since 1994 VHDL Based Digital Design and taught up to 2001, till Dr. Terence Kelly (received his doctorate under supervision of Pro- fessor Prasad) took over. From spring 1998, Professor Prasad also developed and taught 16.517, MMIC Design and Fabrication course to meet the growing demand of regional semiconductor industries. He is the recipient of Zone I best paper award by American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) in 2008. He has been appointed as honorable member of IAAB of the MEGHE group of Institution and Shree Baba Ramdeo College of Engineering and Management (Nagpur) in India. He has also received the Best Teaching award for the New England Region, and the Best Campus award for the Zone 1 from ASEE dur
pronounced for underrepresented groups, often first generation college students,including veterans. PIPELINES, a collaboration between a Navy Base in Southern California, atier-1 research university and a network of community colleges, is an early workforce learningexperience that fosters students’ career preparedness while providing the ground to investigatethe complexities of developing STEM readiness of underrepresented populations through aninteractive ethnographic approach.In this work, we highlight strategies we found effective in developing and implementing thismulti-tiered, interdisciplinary effort, in which each actor (educators, researchers, and Navyscientists and engineers) brings complementary knowledge and skills that are key to
interventionresulted in higher course performance than in the growth and control. Third, the interventionsdid not differentially affect course performance among under-represented minorities (URMs).Finally, among non-URMs, the belongingness intervention led to improved course performancecompared to the growth mindset and control conditions.Interestingly, prior to the interventions, underrepresented minority students exhibited highergrowth mindset scores (effect size = 0.32) than non-underrepresented minority students andwomen exhibited higher feelings of belonging (effect size = 0.21) than men.1 INTRODUCTIONThe present work evaluates whether minimally-invasive, low-cost interventions fostering agrowth mindset and/or feelings of belonging can be effective in
Motivation Questionnaire. This paper describes thestudy and outlines key findings to date, examining data from 1182 participantsgathered in co-operation with 22 practicing middle school teachers. Theimplications for engineering access and success will be discussed.IntroductionOver the past three decades a growing body of research has demonstratedconsiderable links between 3D spatial skills and performance in a diverse range ofdisciplines [1, 2]. In addition, increases in spatial skills that are the result of anintervention have demonstrated considerable links to increased retention andperformance in University level degree programs[3] . This is especially true forfemales who tend to demonstrate lower levels of spatial skills than those of theirmale
(‘engineer’ was in their job title) in a variety of different environments in thesecompanies, including engineering consulting, manufacturing, continuous improvement, qualitycontrol, research and development, third party testing, and corporate management. Accordingly,these engineers come from various disciplinary backgrounds and universities. All names ofpersons and companies are pseudonyms. See Table 1 for further details.During workplace observations, instances of problem solving activity were recorded throughethnographic field notes or through audio and video recording. These recording modalities wereapplied in the context of participant observation, during which we accompanied the engineersthrough their daily routines, supplemented with periodic
the global community, and have become more prominent at this culturalmoment. In an effort to address the topics of social justice, equity, and inclusion manyuniversities and groups of faculty and students have focused on ways to educate STEM studentand faculty populations.There is a complex and continually developing body of literature discussing and reflecting onreform efforts both in engineering education and more broadly. This literature can simplisticallybe classified into three general types: (1) calls for action that explain and provide evidenceconcerning the needs for reforms [1], e.g. , [2]; (2) research describing the reform process e.g. ,[3], [4], and; (3) research examining why most reform efforts fail [5], [6].This third type of
Table 1. This tool shows graduation date, engineering-relatedwork experiences (internships and coops), student organization involvement (activities), mode ofmatriculation and other pursuits of each ambassador. For the purposes of this paper, this chartalso shows the typical profile of our ambassadors. Due to space limitations, only seven of thenine ambassadors for this term are shown.Table 1: Ambassador Profiles Spring 2017 MEEN AMBASSADORS Lead Ambassador Ambassador Ambassador Ambassador Ambassador Ambassador NAME Ambassador 1 2 3 4 5 6 GRAD DATE
range of practical and theoretical approaches. PBLinstructors embrace this diversity and foster an environment that is much more productive andcapable that a single program experience could offer. The PBL sequence will be describedincluding course content and project work that concurrently addresses the ABET 7 criteria forETAC and EAC accreditation. Lessons that have been learned will be shared for other schoolshoping to create a similar curricular experience.IntroductionProject Based Learning (PBL) 1 makes use of active learning techniques to create a studentdriven learning environment. The role of the instructor is to guide the students as they learnwhile doing project work. Projects are selected or screened to have real outcomes that
. Through asystematic approach, we reviewed 89 apps and finally identified 12 educational app that promotecomputational thinking in the context of problem-solving. The apps and the computationalthinking competencies that each app promotes are listed in this study. For the field ofengineering education at large, the results of this study illuminate the following points: 1. Computational thinking is possible to observe and teach at the K-2 levels. 2. Educational media, especially apps, can be used to promote computational thinking competencies. The codebook can serve as a tool to review other educational media that promotecomputational thinking. In addition, the apps identified in this study can be integrated into bothformal and
orientations to the issues.Given how frequently one or more of these are shared to set the stage for presenting diversitywork, perhaps these elements make up a collective normative context for our diversityunderstanding (Figure 1).Figure 1. A common diversity context including a pie chart representing representation numbers, a pipeline representing retention factors, and quote bubbles representing the voices of marginalized students from qualitative research or personal experience.Affordances and Limitations of Our Ordinary Diversity ContextOnce again, establishing a shared context is critical for productive conversation or work on anytopic, including diversity. In addition, this context may represent key components of a
convergent parallel mixedmethod design, collecting both quantitative and qualitative data, simultaneously, to answer tworesearch questions 1) What trends are Program Officers seeing in the Broader Impacts criterionand 2) Which Broader Impacts statements are being addressed in Project Summaries submitted tothe National Science Foundation. The quantitative approach consisted of examining 82 awarded Project Summaries in theEEC division to obtain a quantifiable assessment of the extent to which PIs who applied to EECaddressed the Broader Impacts suggestions outlined in NSF’s Proposal and Award Policies andProcedures Guide. The qualitative approach involved interviews of four program officers from theEEC division regarding the trends in addressing
objects,theories of flight and physics of energy. The instructions are followed with hands on activities orfield trips that can enhance the student experiences.Every year, while this institute helps to recruit 1-2 students from the pool of 25-30 participantsfor the engineering and science programs, it also helps to support the few undergraduate studentsas mentoring counselors in summer as a form of retention. The impact of instructing engineeringphysics at early stages on performance in the college is strong and could be systematized withexpanding such instruction to include additional engineering physics.IntroductionDevising techniques to recruit, retain, educate and graduate students in less established or lessknown disciplines that demand
in an Introductory Circuits CourseIntroductionThere are increasingly frequent calls to incorporate reflection into engineering education. Muchof the focus has been on the use of reflection in teaching design.1, 2 However, there have alsobeen efforts to incorporate reflective practices into courses which are not specifically focused ondesign. If we are able to incorporate reflection into what “the students learn engineering tobe”3—meaning, the engineering science courses which make up the vast majority of mostundergraduate curricula—reflection is expected to contribute to learning outcomes and students’development of metacognitive and social skills.4Because exams are generally used for formative assessment, they are rarely also leveraged as
either the summer orfall semester. In this college, the high school grade point average (HSGPA) was determined to bethe best predictor of graduating within six years. The HSGPA is a weighted GPA determined bythe admissions office. It uses a scale that ranges from zero to five and it gives extra quality pointsfor students who take advanced level coursework (see Table 1). For a reference point, theaverage HSGPA of students who had graduated from engineering was 3.81.Table 1. Number of Quality Points Added to HSGPA for Advanced-Level Courses Course Type Quality Point Advanced Placement 1.0 International Baccalaureate 1.0 Dual Enrollment 1.0 AICE 1.0 Honors
robot. A proof-of-conceptarchitecture and implementation using an Android tablet app is presented. Finally, the alternativetechnologies and potential next steps for future enhancement are discussed.IntroductionThe NAO robot [1], created by SoftBank Robotics (formerly Aldebaran Robotics), is a humanoidrobot with a rich set of features, including a vision system, text-to-speech system, speech andfacial recognition, touch sensors on its head, hands, and feet, and 25 degrees of freedom to moveits head, arms, and legs. It can be programmed using a drag-and-drop GUI software packagecalled Choregraphe [2], or via the Python or C++ programming languages using softwaredevelopment kits (SDKs) provided by SoftBank. The SDKs permit a software developer
, itneeds a comprehensive dialysis of the forms and mechanisms of the internal qualityassurance in engineering education within American colleges and universities.2. Literature Review2.1. Research StatusSince the establishment of engineering education accreditation system, the research topicsgenerally include accreditation organization, accreditation standards, accreditation procedures,accreditation effectiveness, and comparative study.1 However, some scholars have alsopointed out the shortcomings of the existing researches, for instance, the research content isnot systematic, the research method is relatively simple, and the researches lack specificperspective.2.1.1. Research on Stakeholders of Quality AssuranceWith the in-depth development of
-long roboticsworkshop. Table 1 lists the lesson plans for both Year 1 and Year 2. As can be seen, manymodifications were made in Year 2. Table 1: Lesson Plan Semester # Year 1: 2014-2015 Year 2: 2015-2016 Hardware Assembly and Graphic Overview of Robotics; Graphic 1 Programming Programming Introduction to ROBOTC (1): Introduction to ROBOTC (1): Motor 2 Motor Behavior Behavior Introduction to ROBOTC (2): Introduction to ROBOTC (2): Motor
, 2012). Considering the innovation-driven and knowledge-based nature of the U.S. economy,employment opportunities in STEM are projected to increase at a much faster rate than those innon-STEM occupations (CIC, 2014). Also, employees in STEM occupations have and shouldcontinue to experience higher average salaries and lower unemployment rates than theircontemporaries in non-STEM fields (CIC, 2014; Daymont & Andrisani, 1984; Wise, 1975). Inspite of the aforementioned perquisites of working in STEM fields, however, the United Statescontinues to severely lack individuals with the qualifications needed to assume these jobs (CIC,2014; U.S. CJEC, 2012). The insufficiency of the U.S. STEM workforce partially derives fromtwo major factors: 1
actuators ofthe robot are servo motors (Dynamixel) and these motors are directly controlled through a low-level control algorithm. To simplify the control, the system is modeled such that the plate has two-axis linearized motion. This system along with the approaches proposed in this work has potentialto be used as a demonstration testbed for students to learn ROS with control theories in robotics.1. IntroductionRobotics has been growing past the traditional engineering techniques emerging as a newer fieldof modern technology that requires various knowledge from mechanical and electrical engineeringand computer science. When commercial robots are used, the approaches to these robots areprovided by their manufacturers in the form of GUI (Graphical
and assessment, professional practice training, andinstruction in multiple discipline specific design tools and techniques to their students.This paper describes use of student-specific professional development plans, in combination witha menu of online content modules, in order to embrace the unique needs of each discipline whileenabling multidisciplinary collaboration in a single course.BackgroundColorado School of Mines has a long history of multidisciplinary undergraduate programs spreadbetween the freshman and senior year. All freshman students at CSM are required to complete aone-semester, multidisciplinary cornerstone design course which was one of the first suchcourses in the country.1 In addition, the Civil, Environmental
multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary settingthat provides the basis for robust and sustainable solutions. In this proceeding, we present ourobservations, challenges, and learnings garnered over eight years of hosting the summer schooland detail the current program design, which has evolved to reflect lessons learned.1. The ProgramThe US-Denmark research and education program, funded for the first three years by the DanishAgency for Science, Technology and Innovation and the following five years by US-NSF PIRE,is a cooperative and collaborative partnership between two US universities: Universities ofCalifornia, Santa Cruz and Davis (UCSC, UC Davis), and two Danish universities: AalborgUniversity (AAU) and the Technical University of Denmark
] outlinesthree critical elements to consider: 1) availability and advances in digital tools, includingrapid prototyping tools and low-cost microcontroller platforms, that characterize manymaking projects, 2) community infrastructure, including online resources and in-personspaces and events, and 3) the maker mindset, values, beliefs, and dispositions that arecommonplace within the community. In particular, within the Maker realm, things areconstantly evolving, such as availability of new microcontrollers such as Arduino,BeagleBone, and Raspberry Pi. What makes the integration of these tools into the practices ofMakers easy is the ―online community where people can read manuals and tutorials, watchvideos, converse through forums, and share code [17, pg
deliveryspecifically in the cardiovascular area, the leading cause of death in the US. Over the years, thishas spawned explorations in two areas relevant to this paper: (1) behavioral research to improvehealth care; and (2) utilization of technology to improve delivery of health care and to empowerthe patient. We refer here to certain key behavioral research papers that address the role ofnursing and social science professionals in behavioral modification of patients (Bodenheimerand Handley 2002 and 2009, Glasgow et al. 2004, and Piat et al. 2010, AHA 2013). Currentthoughts and tools for behavioral scoring systems are also referenced (Horsman et al. 2003,Rollnick et al. 2008, and PROMIS 2015a and 2015b). Progress on the technology front is seenin the open
enhancing student confidence.BackgroundMcIlwee and Robinson 1 discussed how women engineering students excel in theoretical learning,but fall behind in hands-on learning. This difference in male and female learning styles begins ata young age. During adolescence boys are often raised to be tinkerers and encouraged to develophands-on skills, a fundamental trait of an engineer, whereas girls are socialized differently. Girlsare often not given the same access to hands-on activities, and thus they do not think ofthemselves as tinkerers and do not take part in many hands-on opportunities 1 . This socialupbringing is further enforced by a perception that they do not belong in engineering, which isreinforced by the lack of female role models and mentors
usual ordering of the courses in the student's plan of study. In most cases, it isevident as to which category a course falls into: hardware, software, hardware/software, orsomething else (systems, mathematics…). In those cases, where it was not clear which categorythe course fell into, we attempted to find the course syllabus or, in a few cases, we sent email tothe department chair seeking further information.As to the number of programs examined, we initially believed that a random sample of fiftyprograms would be adequate. After tallying the data for the first twenty programs a patternemerged and this pattern changed little after forty programs so we stopped there.The common software courses that we sought included the following: 1
Engineering Alliance (IEA), Washington Accord [1], European Commission,Bologna Process [2] , Accreditation Board of Engineering Technology (ABET) [3], Middle StatesCommission of Higher Education (MSCHE) [4] and National Commission of AcademicAccreditation and Assessment (NCAAA) [5] are based on an Outcome-Based Education (OBE)model and require higher education institutions and engineering programs to show studentachievement in terms of established learning outcomes. It is clearly stated in multiple researchpapers published by the National Institute of Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA) [25,26] andothers [6,28,29] that in many higher education institutions, actual Continual Quality Improvement(CQI) and accreditation efforts are minimally integrated
experience closely aligned to the practices and tools used in professional recordingstudios and consumer software to craft the music to which many students regularly listen19.Figure 1 shows the EarSketch environment. In this screen shot, one can see (a) the digital audioworkstation, which represents the output of code in a multi-track timeline of sound clips andeffects, and (b) the code editor in which students author the Python or JavaScript scripts used togenerate the music. The sound library includes over 4000 loops created by music industryprofessionals in modern genres such as R&B, dubstep, hip-hop, pop, house, and EDM (electronicdance music). In addition, EarSketch includes a curriculum browser with lessons and examplesfor different
exploration as a theme, and the other used micro controllers as thefoundation for activities. The goals of this research are as follows: 1. Develop effectivecurricula for improving student self-efficacy in CT, 2. Develop a reliable and effective wayof measuring student self-efficacy in CT, and 3. Enforce the notion that CT is not problemsolving (PS), but a component of cognition.Background and Related Work“Computational thinking involves solving problems, designing systems, and understandinghuman behavior, by drawing on the concepts fundamental to computer science”26. However,computational thinking (CT) is not intended to be equated to computer science; rather theessence of CT comes from thinking like a computer scientist when faced with problems
engineering educators and students.IntroductionThe Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET)1 and the National Associationof Colleges and Employers (NACE)2 are among many organizations to assert thatcommunication is an important subject for the modern engineer to be taught. Communicationassignments in engineering courses are often predictable: technical reports, technical memos, andpersuasive communications, such as proposals delivered via oral presentation or inwriting. According to a Journal of STEM Education paper entitled “Student Perceptions ofCommunication: Undergraduate Engineers’ Views of Writing and Speaking in the Classroomand Workplace,”3 students often view writing “as though they were black and whiteproblems.” A lack of
it currently stands, Ohland andcolleagues (2012) have found that industrial engineering has the highest level of stickiness andthat stickiness is less variable for transfer students than for first generation (FTIC) undergraduatestudents. A general overview of recent data using the stickiness metric can be found in Figure 1below.Figure 1. Stickiness by major and gender in engineering (Lord, Layton, & Ohland, 2014, page 4)Additional research has also employed the stickiness measure as a metric of student success. Forexample, research on longitudinal success rates in Civil and Mechanical Engineering studentshas used stickiness as a metric to gauge the differences between genders and ethnicities in thesefields (Ohland, Lord, & Layton