sophomore year of engineering, and aretaking steps to address the current lack of information on this understudied period in anundergraduate engineer’s trajectory.Our study seeks to address these calls for action and research agendas by focusing on thesophomore year in engineering undergraduate, which remains a critical transition time forstudents pursuing engineering degrees. Instead of encouraging the continued development andassessment of novel interventions designed to impact the sophomore year, our study inquires intothe current state of sophomore engineering, so that we can be informed when making andadvocating for changes, or trying to ‘revolutionize engineering departments’ in line with fundingopportunities. We wish to examine the social
inEngineering Programs: Evolving Best Practices, Association to Institutional Research, Tallahassee, FL, Chapt. 8,2008.5. McCaulley, M. H., “The MBTI and Individual Pathways in Engineering Design,” Engineering Education, 80 (5),537-542 (July/August 1990).6. Wankat, P. C. and F. S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, Chapt. 13, 1993. Availablefree as pdf files on the web at https://engineering.purdue.edu/ChE/AboutUs/Publications/TeachingEng/index.html7. Montgomery, D. C. and G. C. Runger, Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers, Wiley, New York, pp.436-441, 1994.8. Watson, K., “Guest Editor’s Page. Change in Engineering Education: Where Does Research Fit?” J. Engr. Educ.,98 (1), 3-4 (Jan. 2009).Table 1. Concentrations in
competency derives from working effectively in diverse and multicultural international environments [7]. Professionalcompetency is best defined by the ability to communicate and work in diverse teams effectively [6]. Colleges are answering the need for global engineers by offering its students various international experiences throughinternships, projects, study abroad and academic exchange, collaborative research projects, service learning projects abroad,and graduate-level international programs [9], [10]. A survey of international engineering programs reported on the types ofprograms available, their challenges, and best practices [11]. Student recruitment, program scaling, and assessment methodsare some of the major challenges faced by these
-year project to develop, implement, and studyoutcomes from the curriculum to promote development of inclusive engineering identities. Todevelop our experimental curricula of inclusive engineering practices, we draw on this literaturereview as well as survey data collected from the baseline year of this research project. Thefollowing section reports on baseline findings from students in two first-year engineering coursesthat did not include diversity or identity specific curriculum.Baseline SurveyTo assess the impact of the inclusive engineering identities curriculum, a quasi-experimentalresearch design was adopted. Data collection took place at a large public university with astudent body comprised of 17% underrepresented minorities, 51% women
framework members is discipline-dependent, the construction of the argumentis field- invariant. When using argumentation in a classroom environment, the instructor plays animportant role by helping the student understand theories and principles, but the instructor is notthe authority to explaining why a principle makes sense for solving a problem. Table 2 providesexamples of the appropriate questions and actions that teachers can use to develop the student’scognitive skills via argumentation. Through the lens of engineering practice, an argumentation-based framework (Table 1) is used to support the rational decisions that design teams make whenanalyzing, deliberating and compromising on the solution to an engineering problem (Jin andGeslin, 2009
, necessary if graduates are to become licensedProfessional Engineers.ABET Criterion 3 states student outcomes that all engineering programs must address [11].Although not specific to ME, these outcomes are important for design of ME curriculum notsimply for the sake of ABET accreditation but because students should meet these outcomes to beprepared for professional practice. These criteria have evolved over time. In part, in response toindustry’s dissatisfaction with the professional skills of graduates—such as skills incommunication and navigating corporate and societal contexts—ABET transitioned tooutcomes-based education and introduced 11 “a–k” outcomes spanning technical andprofessional skills [12]. These outcomes are informed by input from
sophomore and junior years.Even within capstone courses, teamwork instruction can be limited. A national survey ofcapstone design courses that included faculty beliefs and teaching practices by Pembridge andParetti showed that teamwork, as a separate topic from project management, were rarely in thetop five topics covered in the course [18]. Much attention in literature has been focused aroundhow to form teams [19-23] and using peer-evaluation to improving teamwork skills [24, 25] butthere are still many open-ended questions relating to the best way to manage and mentor teams[15].One major reason for benchmarking teaming experiences currently in the curriculum is to betterunderstand where students are exposed to teams throughout a curriculum. This
generalmechanical work and procedures, covering commonly used tools and best practices. All modulestogether form a foundation for team specific training that address risk for common activities onthe team.Once all practical hands-on training modules have been completed, students are now able tocomplete hands-on work and become more active participants on the team. As they are new teammembers, they are still limited to the work that they can complete. Some tasks which are deemedof greater risk or severity of injury are reserved for higher levels. These tasks include theoperation of heavy lifting equipment and high voltage design, construction, and operation. Inorder to further reduce the risk of injury, level two students must always be supervised and workin
) to create engineering pathways for students in the CSUB service area. She is also the co-PI for an NSF IUSE grant (NSF-DUE1430398) to improve STEM retention and graduation, the Activities Director for a U.S. Department of Education MSEIP grant (P120A110050) to develop an engineering calculus sequence and engineering outreach programs, and the Summer Program Director for another MSEIP grant (P120A140051) to improve pre-calculus and provide research opportunities for first and second year students. Her research interests are focused on network and system security, particularly with respects to protecting mission-critical resources and services. She is also conducting research in applying biological concepts to
Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the University of Louisville. He graduated from Furman University in 1992 with degrees in Computer Science and Philosophy. In 2008 he earned his Ph.D. in Computer Science Engineering from the University of Louisville. His research interest include cyber-security for industrial control systems and active learning. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025The Use of Generative AI for the Rapid Development of Qualitative Interview Transcripts for a Human-Centered Design ProblemAbstractThis paper describes how generative AI (i.e., ChatGPT) was used to rapidly develop fictitious,yet realistic, qualitative interview transcripts for industrial engineering
see the final product”; “the editing andfeedback process made my lesson much stronger”).In response to being asked how they were personally impacted by the submission-to-publicationprocess, several teachers cited a sense of accomplishment, while others ranged in their responses:“made me a better researcher and writer”; “[it] impacted me personally by giving me theconfidence to submit more curriculum to TeachEngineering or to other publications. As well as,[sic] presenting my ideas to others”; “it helped [me] understand how to produce a qualityactivity”; “makes me, a teacher, feel empowered and confident in implementing moreengineering practices”; “it has been the best learning experience I have had to produce highquality lessons that really
fellow in the Mechanical Engineering De- partment at MIT after receiving her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Human-Computer Interaction from Iowa State University. Dr. Faas graduated from Bucknell University with her M.S. in Mechanical Engineering and joint B.S./B.A. in Mechanical Engineering and International Relations. Dr. Faas is cur- rently a research affiliate in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at MIT. Her research focuses on developing low cost immersive Virtual Reality applications for products and systems, early stage design process and methodology and engineering education. Research interests: virtual reality (VR) applications in mechanical design, design methodology and engi- neering
Entrepreneurial Idea Pitch and Research Proposal Competitions often determine theaward of cash prizes [ e.g. $100,000 at MIT] and scarce resources. The recipients of these awards aredetermined by judging processes. These judging processes are rarely audited or evaluated as to quality orconsistency. We contend that judging processes will be more fair and perceived as less subjective with a highlevel of consensus between judges [interrater agreement], especially for those ranked as best. Our researchcalculates aWG for idea pitch competitions, identifies interventions that improved interrater agreement over timeincluding external factors that may support higher quality judging processes. We seek participation in acollaborative application to continue the
improving things.According to the interview participants, the main way in which the University was helping themdevelop their creativity was through the engineering design projects. For example: “I know Engineering Design was probably a really good class. I think I learned a lot from that class. Being creative – we had to do a lot of brainstorming. We learned different methods… which helps us to brainstorm ideas and then come up with even more ideas based on our first ideas. But anyways, we also learned different ways to narrow down ideas, choose the best one in the situation… I'd say just working on the design projects gives us practice at being creative and also working as a team and being creative with a
high school student group, providingfeedback and additional scaffolding.Research or No Research Around December 30th - January 2nd, I realized my winter quarter was already full. Iwasn't progressing on my dissertation proposal as I was still researching diary study structuresand question types for participants. I was interested in exploring settler colonial practices,reading relevant scholarship, and considering how to integrate this into diary studies withoutoverwhelming participants. As the quarter approached, I recognized that I was preparing for the high school projectwhere I would be an engineering instructor. I had also joined a DRG on "AI, Reflection, andResearch through Design." The first session of this DRG solidified my
Paper ID #30666A Systems Engineering Approach to Mentorship Program for Online Mili-taryand Veteran Engineering StudentsDr. Reza Rahdar, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Dr. Reza Rahdar, currently a full time faculty of the College of Aeronautics, have over 25 years of expe- rience in systems design/development, and engineering systems that include telecommunication systems and networks, Radio communications, air defenses systems, avionics systems, and Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS). Dr. Rahdar developed proficiency with systems engineering principles, pro- cess, and practices. He is an expert in taking
Practice, 37(1): 64-71.[20] Morgan, C., Isaac, J.D. and Sansone, C. 2001. The role of interest in understanding the career choicesof female and male college students. Sex Roles, 44(5/6): 295-320. [21] Harriger, A. 2008. Finding success through SPIRIT. Journal of STEM Education, 9(3,4): 31-36. [22] Costello, A. B. and Osborne, J. 2005. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: fourrecommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation,10(7).[23] Brown, T. A. 2006. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press. Page 22.1053.17
universities to help freshmen and upper-classmen succeed in challenging college courses. SI can consist of peer tutoring, instructor officehours, review sessions, study groups, or any combination of these. Students who use SI havebeen shown to earn higher term and cumulative grade point averages (GPA’s) as well as moretimely graduation rates than their peers who do not utilize SI.. [3] [4] [5] It also has been shown thatthere is a statistically significant correlation between higher term GPA’s and more time spent inSI. [2] [6] “The U.S. Department of Education has designated SI as an Exemplary Educational Practice and has validated the following three research findings: Students participating in SI within the targeted
-methodology guided our Q-study held with four focus groups. During the Q study, we used five Q-sets, the collection ofheterogeneous items which the participants will sort14. The content for the five Q-sets weredeveloped from a literature review and written on cards. Each card represented an item to be Page 26.506.5used in PosSES. Q-sorting is the procedure where participants sort and rank the cards accordingto stated instructions15. For this study, a full professor and methodologist provided training for the research team in the methods related to Q-Methodology and helped design a protocol to forthe study. A practice session was also held. A
University of Minnesota. She earned her PhD from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder, where she was a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow studying the role of prototypes in companies. Carlye’s research is in the field of Design Theory and Methodology, and she studies how designers engage in the product development process and then improves tools and methods to support them. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com Developing design ethnography interviewing competencies for novices1.0 IntroductionEthnographic research
from different areas of expertise and have had diverse livedexperiences that relate to several aspects of this work.Mouallem is a sighted graduate student at Stanford University, formally trained in ElectricalEngineering, and conducting research on the accessibility of engineering education to learnerswith disabilities. Rogando and Mendez Pons are sighted undergraduate students in the Designprogram at Stanford and have conducted research on accessible practices in design. Dougherty isa low-vision, senior director at LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired, and he has priorwork experience in the education technology industry. Finally, Sheppard is faculty at StanfordUniversity and has taught blind students in her Mechanical Engineering
“complex interlinkages”, which is a cousin of systems thinking), social andemotional learning (values and attitudes), and behavioral learning (practical actions). TheEngineering for One Planet (EOP) Framework (2022), developed through the LemelsonFoundation and VentureWell, establishes nine learning outcomes, each of which includes coreand advanced outcomes (these appear to be interchangeable with competencies, despite thedistinction between competencies and outcomes articulated by Wiek et al. 2011); the EOPlearning outcomes are Systems Thinking, Environmental Literacy, Responsible Business andEconomy, Social Responsibility, Environmental Impact Assessment, Materials Selection, Design,Critical Thinking, and Communication and Teamwork. It is
graduation to70% within our Chemical and Environmental Engineering Department.We have achieved this dramatic increase in retention by iterating through several years of interventiondevelopment and deployment. Crucially, our interventions combine elements designed to affect studentsacross a range of affective learning categories—an approach not yet found in the literature. However,while we have anecdotal information from students regarding their responses to many of theinterventions, we have not yet scientifically studied which interventions are important to which studentpopulations. This paper will thus describe successful practices that we have implemented, highlightingthose that are thought to have the largest effect on women based on a
better when space andbandwidth exist for team members to reflect on how well they work together. A prerequisite forcollaborating productively is to purposefully design and facilitate a robust learning environmentwhere people recognize and work to decrease their own biases. While overt forms ofdiscrimination and bias exist, there are implicit forms of discrimination and bias as well. Tomediate implicit bias, for example, Project Implicit (2011) is a multi-institutional and multi-disciplinary initiative that uses research and practical tips to help people recognize where theyare subconsciously treating people differently and enacting discrimination. When educatorsorganize curricular and co-curricular experiences for students to reflect on their
the solid rocket engine motors,experiences of the undergraduate students who have participated in the competition and lessonslearned through this experience, and a few key projects undergoing current development. It willbe shown that these projects focus on the principles of systems engineering with highly detailedsystem/subsystem designs for rocket systems and propulsion systems. These projects have shownto offer unique opportunities for students to experience real-world challenges that are typicallyfaced by the aerospace industries on a daily basis.IntroductionIn recent years, several engineering universities have seen student-run, student designed, launchand operated high-power rocket systems and fundamental research in propulsion
experimental design. In 2000, she received the Harold E. Mitzel Award for Meritorious Contribution to Educational Practice Through Research. With Chemical Engineering faculty she was funded through NSF to develop assessment instruments and experimental design for research into a new model for educating engineering students. Her interests in assessment and research design have broadened to include electronic portfolios used in student assessment and program evaluation.Lisa Benson, Clemson University Dr. Lisa Benson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering and Science Education, with a joint appointment in the Department of Bioengineering, at Clemson University. Her research
develop hybrid educational modules linked to engineering grandchallenges to improve science and math concepts in k-12 curriculum.References 1. Ward, J. S., & Fontecchio, A. (2012, October). Work in progress: The NAE Grand Challenges, high school curricula and Graduate student research. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2012 (pp. 1-2). IEEE. 2. Davis, V., Raju, P. K., Lakin, J., Davis, E. (2016). Nanotechnology Solutions to Engineering Grand Challenges. American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference. 3. Mote Jr, C. D., Dowling, D. A., & Zhou, J. (2016). The Power of an Idea: The International Impacts of the Grand Challenges for Engineering. Engineering, 2(1), 4-7 4. Thomas, J. W. (2000). A
an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education and is the Co-Director of As- sessment Research for the Institute for P-12 Engineering Research and Learning (INSPIRE) at Purdue University. Dr. Cardella earned a B.Sc. in Mathematics from the University of Puget Sound and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering at the University of Washington. At the University of Washington she worked with the Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) and the LIFE Center (Learning in Informal and Formal Environments). She was a CASEE Postdoctoral Engineering Education Researcher at the Center for Design Research at Stanford before beginning her appointment at Purdue. Her research interests include: learning in
novice designers.Axiomatic Design is attractive because of its criteria for evaluating designs, its standard formatfor recording design decisions, and its ability to promote team-based discussion about designrequirements and associated design parameters. The case study approach we adopted to answerthe research question that had three main aspects: 1. analysis of completion dates for different phases of the design process by previous senior design teams, 2. distilling key axiomatic design ideas in a toolkit that could benefit capstone design projects, and 3. piloting the toolkit with several senior design teams to see how this impacted behavior during conceptual design and system integration.Through the pilot projects we
students use teamwork to solve anengineering design problem.Knowing What Students Know (National Research Council, (NRC, 2001) dictates that theassessment of a curricular and instructional methodology, such as the VITDP, must focuson “a model of student cognition and learning… a set of beliefs [conceptual framework]about the kinds of observations that will provide evidence of students’ competencies, andan interpretation process for making sense of the evidence” (p. 44). For this study, themodel of student cognition and learning is constructivism, the contemporary view oflearning (NRC, 2000). The conceptual framework includes the set of beliefs concerningconstructivism, metacognition, teamwork, and engineering design. The reflective journalsare the