could help in understanding the impactsof the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education as well as gaining some insight on when in-person learning should be prioritized.IntroductionHigher education in an online learning environment has been shown to be at least as effective asface-to-face and appreciated by students [1] - [8]. However it does have limitations [2], [9], [10],and requires several weeks of preparation prior to the start of class [6], [8]. In the case of theCOVID-19 pandemic, most institutions around the world were forced to move to an onlinelearning environment within a week [9] - [11]. Further, while students may appreciate an onlinelearning environment when they choose it, perceptions of learning can change drastically whenforced to
withengineering undergraduates across multiple class years and majors. We sought to answer thefollowing research questions: (1) How do engineering students’ definitions of EM differ fromliterature definitions? and (2) How do engineering students believe EM will be useful to theircareer? Students were interviewed using a semi-structured protocol to get a clearerunderstanding of how they define EM. The interview protocol included questions focused onwhat students think EM means, how it has affected them, and how it might continue to affectthem in the future. These interviews were then transcribed and thematically analyzed todetermine the attributes of an EM that are common in students’ definitions of EM. The analysisof the interviews identified trends that
design process.1. INTRODUCTIONPrototyping is an essential part of the design process, providing insight into the form andfunction of a product or system. Prototyping may take many forms whether it be virtual,physical, or computational, and serves a critical purpose across various disciplines. Often inengineering education, prototypes are core to design course requirements. The learning by doingnature of creating a prototype provides students with a contextualized experience facilitatingstudent understanding, offering a means to assess the students’ understanding, and creating areference point to test the product for further design improvement.Often, an iterative approach is used for prototyping. This idea is supported by many articles
co-op experiences,were given the option to choose from their experiences and write about whichever one they feltwas best suited to the assignment.BackgroundCo-op work experience has long been acknowledged as an important method for experientiallearning that has multiple benefits. Some of these benefits include the development of enhancedprofessional skills such as communication skills [1], leadership [2], and understanding howcoursework relates to engineering practice [1], [3], [4]. Several studies have been conducted onhow engineering coursework and co-op experiences interact [3], [4], [5], and have shown clearbenefits to the co-op experiences. To achieve maximum benefit, however, the co-op experiencemust be explicitly and methodically
students [1]. Students worktogether as a team to apply their engineering skills and gain field experience before embarkingon their eventual careers [2]. The open-ended nature of the experience allows numerous learningopportunities for practicing both technical and non-technical skills. While the primary emphasisof capstone design experience is justifiably technical competency, the non-technical aspects areequally important within engineering careers [2]. A structured training within the broad area ofprofessionalism is required to leverage the capstone design experience and better align with thecareer needs.Besides the application of technical knowledge, every capstone project relies on multipleprofessional skills to be successful. While
opportunity for us toacquire insights for future instruction. Results indicated that some course components wereperceived to be more useful either before or after the transition, and preferences were not thesame for the two courses. Furthermore, to determine what course components need furtherimprovement before transitioning to fully online mode, we computed a logistic regression model.Results indicated that for each course, different course components both before and after thetransition significantly affected students’ preference of course modality.IntroductionFace-to-Face (F2F) classes with no online components have slowly been losing their share ofcourse delivery 1 . Recent improvements in technology and financial constraints have paved theway for
that comprise the EOPframework. We believe the EOP framework can be considered as a guiding framework indesigning courses and curriculum to better prepare students for future engineering work.INTRODUCTIONThe following research paper aims to dissect the integration of the newly developedEngineering for One Planet (EOP) framework into undergraduate engineering courses. TheEngineer of 2020 [1] guided academic approaches to engineering education for the first partof the new millennium, but it could not anticipate the magnitude of the challenges facingengineers today. Our goal is to provide foundational evidence to advocate for EOP as aframework for faculty and students to contextualize a global pandemic, legacy, and newglobal environmental crises
facilitate engagement in contingent teaching, knowledge scaffolding, formativeassessment, and collaborative learning strategies, but in ways that encourage student motivation,interaction, and engagement in learning. Plickers [1], an innovative SRS consisting of studentresponse cards and an instructor website and instructor app, combines many of the features ofpre-technological, clicker, bring-your-own-device, and gamification SRSs. Instructors shouldcarefully implement any SRSs with full awareness of the benefits, limitations, and best practices.New instructors might find Plickers to be an easy to implement SRS to meet their students’learning needs.This paper presents a brief history of SRSs and an evaluation of the benefits and challenges ofSRSs
acceleratechange.” [1] (Sands & Shushok, 2020). They portray a vision where a “student, staff, or facultymember should be able to be anywhere in the world participating in a learning or discoverycommunity and still be fully engaged with the university.” They go so far as to quote the bionicman from the fantasy 1970s TV series, saying “we have the technology.”Three special issues for archival journals related to chemical engineering education: Advances inEngineering Education, [2] Biomedical Engineering Education, [3] and the Journal of ChemicalEducation[4] have published 255 special issue papers address a broad span of topics includingcourse design, content delivery, assessment practices, classroom environment, and project andlaboratory work. Of the
members safely and securely in a room within a home.This isolation room can be controlled and monitored and has an alarm to alert family members ofsystem warnings and malfunctions. The idea is to make the system simple enough that userscould install it with a little modification in the room.Because of the outbreak of Coronavirus Disease 2019, abbreviated as COVID-19 and its viablepotential to overwhelm health care facilities as observed in the most of countries, the authorshope to provide a cost-effective solution that could ease the demand of the isolation room in thehospitals.1- Introduction:Negative pressure rooms, also called isolation rooms, are a type of hospital room that keepspatients with infectious illnesses, or patients who are
outcomes of thecourse and found that a proficiency increase was measured in each of the techniques and toolsthat were instructed, furthermore, students recognized these proficiency increases.IntroductionPrototyping is a critical technical skill that engineers use to solve problems and explore designalternatives. As succinctly explained in Ulrich and Eppinger’s seminal Product Design andDevelopment, “prototypes are used for four purposes: learning, communication, integration, andmilestones” [1]. When engineers prototype, they do so physically or digitally through artifactsthat communicate design intent, sub-features, or a full solution; as Tom Kelley of IDEO hasstated, “A prototype is worth a thousand meetings” [2]. While there is consensus on
. A 16-hour “So, You’reGoing to be a(n) [School] Engineer…” course targets incoming first-year engineering students,and is customizable by school. The vision is asynchronous deployment accompanied by studentcreation in a digital journal.Although the initial focus was to build a single course to address college and career readiness,“as the investigation has progressed, the potential benefit of developing separate courses for‘guide and inform’ and ‘prepare’ is appearing” [1, p. 1], and that is the direction undertaken inthis paper.The former course will be largely deployed through a key contact point for college-boundsecondary school students, the high school counselor and college recruiter networks. Thischannel is constantly under great strain
building a new generation ofmachines, materials, and systems [1]. As a result, these challenges will require us to examinehow we not only educate engineers for the future, but also to integrate techniques from the largerfield of education so that we can apply research-informed approaches to engineering education.When we talk about a research-informed approach in the context of this work, we are discussingthe method of engaging in interactional ethnography as a logic of inquiry, and as a method forinforming curricular based decisions [2]. Many engineering and science curricula focusprimarily on students developing the technical skills required for their careers post-graduation.This focus on technical skills often comes at the cost of the
822 den ac 8c e in 4 ni e i ie .Backg ndLinea ci c i anal i c e ha e inc ea ingl been ili ing ci c i im la i n f a ehel den nde and and e hei kn ledge f ci c i anal i c nce . H e e , ch f a e ha m f en been ed f ci c i anal i lab a c e , he e den lea nde ign, e , and b ild im le and c m lica ed ci c i -lec e. M e ecen l , f a e lha e been de el ed ecificall aid den in he lea ning f ci c i anal i c nce . Thi ec i n de c ibe he e ea ch n de el ing and im lemen ing in e ac i e l f lea ningci c i anal i .S ga Aid i an a -g aded h me k em Ma e alli e . al de igned e a e den fin-cla e amina i n [1]. S den en a MATLAB h me k da a file and n he g
own learning. A common misconception is that self-directedlearning can only occur in isolation from all other input from either the educator or fellowstudents. Students can work in a highly self-directed way while being a part of a larger team.Notably, a salient trend in the research suggests that students with highly developedself-directed learning skills connect and consult with a range of peers and leverage theirlearning network to make their choices about the direction of their learning [1].Foundational literature that examines the construction of a successful self-directed learningenvironment suggests that learning should reflect three distinct parts: The learner, the educator,and the learning resources [2]. Significant parts of this
their teaching on the expertise gained from the academic context where theywere educated and industry environment where they have worked. Even in current day UnitedStates, professions like structural engineering have fewer female and minority industry leadersthan those that are White Caucasian male [1], and the same follows for academics in this field.As a result, many faculty members have limited exposure to the notable published works,projects, and other contributions of under-represented individuals to share with students.Historically, entry to professions in the built environment have been riddled by barriers due togender, race, and class. This continues to negatively affect not only the number of women andminority students who choose to
two-year colleges at the institutional level and documentsvariegated results. One study [1] compares full-time enrollment between Summer2019 and Summer 2020 and finds that there was a disproportionate decrease inenrollment for male and traditional-aged students, and a total of 57.7% percentagedecrease in engineering technology enrollment during this period. On the otherhand, another survey [2] showed that students were mostly enrolled in online andhybrid courses during the Fall of 2020, and the vast majority state that their coursesmet or exceeded their expectations. In addition, when asked which instructionalmethod they would prefer in the future, 25% chose traditional face-to-face classes,45% chose online classes, and 30% chose hybrid
,experience of younger university students. Successes and lessons learned are reported from a capstone design covers three semesters- a one-credit AE Junior Design class, and two three-capstone design project whose scope included development of four Arduino rover lab activities credit senior classes (Senior Design 1 and 2). In Junior Design, students define topics, formfor a freshman class. The second approach described involves having all capstone seniors teams, and then complete a proposal that scopes their project for their senior year. Some projectscomplete an individual assignment to document a specific “tool for student success” that might are faculty-proposed or industry-sponsored, but most are proposed by
various disciplines to solve real worldproblems [1]. A call to action has been made to develop and support new educational programsfor the revision of STEM education into a more integrated model [2], [3]. To this end, guidingframeworks are necessary for identifying what concepts must be incorporated into such modelsto effectively teach STEM in an interdisciplinary manner. In particular, the Next GenerationScience Standards (NGSS) outlines the “crosscutting concepts” as the common tools and lensesshared across disciplines that may be used to bridge into alternative contexts [4], [5]. The NGSSfurther distinguishes “energy and matter” as a crosscutting concept with relevance across thefields of science and engineering. The first law of
in bearing and gear systems at the Villanova Center for Analytics of Dynamic Systems (VCADS) in PA. He graduated from the University of Yaounde 1 in Cameroon and then completed a Certificate in Teaching Engineering in Higher Education at Villanova University. Dr. Kwuimy is interested in vibration analysis and in the use of nonlinear dynamics tools to improve the early detection of fault in complex nonlinear systems. In the latest, his focus is on engineering systems (gear systems, bearings) and biological systems (vibration in human-arm, human diseases). In vibration analysis, his focus is on the conversion of mechanical vibration into electrical energy (energy harvesting). A key interest of Dr. Kwuimy is the
successful during outreach. This work may inform how we think about andconceptualize the role of outreach educators, in that EOEs may serve as a “greeter”, welcomingstudents into and helping them feel like they belong in engineering. This paper will discussimplications for engineering outreach and how to support EOEs as they balance delivery ofcontent and building relationships that foster student agency and success in engineering.IntroductionIntroducing children to role models during STEM outreach programming is believed to be aneffective means to inspire interest and exploration in STEM study and careers [1-2]. Thisapproach is based on the idea that if children see and interact with these role models, they canlearn from them, get excited, and
discussed.1. IntroductionModern engineers are now required to not only be technically adept but are also expected topossess creativity and to lead innovation [1]. Specifically, scholars see creativity, innovation,entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, and mindset as essential skills for the new generation ofengineers [2], [3]. Traditionally a domain of business schools, entrepreneurship education hasexpanded to multiple academic disciplines with this realization that students need new skills thatare marketable and valuable [4]. Engineering programs have reconceptualized entrepreneurshipeducation to foster creativity, innovation, and entrepreneurial skills and mindset in engineeringstudents [5]. With over half of ASEE member schools offering some form
andprofessional skills within the teaching framework to train successful future engineers [1]. Mostengineering programs define the core of engineering curricula as mathematics, science,engineering analysis, and design; however, students need more than just technical skills [2]. In2004, the National Academy of Engineering indicated that engineering graduates need to beprepared to address the complex technical, social, and ethical questions raised by emergingtechnologies [3]. In addition, at a recent department Industry Advisory Council (IAC) meeting,professional engineers indicated that entry-level engineers from our university have the technicalskills, but need further training in interpersonal and professional skills. However, developingstandalone
studying in the U.S. Hence, the purpose of this study is to understand the experiences ofinternational students participating in an engineering study abroad program at a single researchuniversity. We argue that understanding the impact of study abroad on international students isrelevant to enrich their academic and professional experience in the United States.BackgroundHigher education’s internationalization has increasingly garnered attention and has taken diversetrends due to the global educational experience associated benefits. Internationalization providesa mechanism that interlocks global and intercultural imperatives in the agenda of institutionaldeliverables in post-secondary education [1]. In the United States (U.S.), the emphasis
knowledge and pass it from one generation ofworkers to the next properly and succinctly. The aging workforce poses a difficult obstacle, withreports of employees within the industry nearing retirement age being published regularly in theearly 2010s [1] [2] and illustrated in Table 1 [3]. This is prevalent at the local utility, where mostsenior operations staff are at or nearing retirement age, with several purposefully asked to staybeyond their qualified retirement. The researchers completed a Knowledge ManagementCapability Assessment (KMCA) questionnaire that was validated at its publication [4]. Thisquestionnaire provided the team and the utility management with a succinct description of theKM capability of the operations and maintenance staff in
Engineering at higher rates thanmen (e.g., [1, 2, 3]). Some of the reasons that women are underrepresented in Engineering includea mismatch of values (especially being human-centered vs. machine-centered) or life goals (e.g.,not being family friendly) and lacking female mentors and role models, as mentioned in the thirdquote above (see, e.g., [4, 5, 6, 7]). More generally, women do not enter Engineering at the samerate as men and also are likely to leave more readily because they feel like they don’t belong. Thefirst quote that we shared at the beginning of this paper from a woman majoring in Engineering atour institution conveys the sentiments of women who drop classes, at least in part, because theyfeel that they do not fit in, not even in a
societalneeds and social impacts, and teachers’ development in engineering education through hands-onactivities, provides better understanding of engineering education professional development forK-12 STEM teachers.Key words: STEM integration, precollege engineering education, professional development,STEM teacher self-efficacyIntroductionEducation policy and reform have placed a major emphasis on STEM college and careerreadiness for national economic success [1]-[3]. Integrated STEM approaches in K-12 scienceand math instruction can be more engaging and meaningful for students and often meet thecurriculum content and practice goals better than single-subject lessons. In addition, studentengagement and motivation increase in math and science classrooms
EcologyThis paper reports on a work-in-progress—a study about the learning experiences ofengineering students exploring possible careers in the energy industry. It is a follow-up to aprevious study of the learning experiences of practicing engineers beginning new jobs in anenergy company [1]. The overall objective of the two studies is to map the learning ecology ofengineering students in a higher education program to the learning ecology of practicingengineers in a workplace. This paper also reports on the perspectives of engineering facultyeducating engineering students—specifically in an energy engineering program at a university.Our objective is to better understand the similarities and differences between the two learningecologies of an
were received. Selection was based on a reviewof high school transcript for academic performance, a recommendation letter from a STEMteacher, transcripts, and stated interest in exploring transportation engineering careers in anapplication essay. Of the 128 participants accepted to the NSTI program, 123 attended. As a partof the application process, the program collected demographics (see Tables 1, 2, and 3) andrelated measures such as self-reported enrollment in free and reduced-price lunch program andfirst-generation status based on parent/guardian education level.Table 1. Participant demographics by Sex and Race/Ethnicity Number Percent Total Number of Participants 123 Sex Female
engineering education practices to create more inclusive engineering professionals with thebroader impact of increased diversity in the field. This Work-in-Progress paper will detail thebackground and current progress of a 2-year National Science Foundation Professional Formationof Engineers: Research Initiation in Engineering Formation (NSF PFE:RIEF) project including theproject framing, team formation, research training, and questionnaire development.BackgroundThe engineering field has not always been welcoming of diversity despite attempts and calls byorganizations to change this in recent years [1-5]. Women and non-white people have showninterest and capacity for success in engineering but often become discouraged due to unnecessarybarriers in