:10.1108/026839400103052985. Andersen, J. A. (2010). Public versus private managers: How public and private managers differ in leadership behavior. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 131-141. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02117.x6. Bennett, R. H., III. (1998). The importance of tacit knowledge in strategic deliberations and decisions. Management Decision, 36(9), 589-597. doi:10.1108/002517498102394787. Borrego, M., Foster, M. J., & Froyd, J. E. (2015). What is the state of the art of systematic reviews in engineering education? Journal of Engineering Education, 104(2), 212-242.8. Brockmann, E. N., & Anthony, W. P. (1998). The influence of tacit knowledge and collective mind on strategic planning
doctoral research8. Drawing on experiencesand ideas from multiple contexts, which for returners may include their work context anddoctoral program context, can be a source of innovation9. Further, returners bring anunderstanding of real-world engineering needs to their academic work, and their academic workmay have more immediate applications within the engineering community7. Peters and Daly8shared the example of one retuning student who sought a PhD to address an issue that arose inher industry work experience with the plan to pursue work related to that issue upon completingher degree. One study on adult undergraduate returners suggests that, because of their pastpersonal and work experiences, mature students were highly motivated and goal
. Ideation -Both instructors emphasized the iterative process of developing project designs, evaluating them, and seeking peer and instructor feedback4.3 Integrating Engineering and the ArtsGess (2017) suggested, “In order to facilitate an effective STEAM [Science, Technology,Engineering, Arts, and Math] educational experience for your students, you should beparticipating in the same iterative cycles of design and reflection that you are planning for yourstudents” [18, p. 41]. This study serves as a catalyst for reflection on the initial implementationof a course designed to integrate engineering and the arts. We hope this reflective exercise willmanifest in iterative improvements for future implementation. To further
unlimited potential. I have a feeling we’d see less dropouts in the field of engineering.” - FranklinParticipants also articulated their recognition of the potential pitfalls going forward. Thisincluded an expectation that it will be difficult to hold themselves accountable to maintain agrowth mindset and that maintaining positive attitudes of intelligence as malleable will beespecially difficult during times that are personally difficult. “Making effective plans is hard and holding yourself accountable is even harder. Holding myself accountable will definitely be my largest hurdle in adopting the growth mindset.” - Don “A major barrier will always be to keep a positive/growth mindset at times when things get tough … but hopefully I can
education and his M.S. in electrical and computer engineering, both from Purdue University. He received his bachelor’s in computer engineering at Harding University.Mr. Kanembe Shanachilubwa, Harding University I am an undergraduate mechanical engineering major anticipating graduation in May of 2019. I am a member of the Beyond Professional Identity research group based in Harding University located in Searcy, Arkansas. I plan to further my studies in engineering education in graduate school particularly in regards to equipping students to work in development and sustainability.Dr. Stephen Secules, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Stephen received a PhD in education at the University of
gathering information about participant’s English proficiency, familystatus, prior teaching and work experiences, duration of stay in the US, and future plans aftergraduation. During this interview, we also asked participants about their teaching assignmentincluding nature and level of class, their role in the class, prior experiences of teaching or takingthe class, anticipated rewards and challenges as a teaching assistant, and support provided by theuniversity or the engineering department or the course instructor to help the participant betterhandle their TA responsibilities. The second interview was conducted in the last third of the semester (10th - 12th week).The aim of this interview was to give an opportunity for participants to
believe enrich their classes.Some participants started teaching right away, some after years or decades of industry experience. Someparticipants earned a doctoral degree early in their career, some much later, some do not plan on earning adoctoral degree at all. This breadth of pathways is important when considering recruitment and careeradvancement policies. A “one size fits all” approach to recruitment, especially if that approach is modeledon the tenure-track recruitment criteria, will result in policies that exclude some candidates whoseperspectives and experiences would be an asset to the program. There was no career pathway that could bedescribed as “typical” among these ten participants.We found that our participants were hired with an
element of social value; saving money was still the only social value identified.Instead of articulating specific social value their proposed project would bring to the localcommunity in which they planned to implement it, the Youth Scholars described in their posterand through their discourse with audience members that the project would bring benefits to andavoid harm to the world in general. But such articulation of broad and vague goals does notexhibit a sophisticated understanding of social value creation through energy engineering.Furthermore, the Youth Scholars’ second poster exhibited a higher level of applied knowledge ofownership, reinvestment, and extraction, articulating ways that ownership of technologies shapesthe design of a system
participants at the end of their second year of transfer using a semi-structured interviewprotocol. During the interview, students were asked to: 1. describe their overall transferexperience; 2. contrast the second year of transfer with the first year; 3. describe experiences intheir majors; 4. describe their participation in activities or resources introduced through theprogram, and their perceptions of the benefits of these resources (academic supports, socialactivities, undergraduate research, internships, career activities, etc.); 5. identify any programbenefits they perceived; 6. identify short and long-term future academic and career plans; and7. suggest recommendations for program improvement.Analysis Participant demographics and outcome
Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Prof. Michelle M. Camacho, University of San Diego Michelle M. Camacho is Professor of Sociology at the University of San Diego. She began her career at UC San Diego in 1999 as a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for US Mexican Studies, and later as a UC Faculty Fellow in Ethnic Studies. In 2015-16, she returned to UC San Diego as a fellow of the American c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019
given special event T-shirts, but thecolor of the volunteer T-shirts differs from any color worn by the girls, for easy identification ofvolunteers and participants.All GEE activities are designed by volunteers, and the event itself is organized entirely byvolunteers. Each yearly event requires about eight months of planning. Usually around 75volunteers plan and execute the event. No volunteer is compensated for organizing or managingthe event. The total cost for each activity is limited to a few hundred dollars (USD), due to budgetconstraints on the event. GEE is funded by donations from corporate sponsors and partners. Theevent is free to participating girls; registration is performed using an online form. GEE isadvertised to DPS female
their sense of belonging, eleven out of the seventeenstudents reported feeling connected with their peers and community by the end of the quarter,compared to only 6 at the start of the quarter. This increase in students’ sense of belonging issupported by the final reflections in which nearly all the students spoke positively of the classenvironment that supported community and friendship development.This study provides endorsement for continuing to offer ENGR 101 at our university and forincorporating similar activities into other introductory engineering courses. Below, we providerecommendations for those interested in implementing similar interventions at their universityand our vision for future iterations of the course and how we plan to
expressly devoted to the first-year Engineering Program at Northeastern University. Recently, she has joined the expanding Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at NU to continue teaching Simulation, Facilities Planning, and Human-Machine Systems. She also serves as a Technical Advisor for Senior Capstone Design and graduate-level Challenge Projects in Northeastern’s Gordon Engineering Leadership Program. Dr. Jaeger has been the recipient of numerous awards in engineering education for both teaching and mentoring and has been involved in several engineering educational research initiatives through ASEE and beyond.Dr. Courtney Pfluger, Northeastern University Dr. Courtney Pfluger received her Doctoral degree
renderedvisible (e.g., “Given a -10 F night temperature, a 1500 calorie daily intake, and a 0.5 in thick coatworn by a homeless person, find the insulation material that will keep this person’s bodytemperature at 97 F throughout the night?”). Students could also identify alternate sources ofknowledge that would be useful to solving the larger homelessness problem “(e.g., social policy,urban planning, nutrition science, distributive economics)” [17]. Furthermore, they could identifywhat assumptions need to be challenged (e.g., what percentage of homeless people are adults vs.children, veterans vs. non-veterans, or how many actually own a coat that provides sufficientwarmth). Finally, students could contrast how their solutions would differ using only
) servicelearning project where 240 freshmen mechanical engineering students worked together in smallteams to design and deploy an engineering outreach experience for a designated age-group of 4th-11th grade students. This educational experience is designed to expose the freshmen engineeringstudents to a variety of concepts and skills necessary for successful negotiation of theirengineering careers. The project encourages the freshmen to challenge their assumptions andconceptions of what an engineer is and does. Other knowledge and skills gained includeunderstanding and using the engineering design process, effectively working on engineeringteams, effectively communicating, planning and making decisions, all while solving an open-ended problem. The
motivated by, beingwell-compensated for their work. It becomes more of a concern if highly controlled motivations(external or introjected) are the only incentives for career persistence. In this study population,this was a relatively small group (3 women and 1 man). What was similar among these fourparticipants was that both the man and women who expressed only controlled motivations alsodisplayed lower self-confidence regarding both engineering work and their career pathwaychoices than those participants expressing some autonomous motivations.For those participants who lacked the autonomous motivation, a universal expression of low self-efficacy emerged, particularly with regard to more technical tasks. For instance, Jacob seemed tobe planning his
do you imagine people with these jobs do on a day-to-day basis?7. Future plans Even though graduation is pretty far away, I’d like to get a sense of your future plans. What do you want to be when you grow up? Page 26.961.17 How did you choose (xxx)? Have you considered other areas/subjects?How would you become a (career choice)?What would you say it takes to be a good (insert student’s career choice)?How are you at (insert characteristics student mentions)?Are there any fields/careers you just don’t want to go into? Why?Who talks with you about career choices (parent, relative, teachers, etc.)?(If applicable
preparation or work done and decisions made by the facultyadvisor. This is because students have control over their design and technology choices, butcannot do much about the MAE curriculum and have difficulty countermanding the adviceof the faculty advisor. Thus the authors embarked on a plan to remedy two issues with this situation: • the reliance on faculty to bridge students’ skill gap, • the inaccessibility of a pathway through the curriculum that allows students to build their skills to the level these competitions require.Addressing the first issue requires the faculty to download their knowledge to the students ina more formal way, other than individual coaching. Although it is reasonable to individuallycoach a student or students
both engineers and non- engineers to become members and work on “wickedproblems”, complex problems that are experienced as local manifestations of global trends. Suchwicked problems are contingent on multiple, interconnected factors manifest longitudinally atlocal, national and international levels (Gardner 2011). Global economic trends interrelated withlocal wages influence aggregate availability and consumption of resources including food,energy, water. Planning depends on local customs and, sociopolitical and legal institutions.Planet-scale environmental changes shape local climate and soil, affecting productivity andaccess to resources. In the interim, individuals and households experience the synchronic effectsof food, water and energy
nonacademic interactions with faculty, and thesocial supportive residential environment. Page 26.1450.9Using two-wave longitudinal data from 2004-2007 National Study of Living Learning Programs(NSLLP), Szelényi and Inkelas investigated how the living learning program affected 294 femalestudents’ persistence in STEM majors.21 The researchers found one year involvement in theliving-learning program at the beginning of the women’ college education has a long-termpositive relationship with plans to attend graduate school in the fourth year of college. Szelényi,Denson, and Inkelas investigated how living-learning program participation influenced
-learning project that would keep students engaged. TheEngineering Leadership Program objectives were to: • Provide monthly exposure to successful women in engineering, including practicing engineers, engineering alumni, and engineering faculty members whose presentations featured their latest research, experiences, and personal journeys with students • Utilize an individual and group-mentoring model designed to match sophomore- engineering majors with junior and senior engineering majors to specifically target feelings of isolation in engineering. This adapted a mentoring program for all STEM students at Douglass that was already being planned for the 2013-2014 year to target engineering students
mathematics and science lesson plans to complete the learning circle by tyingmathematics/science problems to their experiences. Many of these students decide to apply foracademic magnet middle schools focused on STEM based on the success of the 4th and 5th gradeintegrated lesson/field trip curriculum to The Citadel. Assessment of curriculum changes basedon the field trip, student reflective essays, and future attendance at middle and high schoolSTEM magnets will demonstrate the importance of collaboration between universities andelementary and middle school programs (especially STEM focused programs) on engagementwith STEM disciplines in the future.IntroductionEverywhere you read there are discussions about the importance to increase the number
Paper ID #11616Characterizing Student Music Preference and Engineering Major ChoiceMr. Frank Blubaugh, Purdue University Frank Blubaugh is a graduating senior in Multidisciplinary Engineering at Purdue University. He has a diverse academic background in acoustical engineering, education, and music performance.Dr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, West Lafayette Joyce B. Main is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate
stakeholders and other professionals. In developing a portfolio of initiatives toaddress the overarching project goals, the City Council has identified an opportunity to utilize avacant city block in a low-income area with an ethnically and racially diverse population todevelop and construct an urban natural enclave, including walking trails and community foodgarden spaces. As the project engineer you plan to approach this initiative by forming a projectadvisory team comprising a variety of community stakeholders and a range of interdisciplinaryprofessionals. After your initial round of interviews, you have invited some of the stakeholders toa group meeting. Your goals in facilitating this first meeting are: 1) through the group discussionyou want to
course content inmore depth because of the communication assignments. While C-I course faculty indicated thatchanging their course objectives and lesson plans to include more work on communication skillshad initially increased time spent on course preparation, they also indicated that because of thedual benefits of improved communication skills and improved understanding of engineeringconcepts, the extra work was worth the effort.At this time, the culture of the College of Engineering was beginning to value and embrace theseprogrammatic changes. The program grew because of successful efforts at faculty buy-in, aswell as positive assessments of the program by students. The program was built from faculty'sgrass-roots perceptions of student needs
. And the third group con-centrated on quality of life and future plans for the region. In addition to that, all of the groupswere asked to compare their results with their home countries in terms of any major differ-ences or even similarities. The results were presented and discussed in class during one of theearly live sessions. Hereby the students simultaneously gained knowledge about their futuredestination and challenged their personal understanding about their own cultural background.Furthermore, they were introduced into the home countries of their future classmates. Anoth-er activity in this course part was dominated by several discussions about the essence of theengineering profession, necessary competences for successful careers in
refer to the ship as the “Babel at sea”; 29 crew membersstruggled to understand each other and the captain. As Squires notes, lack of a common languagemay have contributed to the confusion regarding evacuation procedures.29Pollution IssuesA more serious ethical consideration is the substantial environmental pollution wrought by cruiseships. Although several US states (Alaska, Maine, Washington, and California) have restricteddischarges within their coastlines and the International Maritime Organization (IMO) forbidsdumping of plastics in oceans, there is currently no comprehensive international plan for dealingwith what is becoming an increasingly vexing problem. “Beyond three nautical miles, there arevery, very few rules,” notes a Seattle
to develop and prototype a remote wireless network to collect environmentaldata in an extreme weather environment. The project consisted of mechanical design ofpackaging, electrical design of the system and sensors and the software design of the databasesand user interfaces. The main risk was the scale of the company; it was a small privately-ownedfirm with limited resources, very tight budgets, and thin operational margins. The companystated it needed to make the product commercially available after the end of the academic year tobe profitable. The company's business plan stressed rapid time to market and to provide ease ofuse of the system to the final customer. For a successful project from the company's perspective,a working solution
, inspired by service learning pedagogies [25], we continually ask our students toformulate plans for future action based on their experiences. In short, we ask students: “What?So What? Now What?”MethodsTo explore student capacities for building their own self-concept, learning to develop meaningfuland rewarding relationships, and maturing their capacity for deep learning, we relied on existingwork for the development of self-authorship in the intrapersonal, interpersonal and cognitivedomains, synthesized into a rubric (see Table III).We selected four students who had completed our series of seminar courses, three of whom wereengineering majors, to trace longitudinally, comparing their reflections at the end of the programto earlier work in their