associated level oftechnology and cost: 1. Small, student-built version 2. Medium, classroom version used by all students 3. Large, full-featured version that was remotely accessible via the internetVersion 1 – Small, student-built house The first version of the IoT House was design so that a small team of students could buildtheir own structure. This structure was approximately 15”x15”x15” in size and was constructedprimarily from form board readily available from a local hardware store. The pieces for thewalls and roof were cut and glued together so that the house could be instrumented with the IoTdevices that the teachers received during the summer workshop. These devices can measure anumber of environmental parameters
are widely recognized as problem solvers [1]. Solving problems commonly includesworking collaboratively in design teams to generate solutions to real-world problems [2].Throughout the engineering design process, engineers make decisions about how to understandthe problem, design solutions, evaluate solutions, and then implement the solution that bestaligns with user needs. Many of the decisions made in the engineering design process haveimplications for the well-being of members of our society and our globe. As such, undergraduateeducation should facilitate holistic development of engineering students’ ability to makedecisions in ill-structured settings such as design [3, 4]. In engineering education, explicitdiscussion of decision making
. Specificquestions we are examining include: • What differences exist between students’ sense of belonging based on academic and social demographics their academic level (year in college, gender and race/ethnicity)? • What differences exist for two student cohorts, sophomores and juniors, from Year 1 to Year 2 in the project? • What is the nature of students’ experiences in CE that affect their sense of belongingness in engineering?MethodsStudy ContextIn 2017, a CE department at a southeastern land grant institution was awarded a National ScienceFoundation (NSF) Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer Science Departments (RED) grant, whichaims to achieve “significant sustainable changes necessary
ofEngineering (NAE) report published in 2017 [1], “Engineering Technology in the United States”.This report suggests that research addressing the engineering technology student population isunderrepresented in certain areas. Specifically, this work supports furthering our understandingof what influences student choice of major, how socioeconomic factors influence student choice,and how mentoring, peer support, and differences between 2- and 4-year schools impact studentprogress and choice. Recommendation 4 suggests that research is needed to understand thevariety of programs found in engineering technology and resulting employment followinggraduation. It also supports investigation into pay differences between disciplines and how thatimpacts students
, design, andimplementation of engineering and technology in engineering field. It is generally expectedengineering technologists often work under professional engineers. However, InternationalEngineering Technologists Agreement (IETA) stipulates an engineering technology shalldemonstrate “the competence for independent practice as an engineering technologist asexemplified by the International Engineering Alliance (IEA)1 competency profile.” IETA(Sydney Accord) provides knowledge profile for engineering technologists as: a systematic,theory- based understanding of the natural sciences applicable to the sub-discipline,conceptually-based mathematics, numerical analysis, statistics, and aspects of computer andinformation science to support analysis
that engineering technologyand related disciplines tend to be male dominated. The reporting students most frequentlyidentified as white, followed by Asian and Hispanic. Most students attended a suburban, publichigh school and about 47% of students reported receiving no support as they prepared to attendcollege.Key Words: Undergraduate students, matriculation, retention, graduation, engineeringtechnologyIntroductionThe work offered in this paper was intended to address recommendations 3 and 4 from a reportpublished by the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) [1]. This recommendation suggeststhat researchers focus on understanding the population of ET (Engineering Technology) studentsthrough understanding why they choose ET, socioeconomic
Design (CAD). c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019Enhanced Student Learning Experience in Technical Drawing and CADthrough Augmented Reality and Micro Credentials Yue (Jeff) Hung1, Daniel Weinman1 1 Farmingdale State CollegeAbstractComputer Aided Drafting and Design is a required freshman course for Mechanical EngineeringTechnology AAS and BS and Manufacturing Engineering Technology BS programs atFarmingdale State College. The course teaches students technical drawings and computer aideddesign (CAD) which includes 2D computer aided drafting, and 3D modeling. These topics areclosely related. The students who excel in these topics will have
theincreasing influence of engineering design and computing in shaping our lives, education standardsshould require all students to have significant and equitable STEM experiences. Such arequirement would foster an interest in STEM subjects and careers in more, diverse students, whilereducing the focus on STEM pipelines.IntroductionAs a response to a recent essay from Lecturer Stuart Reges on “Why Women Don’t Code,” [1]Professor Barbara Oakley of Oakland University supported his premise that women often choosenon-STEM disciplines, but attributed part of the responsibility for limited science, technology,engineering and mathematics (STEM) diversity to faculty from the humanities and social scienceswho “malign” STEM disciplines and
the lower-division level. The program was modeled on previous programsthat had been shown effective at retaining URM students [1] [2]. First and second year studentswere targeted for this research program because over 70% of the STEM students who leaveCSUB without a degree leave in the first two years. The first two years are a critical interventionperiod for promoting success and retention.In [3], we described the first two years of the program and presented preliminary results withrespects to attitudes and awareness, along with one-year retention data. In this paper, we look atthe full four years of the program to analyze multi-year retention rates, the survey and interviewdata collected during the program, and the follow-up surveys
multipleinstructors, ranging from graduate students to full-time faculty members. It is notable thatstudents taking this course during the spring semester are considered “off-semester” students.Traditionally, students enter the program in the fall and take the courses in a Fall-Springsequence. In contrast, off-semester students take the courses in a Spring-Fall sequence. Duringthe traditional sequence, each major-granting engineering department offers information sessionsin the Fall for students taking the course. However, because of the reduced number of studentstaking the off-semester sequence, this resource is not available to them in the Spring semester.The Foundations I course offered during Spring 2018 contained eight explicit learning outcomes: 1
theimportance of engineering ethics. Educators have begun incorporating engineering ethics incurricula in a variety of formats: as a component in introductory or capstone courses, a centralelement in stand-alone courses, and/or through deliberate integration across curriculum [1], [2].The main approaches in teaching of ethics continue to use case studies or case-based discussionssupplemented by moral theory and/or professional codes of ethics. Service learning is anotherapproach that has increasingly been used and reported as an effective pedagogical strategy ininstruction of engineering ethics [3]-[5]. In the U.S., the main driver in incorporating ethics inengineering curriculum was the changes in ABET engineering criteria requirements on
systems and advanced robotics. Her teaching excellence has been recognized by numerous awards. More recently, she is interested in developing inclusive teaching best practices that will support students with diverse learning styles for improved learning outcomes. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 An Evaluation of a Digital Learning Management System in High School Physics Classrooms 1 Meera Singh, 1Qiao Sun, and 2Cassy Weber meera.singh@ucalgary.ca; qsun@ucalgary.ca; CWeber@MindFuel.ca 1 Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, The
various academicinstitutions, with some positive overall results. A main goal pursued with those initiatives is toimprove the students’ spatial visualization skills, as measured by their scores in a standardizedvisualization test, by comparing the pre-initiative and the post-initiative performance of thestudents. Thus having as well an indication of the effectiveness of the implemented initiative.There are several tests that have been applied to measure spatial visualization skills of students[1, 2], and there are numerous studies that have collected and analyzed information regardingdemographics, spatial visualization skills, and academic performance [3, 4]. Of interest arestudies where spatial visualization skills have been linked to abilities
made.IntroductionSustainability is, as stated in the United Nations Report on the World Commission onEnvironment and Development [1], the consideration of impacts to and preservation of theeconomy, the environment, and social equity (often referred to as “the three ‘E’s” ofsustainability) in the execution of any plan or project. Its growth as a field of study and as astandard of practice is understandable in light of concerns about dwindling resources, populationand developmental growth, and environmental sensitivity based on global warming and othernatural phenomena. Engineering in general, and civil and construction engineering in particular,is a field uniquely well-equipped to tackle the issues of incorporating sustainability into projectexecution. Indeed, the study
process.1. IntroductionThe motivation for differentiated instruction (DI) is based on the observation that any classenvironment will consist of learners of different abilities, interests, learning styles and culturalbackgrounds. This implies that learners will respond to instruction differently, and the one-size-fits-all teaching approach, commonly utilized in college classrooms, is less than optimal from thestandpoint of student learning. DI acknowledges the diverse characteristics of the individuallearner by designing learning experiences that are adapted to meet the unique learning needs of astudent with the expectation of improving student success compared to the one-size-fits-allparadigm. In the DI model [1], an instructor can differentiate
thePresident’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) in 2012, there is a projectedneed for 1 million more STEM professionals than the U.S. will produce at the current rate over thenext decade [1]. More specifically, the U.S. will need to increase the number of students whoreceive undergraduate STEM degrees by about 34% annually over current rates to meet that need[1]. The recruitment and retention of more ethnic minorities into STEM fields is needed to assistin closing the gap between the current supply and demand for STEM professionals. Minoritieshave historically been underrepresented in STEM. In fact, underrepresented minorities (AfricanAmerican, Native American and Hispanic) earned just 18.9% of all bachelor’s degrees awarded
women’sexperiences, both in education and in their careers. Much of the research on bias in theworkplace has focused on U.S. and European women engineers. Forty years of social scienceresearch have shown the prevalence of implicit bias against women and the ways in which suchbiases impact decisions in hiring, performance evaluations, and compensation. However, similarstudies are scarce in India.Extremely few women in India were earning engineering degrees in the 1980s. Compared to theUnited States, where about 10% of engineering degrees were earned by women, less than 2% ofengineering degrees were earned by women in India [1, 2]. Fast forward 20 years, and in the year2000 women in India had surpassed women in the U.S., earning 24% of engineering
country are implementing hands-on activities in the classroom becausethere is evidence that they improve long-term material retention and critical thinking skills[1][2]. A study at Oregon State University found that working in teams gives studentsopportunities to communicate with others, set group expectations, and practice conflict-resolution, all of which are skills that are highly desired in industry [3]. A major goal ofimplementing groupwork into the classroom is to prepare students for teamwork in theengineering workforce, yet students are not learning technical and non-technical skills equally inthese types of classroom settings. Many studies have shown that women frequently take onstereotypically feminine roles, such as being in charge of
interventions that couldmitigate the ethnic and cultural influences on peer ratings and teamwork behavior.Introduction & Literature ReviewThe United States has become one of the top destinations for international students pursuinghigher degrees. According to Institute of International Education, in 2017-2018 school year,there were 1,094,792 international students studying in the U.S and they made up 5.5% of allstudents in U.S. higher education [1]. Among more than one million international students, threeAsian countries: China, India and South Korea are consisting of 33.2%, 17.9% and 4.1%respectively of the international students [1]. Students from these three countries are differentfrom domestic students not just for physical distinction but for
to the in the classroom counterpart). Seniorcapstone design courses were introduced to most of the universities in United States afterengineering education faced criticism about the student’s readiness to enter the industry to face thereal world problems.1 In an effort to understand the impact of senior design, we aim to understandhow a particular project type impacts students. Understanding how project types contribute tostudents’ motivation in senior design affords the ability to improve the educational process of thecourse through offering students with better project options. This is done by specifically targetingthose project topics which are found to have an impact on the student’s motivation during the entirecourse period.This study
Jeremy C. Schwartz1 Rebecca A. Atadero2Note: 1West Virginia University, 2Colorado State UniversityThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under theawards # 1726268, #1726088, and #1725880. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions orrecommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarilyreflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Examining the Effects of Equity, Inclusion, and Diversity Activities in First-Year Engineering CoursesThis completed research paper describes the research-based activities [1], [2] that wereintegrated into a first-year engineering course at a large mid-Atlantic
-ended questionsabout their negative and positive experiences of the class that was analyzed using qualitativeinductive and summative strategies. The study found the following, students’ research self-efficacy posttest score was higher than pretest, and the observed difference was statisticallysignificant. Both males and females had a higher research self-efficacy posttest score thanpretest. The observed difference of the pretest and posttest for males was found to be statisticallysignificant. Males had a higher research self-efficacy posttest score compared to females, but theobserved difference was not statistically significant. The qualitative analysis results are,increasing self-efficacy could be attributed to students (1) having the feeling
children go aboutsupporting their children 's engineering learning—especially given the upswing in the number ofchildren being homeschooled in the U.S. over the past decade [1] [2], which is expected tosteadily grow in the future. Thus, in this study we aim to investigate the role a homeschoolparent plays in their child’s engineering learning. Literature review In the last decade computers have become less of a cutting-edge technology and more ofa commonality in every household. The shift in technology from exciting innovation to pertinenttools requires more than the ability to use computers for work. In fact, it is becomingincreasingly pertinent for children to think like computer scientists and
execution can be used to build a sustainable SummerBridge Program for all first-year engineering students in the future. 1. Introduction and Related WorksIn the United States, a global leader in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), theissue of underrepresented minority (URM) has received a considerable attention over the recentyears [1]. Of particular importance to the University of Illinois at Chicago, as a Minority ServingInstitution, is that racial/ethnic URM students are often also low-income students. Furthermore,recruiting and graduating low-income engineering students is a challenging problem. Solutionshave focused primarily on broadening access via outreach, aggressive recruitment andremediation-based interventions to
students in a total of 24 separate offerings of five differentsemester-long courses. In prior publications, the results of anonymous student feedbackcollected at the end of the semester have been reported, including: quantitative results ofLikert-scale responses to five common questions; and representative comments to open-ended questions. These prior results suggest that at least two responses are predominant,namely: 1) rejection of mastery learning as “unfamiliar”/“unfair”, or “lazy on the part ofthe professor”; or 2) welcoming of mastery learning as “empowering”, or “an opportunityfor self-ownership of learning on the part of the student”. To improve our understandingof the attitudes of students towards mastery learning, a qualitative approach
literature and performing arts. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019Work in-progress: Experience-Based Learning in Global Engineering Culture and Society1. MotivationIn September 2015, more than 190 members of the United Nations (UN) committed to 17Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [1] for bringing equality across the world. Among thesegoals are poverty reduction, quality education, sustainable cities and communities, and thepreservation of Earth’s life-support system. In the Spring of 2017, the leadership at thePennsylvania State University (Penn State) created an environment to help facilitatecollaborations with Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria in Lima, Peru (UNI) by conducting aworkshop in Lima
Examination of Learning Community Models on the Retention, Progression and Academic Performance of Engineering Students at a Historically Black UniversityIntroductionThe foundation for learning communities was introduced into higher education over 90 years ago [1]. It is well known that they have apositive effect on measures of student academic performance including retention and graduation rates [2]. Learning communities alsohave been shown to facilitate both the academic and social transition to college for first-generation students [3]. These characteristicsare especially important in the graduation of students underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)disciplines including women and African-Americans
Number:1565066. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Experiments in Community Building within Classrooms of Commuter Students. Part I: The Case of StaticsIntroductionA commuter student has been defined as “a college student who does not live in an on-campusinstitutionally-owned/approved housing, such as a residence hall or a fraternity or sorority house[1]. Using this definition, it has been estimated that approximately 85% of today’s students in theUSA commute to campus [2].The lives of commuter students have three separate parts: life at home, life at work, and life atschool. Juggling the responsibilities from those three aspects of their lives is challenging [3]. Inmany
, the Communication Lab’s free online collection of discipline-specific guides to technical and professional communication. She is dedicated to promoting peer-to-peer professional development experiences for scientists and engineers. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Experiments in the Communication Lab: Adaptations of the Comm Lab Model in Three InstitutionsAcross engineering and science disciplines, individual schools and programs are searching forways to better support science and engineering students as writers and communicators [1] [2] [3].Despite rich accounts of these interventions, it is difficult to imagine how to implement them indifferent
departments of computer science and engineering. Her interests focus on broadening participation in computer science and engineering through the exploration of: 1) race, gender, and identity; 2) discipline-based education research (with a focus on computer science and computer engineering courses) in order to inform pedagogical practices that garner interest and retain women and minorities in computer-related engineering fields.Prof. Zahra Hazari, Florida International University Zahra Hazari is an Associate Professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning and the STEM Trans- formation Institute as well as an affiliate faculty member in the Department of Physics. Dr. Hazari’s research focuses on reforming physics