Paper ID #29665Projections as Preparation for Persistence: Exploring Expectations forEngineering Graduate SchoolEllen Zerbe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Ellen Zerbe is a Ph.D. candidate in Mechanical Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. She earned her B.S.M.E. at Grove City College. She is currently researching under Dr. Catherine Berdanier in the Engineering Cognition Research Laboratory.Gabriella M Sallai, Pennsylvania State University Gaby Sallai is currently a Master’s student in the mechanical engineering department at Penn State. She is working under Catherine Berdanier in the Engineering
Entrepreneurial Skills and Mind-Set,” Journal of Engineering Education, 94 (2), 2005, pp. 233-243.(4) Creed, C., E. Suuberg, and G. Crawford, “Engineering Entrepreneurship: An Example of A Paradigm Shift,” Journal of Engineering Education, 91 (2), 2002, pp. 185-195.(5) Standish-Kuon, T. and M. Price, “Introducing Engineering and Science Students to Entrepreneurship: Page 12.632.14 Models and Influential Factors at Six American Universities,” Journal of Engineering Education, 91 (1), 2002, pp. 33-39.(6) Johnson, M., “Engineering Entrepreneurship: Does Entrepreneurship Have a Role in Engineering Education?,” IEEE Antennas and Propagation
static friction between your shoe and the sample of carpet provided.Labs in the Engineering ProfessionPracticing engineers use research laboratories and development laboratories. In ResearchLaboratories they seek broader knowledge that can be generalized and systematized, oftenwithout any specific use in mind. They carry on what is called Observational experiments andTesting Experiments. They also go to Development Laboratories to obtain experimental data toguide them in designing and developing a product. The lab is used to answer specific questionsabout nature that must be answered before a design and development process can continue. Inthis case they carry on the so called Application Experiments. They also go to these developmentlaboratories
AC 2007-2278: SECONDARY STUDENTS' BELIEFS ABOUT THEIR INTERESTSIN NANOSCALE SCIENCE AND ENGINEERINGKelly Hutchinson, Purdue UniversityShawn Stevens, University of MichiganNamsoo Shin Hong, University of MichiganMolly Yunker, University of MichiganCesar Delgado, University of MichiganWilliam Fornes, Purdue UniversityGeorge Bodner, Purdue UniversityNick Giordano, Purdue UniversityJoseph Krajcik, University of Michigan Page 12.1258.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Secondary Students’ Beliefs about their Interests in Nanoscale Science and EngineeringAbstractResearch has shown that increasing students’ interests in science
2006-1379: USING INQUIRY-BASED ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTEUNDERSTANDING OF CRITICAL ENGINEERING CONCEPTSMichael Prince, Bucknell University Michael Prince is a professor of chemical engineering at Bucknell University. His research interests focus on chemical engineering education, active learning, problem based learning, and inquiry-based methods.Margot Vigeant, Bucknell University Margot Vigeant is a newly minted associate professor of chemical engineering at Bucknell University. Her research interest in this topic stems from her own frustration in thermodynamics, and her profound hope we can find a way that people can "get it" the first time around
AC 2007-271: EXPLORING ACADEMIC FACTORS AFFECTING ENGINEERINGGRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH PROFICIENCYScott Rogers, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D. Candidate in Environmental Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology (GT-EnvE) in Atlanta, Georgia. Served on the GT AEES Dialogue for Academic Excellence Committee (DAEC) as Assessment Subcommittee Chair from August 2004 to June 2005, Committee Chair from June 2005 to August 2006, and Past Committee Chair from August 2006 to present.Recep Goktas, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D. Candidate in GT-EnvE. Served on DAEC as Committee Secretary from August 2005 to August 2006.Ulas Tezel, Georgia Institute of Technology Ph.D
, June 2009. < http://www.asee.org/about-us/the-organization/advisory- committees/CCSSIE/CCSSIEE_Phase1Report_June2009.pdf >.2. Piechota, Thomas C. et al, Project-Based Learning in a Freshman Engineering Course: University – High SchoolPartnership. Las Vegas, Nevada, 2003.< http://faculty.unlv.edu/piechota/proceedings/piechota-asee-psw-2003.pdf >3. Bransford, John D., Ann L.Brown, and Rodney R.Cocking, editors. How People Learn: Brain, Mind,Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, NationalAcademy Press, Washington, D.C. 2000.4. National Research Council, National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC(1996).5. McKnight, Stephen W., Michael
Paper ID #6745A Grand Challenge-based Framework for Contextual Learning in Engineer-ingDr. Lisa G. Huettel, Duke University Dr. Lisa G. Huettel is an associate professor of the practice in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Duke University where she also serves as associate chair and director of Undergraduate Studies for the department. She received a B.S. in Engineering Science from Harvard University and earned her M.S. and Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Duke University. Her research interests are focused on engineering education, curriculum and laboratory development, and applications of
, Bioinformatics, Biomedical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, CivilEngineering, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Math. CSULA faculty train fellows through apreparation course and workshops in order to improve communication, collaboration, andteaching skills. Furthermore, a strong partnership between CSULA, LAUSD, local industry, and Page 25.801.3minority serving organizations such as Great Minds in STEM and MESA has been established inorder to achieve program goals. At the time these demonstrations and activities were performed, the program consisted ofeight fellows, conducting research in Electrical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Chemistry
AC 2010-1221: AN EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OF THE INNOVATIONCAPABILITIES OF ENGINEERING STUDENTSNicole Genco, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Nicole is a graduate student in Mechanical Engineering at University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.Katja Holtta-Otto, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Katja is an assistant professor of Mechanical Engineering at University of Massachusetts Dartmouth.Carolyn Conner Seepersad, University of Texas, Austin Page 15.151.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 An Experimental Investigation of the Innovation Capabilities of
. Page 10.1328.9 Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering EducationThe TeachEngineering consortium encourages engineering faculty to submit their own contentfor publication in the digital collection. Thus, engineering faculty who have not previouslyparticipated in K-12 outreach can readily communicate their research passions by creating newcurricular materials that incite curiosity in the minds of youth and solidify in them a lifelonginterest in learning. Faculty who desire to become involved will use curricular templates asguides for creating TeachEngineering-compliant curricular units, lessons and
AC 2010-136: AN AUTOMATED BOTTLE FILLING AND CAPPING PROJECTFOR FRESHMAN ENGINEERING STUDENTSKala Meah, York College of Pennsylvania Kala Meah received his B.Sc. from Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology in 1998, M.Sc. from South Dakota State University in 2003, and Ph.D. from the University of Wyoming in 2007, all in Electrical Engineering. Between 1998 and 2000 he worked for several power industries in Bangladesh. Dr. Meah is an Assistant Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Department of Physical Science at York College of Pennsylvania. His research interest includes electrical power, HVDC transmission, renewable energy, power engineering education, and energy
innature (e.g., manufacturing systems, facilities design). While IE’s diverse knowledge domainscontribute to its uniqueness, they also highlight the need to effectively integrate material fromthese different domains into a compact curriculum. To succeed, students must learn how tointegrate these different concepts and apply them to the complex problems that they will face inpractice.In response to the challenges facing engineering educators in general, and IE educators inparticular, we are revising the undergraduate IE curriculum at the University of Pittsburgh withfour primary objectives in mind: 1. Integration: Integrate concepts across the curriculum via • Reinforcement of course material throughout the curriculum. • "Just
, Page 24.439.10curious outgoing, kind, and/or hardworking. Although these results cannot make causal claims,it could also be the case that involvement with EWB-USA alters personality traits due to beingaround like-minded people. More thorough personality research is needed to clarify thesefindings, but the results point to the idea that EWB-USA members may have an expanded visionof who can do engineering based on their departure from the stereotypical engineeringpopulation.These results also showed that the two groups of engineers had equal intrinsic motivations forengineering, which indicates that despite personality differences, students involved with anEWB-like activity held similar interest for the subject of engineering. This suggests that
Paper ID #9139Faculty Approaches to Working Life Issues in Engineering CurriculaMrs. Marie Magnell, KTH Royal Institute of Technology PhD student at KTHDr. Lars Allan Geschwind, KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyDr. Lena B. Gumaelius, KTH, Department of Learning Head of Deparment of Learning, ECE school, KTH PhD in Biotechnology 2001 Engineering degree in Chemistry 1994Prof. Anette Jepsen Kolmos, Aalborg University Anette Kolmos is Professor in Engineering Education and PBL and Chairholder for UNESCO in Prob- lem Based Learning in Engineering Education, Aalborg University, Denmark. Guest professor at KTH Royal Institute of
, engineering societies, and government that there had been a decline in the qualityof undergraduate engineering education over the previous two decades10-11. The result was astrong push towards providing both intellectual and physical activities (such as dissection) toanchor the knowledge and practice of engineering in the minds of students12-13.Product dissection was successful in achieving this for several reasons. First, it helps coupleengineering principles with significant visual feedback14 and increase awareness of the designprocess15. Product dissection activities spread around the world as a community emerged aroundthe development and propagation of these activities12-13,16-22. These activities have since evolvedto all levels of undergraduate
focused on both documenting differences in departmental climate forfemale faculty and graduate students, and discerning how those differences influence therecruitment, retention and advancement of women in STEM. Barber hypothesized that theclimate for women in STEM at the doctoral level leads them to change their minds about careers Page 10.308.2in STEM[21]. In other words, there is something that happens during the doctoral course of “Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright ©2005, American Society for Engineering Education”training that
knowledgeable in their own field of mechanical and electrical engineering,and also open-minded and interested in other disciplines as well. This resulted in an openatmosphere among the students, and made them more willing to explore the overlappinginterests between the College of Design and the College of Engineering. We haveobserved that in professional practice, there is sometimes a tendency for barriers to existbetween any two disciplines, with negative expectations of the aptitudes and motivationsof other disciplines than one’s own taking precedence over actual personal experience.By establishing links between related professions at the university level, the way is pavedfor more effective collaboration in the student’s future careers.Unexpected
self-authorship: Constructive-developmentalpedagogy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N. & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self,voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.Clewell, B., Anderson, B. & Thorpe, M. (1992). Breaking the barriers: Helping female and minority studentssucceed in mathematics and science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Clewell, B. & Campbell, P. (2002). Taking stock: Where we’ve been, where we are, where we’re going. Journalof Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8, pp. 255-284. Page 10.538.11Cobern, W. W. &
Reforming Architectural Engineering Education in Taiwan: Contexts, Opportunities, and Concerns Tsung-Juang Wang Department of Architecture National Taipei University of Technology, TaiwanIntroduction Architectural education has traditionally included interdisciplinary courses to encouragestudents to improve their competency in fields related to the discipline areas (Erman et al.,2004:51, 52; Bronet & Schumacher, 1999:97, 100) and provide the basis for a wider vision ofthe field and its role in society. Architectural education has always struggled to fit thepreparation for practice demanded by professional
is also critical to build on each activity by usingthe students’ own ingenuity in discussions about the embedded lessons. Far broader strokes can be drawn inclass when the picture is not limited by availability and cost of materials or technological requirements.Much more of the complete picture can be seen and appreciated when each concept is separately definedand demonstrated for its own unique qualities or modus operandi, and then returned to the full scheme as awhole. Empty-handed demos can help contribute to the masterwork of engineering education.Additional Refer encesBransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., &. Cocking, R.R., Editors. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, andSchool, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2000.Felder
Challenges and Opportunities in Ethics Education in Biomedical Engineering Paul J. Benkeser1, Roberta M. Berry2 and Jonathan D. Olinger3 Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology and Emory University1 / Schools of Public Policy2 and Aerospace Engineering3, Georgia Institute of TechnologyI. IntroductionThe challenges of interdisciplinarity—integrating bioscience, biomedical, and bioengineeringknowledge and skills—are well known to biomedical engineering (BME) educators.Undergraduate BME engineering educators face the additional challenge of preparing theirstudents for diverse professional career paths in a
Session 3530 Portfolio Assessment and Improvement for a First-Year Engineering Curriculum Larry D. Stetler, Stuart D. Kellogg, Jon J. Kellar, David J. Dixon, Glen A. Stone, Larry A. Simonson, Zbignew J. Hladysz, Jason T. Ash, and Heidi L. Sieverding South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, Rapid City, SD 57701Abstract:For the past five years, the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology has redefined its first-year engineering curriculum. The program, now required of all first year engineering students,incorporates curricular elements developed by the Foundation Coalition and elements from theEPICS program at the Colorado School of Mines. As part of the course, students are required
Sectors to Strengthen Collegiate Education and Pursue Excellence in the Next Generation Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2005, American Society for Engineering Educationof US Leadership in Science and Technology,” Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation,March 1986.Newberry, B and Farison, J. 2003, “A Look at the Past and Present of General Engineering andEngineering Science Programs,” Journal of Engineering Education, July 2003, pp.217-226.NRC 2000, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School, National Academy Press,Washington, DC, 2000. www.nap.eduNRC, 1996, “From Analysis to Action, Undergraduate Education in Science
in General Engineering program to be themost favorable. Based on that, it was decided the issue of space could be worked out relativelyeasily in light of the more pressing issue of industries needs. In effect, we decided that theweight factor for industry need should have been higher. With that in mind, a BS in Engineeringwith concentration in either Mechanical Engineering or Electrical Engineering degree programwas selected to be the most desirable solution taking into all constraints and established criteria.9. Write Specification The engineering program will be administered by the department of Engineering and housed in the college of Arts and Sciences for academic and administrative support. One program is to serve both
. Texas Education Agency, 2000 District Accountability Summary for Austin Independent School District., Page 9.153.13 available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2000/index.html Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Education 13. Texas Education Agency, 2000 District Accountability Data Tables for Austin Independent School District., available at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2000/index.html 14. Carmean, C. and Haefner, J. (2002) Mind over
2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Education”“Actually meeting a woman who has a physics PhD and is still working in the field hasbeen extremely valuable. Previously, it almost seemed like no such women existed.” MentorNet Protégée“You cannot imagine how much I've changed since we started the mentoring process,basically from a timid chicken to a brave fighter. I now know when and how to speak upmy mind. As a result, I receive much more respect, consideration and understanding frommy colleagues and advisor
Session 3554 A Holistic Approach to Teaching Engineering Entrepreneurship and Technology Commercialization Carmo D’Cruz, P.N. Vaidy Vaidyanathan University of Central FloridaAbstractWith their creative product and technology ideas, engineers are excellent sources of high growth-potential entrepreneurial and technology commercialization ventures. However, this resource hasnot been effectively supported by academia in general, to fully realize its potential.This paper reviews
. Page 8.9.13“Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2003, American Society for Engineering Education”References:1. Petroski, H., "Invention by Design", published by Harvard Press, 1996, ISBN: 0-674-46367-62. Sarfield A.M., Smith, K.A., and Bleloch, A.L., "How to Model It, Problem Solving for the Computer Age", published by Burgess International Group, Inc, 1994, ISBN: 0-8087-7970-23. "ABC Nightline. The Deep Dive", Show date: 07/13/99, ABC News Dept. 108, P.O. Box 807, New Hudson, MI 48165, 1-800-505-6139, ABCNewsstore.com4. Wujec, Tom, "Five Star Mind, Games & Puzzles to Stimulate your Creativity and Imagination", published by Broadway
EngineClassroom learning often provides students with the initial data required to solve a problem, thusfocusing the students’ attention on theoretical principles, scientific laws, and how physicalphenomenon can be modeled using scientific equations. Laboratory learning, however, presents agreat opportunity to expose young minds to the practical methods used to obtain input data aswell as realistic results. For example with the SR-30 engine, students are exposed to some ofthese methods when attempting to calculate the fuel flow rate, the bulk velocity in and out ofnozzles, and integrated values.Fuel Flow RateThe fuel flow rate in cc/min is given by the equation fuel flow rate = 4.07Pmanifold - .013P2manifold - 3.7where Pmanifold