to connect existing memories to new concepts13; to represent knowledge across disciplinaryboundaries in a first year mechatronics course 14; to improve student’s ability to applyknowledge across a range of situations15; and as a means of helping engineering students toperceive major ideas and improve knowledge transfer16. These examples are suggestive of howconcepts maps can be applied to help students learn engineering.The idea behind concept mapping is to convey the relationships that
Paper ID #20044The Use of Narrative in Undergraduate Engineering EducationDr. Gary P. Halada, Stony Brook University Dr. Halada, Associate Professor in Materials Science and Engineering at Stony Brook University, directs an interdisciplinary undergraduate degree program in Engineering Science. He designs educational ma- terials focused on nanotechnology, advanced manufacturing, and how engineers learn from engineering disasters and how failure and risk analysis can be used to teach about ethics and societal implications of emerging technologies. Halada also coordinates the Long Island Alternative Energy Consortium, a
Langton, N., The Collected detailed descriptions of the Teaching of techniques, processes, instrumentation, Theoretical Subjects and design procedures used by firms to Students of High through interview and brief observation of Polymer polymer technologists and derived a Technology. 2 Vols. theoretical curriculum
experiences.Dr. Marie C Paretti, Virginia Tech Marie C. Paretti is an Associate Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she co- directs the Virginia Tech Engineering Communications Center (VTECC). Her research focuses on com- munication in engineering design, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, design education, and gender in engineering. She was awarded a CAREER grant from the National Science Foundation to study expert teaching in capstone design courses, and is co-PI on numerous NSF grants exploring com- munication, design, and identity in engineering. Drawing on theories of situated learning and identity development, her work includes studies on the teaching and learning of communication
is currently interested in engineering design education, engineering education policy, and the philosophy of engineering education.Prof. John Heywood, Trinity College Dublin John Heywood is professorial Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College Dublin- The University of Dublin. he is a Fellow of ASEE and Life Fellow of IEEE. he is an Honorary Fellow of the Institution of Engineers Ireland. He has special interest in education for the professions and the role of professions in society. He is author of Engineering Education. Research and Development in Curriculum and Instruction; The Assessment of Learning in Engineering Education; The Human Side of Engineering, and Empowering Professional Teaching in Engineering. Together
Sears Mikelson, Iowa State UniversityMr. Brian Vincent Skalak Brian Vincent Skalak is a senior at Iowa State University majoring in advertising with a minor in engi- neering studies.Dr. Mani Mina, Iowa State University Mani Mina has been with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Iowa State Uni- versity since 2001. He has extensive industrial and academic experience. His current research interests include physical layer systems, measurements, and testing, applied electromagnetism, optical network- ing, magneto-optical switching, nondestructive testing and evaluation, and innovative methods of teaching technology. He is also one of the leading educators in the area of technological literacy to non
Paper ID #6570Applying a knowledge-generation epistemological approach to computer sci-ence and software engineering educationDr. Stephen T Frezza, Gannon University Dr. Stephen T. Frezza, C.S.D.P. is a Professor of Software Engineering at Gannon University in Erie, PA (USA). Dr. Frezza is a Certified Software Development Professional (CSDP), and at Gannon pursues research in Program Assessment, Software Engineering Pedagogy, and Engineering Philosopy. His teach- ing interests include Software Process, Requirements, Design, Testing and Quality Assurance. He is the past chair of the Computer and Information Science Department
Astronautical Engineering from The Ohio State University, M.S. and Ph.D. in Engineering from the University of Arkansas. He holds a Professional Engineer certification and worked as an Engineer and Engineering Manger in industry for 20 years before teaching. His interests include project management, robotics /automation and air pollution dispersion modeling. Page 23.1335.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Using Scale Models to Promote Technological LiteracyAbstractThe use of technologies by humans is nothing new. In actuality, humans have utilizedtechnologies of
literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the human side of engineering, new ways of teaching engineering in particular Electromagnetism and other classes that are mathematically driven. His research and activities also include on avenues to connect Product Design and Engineering Education in a synergetic way. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020A perspective on students’ autonomy in learning and engaging in a freshman inquiry-based learning environmentAbstractPresent day workforce requires graduates to be self-starters, independent and willing toexperiment, as genuine
College Kate Disney teaches engineering at Mission College in Santa Clara, Calif.Prof. Carl O. Hilgarth, Shawnee State University Carl O. Hilgarth is professor and Department Chair of engineering technologies at Shawnee State Univer- sity (SSU), Portsmouth, Ohio. He joined SSU in 1990 and has served as Department Chair since 1997. He holds an M.S. in engineering management from the Missouri University of Science and Technology (UMR). His technical interests are computer engineering technology, production operations, industrial management, and industrial archeology. He also instructs ethics and senior seminar courses in the univer- sity’s general education program, and is an advocate of the importance of including
working on better understanding of students’ learning and aspects of tech- nological and engineering philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the human side of engineering, new ways of teaching engineering in particular Electromagnetism and other classes that are mathematically driven. His research and activities also include on avenues to connect Product Design and Engineering Education in a synergetic way.Kate A Disney, Mission College Kate Disney has been teaching engineering at the community college level since 1990. Her interests are promoting greater gender and racial balance in
LUT with main research interests re- lated to technology and society, gender diversity and engineering education.Dr. Hanna Niemel¨a, Hanna Niemel¨a received the M.A. and PhD degrees in translation studies from University of Helsinki in 1993 and 2003, respectively. She is currently working as an associate professor with the Department of Electrical Engineering at Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland. Her professional experience ranges from translating to teaching and language consulting. Her interests include electrical engineering, scientific writing and special languages. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020
endeavour. At first, one may betempted to categorize the enterprise of engineering and science into one that contains massivedistractions by the nature of their existing. For instance, the structure of universities, laboratories,industrial complexes, and even the clutter basement or garage of an armchair practitioner, cancontain reinforce thoughtlessness. Another example, is that the process of either science ofengineering, both of which being built upon previous works, in itself could engender humanpractitioners only concerned with furthering a particular line of work and not actively thinkingwhile undertaking such work. Page 26.1314.9
examination question. Students answered individually. Thestudents had prior practice in creating similar system diagrams for other technological systems.Other parts of the course include class activities, laboratories, and homework assignments thatinvolve creating system diagrams. Some of the other technological systems studied include:automotive systems, home appliances, refrigeration systems, and biomedical devices. Thestudents are familiar with this type of question and have had the opportunity to practice makingsystem diagrams in a variety of contexts.To provide some background on this system, the Extended Range Mode for the Chevy Volt is aninteresting mode of operation. The Volt utilizes extended range mode after batteries have beendepleted. In
could be realised in practice by following the three stage philosophy of learning described byWhitehead. This model was based on experimental work in the teaching of engineering and technology that hadbeen completed in the post-primary system of education (high school) in Ireland. While the content and methodapplicable to each of the three stages of the Whitehead cycle was illustrated there was no in-depth discussion of thecomponents of each of these stages.The purpose of this paper is to consider in detail problems in the design of the first stage of the cycle called –“Romance”. The paper begins with a short introduction to Whitehead’s philosophy of rhythm in education.As conceived here the stage of romance for a program in engineering and
) An issue related to the rhetorical literacy skill of clearly stating the purpose and providing an explicit justification for the writing (16% of evaluations) 3) An issue related to the ethical literacy skill of using citations for others’ ideas, including both textual and non-textual materials (36% of evaluations)In 2006, Drury, O’Carroll, and Langrish[8] reported on an interactive online program for teachingreport writing at the University of Sydney. They included in their results the assessment of acohort of third year chemical engineering students’ laboratory reports. This cohort wascomprised of 46 students, 42% of whom were non-native English speakers. Assessment criteriaincluded “academic literacy” based on a
. Toname but several: engineering design, economics, industrial psychology and sociology,manufacturing, and philosophy. The knowledge available to all these segments is large andlearning can be at various levels of depth which is determined to some extent by a person’sability and previous knowledge. When these knowledge dimensions are combined it is easyto imagine a substantive degree program in engineering/technological literacy. Equally it iseasy to perceive that the kind of teaching and learning necessary to bring about the outcomesof engineering/technological literacy would have to be very different to that undertaken in thesame courses when treated as separate entities within a traditional program. Both level andapproach would be different
“The Engineer of 2020” in 2004. The focus is onunderstanding how engineering definitions change over time in the dialog of policy since policymakers play a large role in setting directions for engineering education. It is found that thedocuments contain both explicit and implicit definitions which provide insights into how andwhy engineering education is this way and not that. The definitions are also illuminate tensions,or misalignments, in how we currently teach engineering, the most glaring of these is a technical-social duality that increases in importance in over the 84 year span examined.Rationale & FrameworkThe broad engineering education question addressed in this paper is the interplay of engineeringeducation with the larger