research interests include electrokinetics, predominantly di- electrophoretic characterizations of cells, and the development of biomedical microdevices. She earned a NSF CAREER award and was nominated for Michigan Professor of the Year in 2014. Research within her Medical micro-Device Engineering Research Laboratory (M.D. – ERL) also inspires the development of Desktop Experiment Modules (DEMos) for use in chemical engineering classrooms or as outreach activi- ties in area schools (see www.mderl.org). Adrienne is currently co-Chair of ASEE’s Diversity Committee and PIC I Chair; she has previously served on WIED, ChED, and NEE leadership teams and contributed to 37 ASEE conference proceedings articles.Prof. Beena
as apractice and as a shared mental model.What We Can Learn from the Teachers of Technical Writing Who Embraced the Task Page 26.365.3Fortunately, there have been along the way notable faculty members who did not accept inferiorstatus. These individuals can help us understand the success we have achieved so far and chart aclearer path for the future. Their careers endow the phrase “Engineering English” with acompletely different and very positive meaning. In overview form, these are the central featuresof their approach: • Treating communication, including technical communication, as the ultimate interdisciplinary subject and a
difference between a successful and a failing career, team, or even corporation. In the lastdecade there have been efforts such as those by the Association of American Colleges and Universities(AAC&U) to advance broad- based systemic innovation to build and sustain strong undergraduateeducation in the STEM fields.Our group is in the early stages of an innovative initiative to provide alternative communication andhumanities learning environments in STEM higher education. The group consists of faculty from severalacademic units including liberal arts, libraries, and technology. One of the learning experiences currentlybeing tested involves the tight coupling of all forms of interpersonal communication, and informationliteracy with technological
courses to retrain engineers for the war and post-warindustrial efforts. Similarly. the engineering enterprise contained in Seeley’s interpretation of theWickenden report has a comparable assertion.[7, 9] One of Seeley’s main critiques of Americanengineering in particular is that it had become little concerned with student self-realization orself-assessment as opposed to the specialized and more theoretical nature of Europeanengineering. Heidegger’s works span a number of important topics, but one he addresses throughouthis career is how the meaning of words is interpreted by human beings. Usually his efforts on thesubject are summarized into the question of being. One method whereby he constructs andexplores the concept of being is
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
Paper ID #12127A Nod in the Right Direction? Designing a Study to Assess an Instructor’sAbility to Interpret Student Comprehension from Nonverbal Communica-tionDr. Brock E. Barry PE, U.S. Military Academy Dr. Brock E. Barry, P.E. is an Associate Professor and Mechanics Group Director in the Department of Civil & Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York. Dr. Barry holds a Bachelor of Science degree from Rochester Institute of Technology, a Master of Science degree from University of Colorado at Boulder, and a PhD from Purdue University. Prior to pursuing a career in academics
institutions involved in engineering education research, as wellas a diverse complement of industry professionals with an interest in engineeringeducation. A cursory scan of the people invited to the workshop from industry revealsindividuals from a variety of industrial career paths. Companies providing hardware andsoftware to educational markets, designated educational specialists and liaisons fromlarge companies, and practicing engineers were all represented.1The mission of the series of workshops, as stated in the TUEE executive summary is “todevelop a new strategy for undergraduate engineering education that meets the needs ofindustry in the 21st century. Transforming Undergraduate Education in Engineeringaims to produce a clear understanding of
engineering practice, particularly by highlighting important gaps betweenwhat is portrayed by the codes and professional societies’ appetite for controversy arising fromactual ethical dilemmas.This paper examines the historical context around the establishment of IEEE’s first “Code ofEthics for Engineers,” focusing specifically on the early history of the IEEE Committee onSocial Implications of Technology (CSIT) and the advocacy activities of one of its co-founders,Stephen H. Unger. CSIT and Unger played a crucial role in the creation and adoption of the 1974IEEE “Code of Ethics for Engineers” and in urging IEEE to support engineers whose adherenceto the Code of Ethics exposed their careers to risk. Through revealing the historical contestationsover
of numerous awards and honors, including the National Science Foundation’s most prestigious, Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award. She is a Fellow of the American So- ciety of Engineering Education, holds membership in a number of organizations and presently serves on the National Advisory Board of the National Society of Black Engineers. Page 26.1304.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Reaching Out to the Masses: Building Literacy About Engineering Amongst Non-Engineering StudentsEngineering literacy gained initial
Nature’s Designs,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Honolulu, HI, June 24-27, 2007.10. Petersen, O. G., Kent, R. D., Howe, C., and Vollaro, M. B., 2012, “General Education: Key for Success for an Entrepreneurial Engineering Career,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio, TX, June 10-13, 2012.11. Norton, M. G., and Bahr, D. F., 2002, “An Upper Division General Education Course on Materials for Non- Engineering Students,” Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Montreal, Canada, June 16-19, 2002.12. Krupczak, J., Bair, N., Benson, P. B., Corlew, D., Lantz, K., Lappenga, D., Scholtens, M., and Woessner, D., 2005, “Hands-on Laboratory
discussion of the events that led to the restriction on advice toindividuals, see Stephen Unger’s essay on the topic. 17)Ironically, in a Policy Statement adopted in 2004, IEEE appears to endorse EMCC support of Page 26.1723.8individuals in upholding the Code: The EMCC emphasizes that IEEE is committed to being supportive of any member who acts to uphold the IEEE Code of Ethics. It recognizes that voicing concern about ethical violations could jeopardize a member’s career opportunities. Nevertheless, the EMCC believes that by raising awareness of IEEE’s strong stance on ethical conduct through this Position Paper