Paper ID #240602018 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and ComputingDiversity Conference: Crystal City, Virginia Apr 29Exploring the Experiences of First-Generation Student Veterans in Engineer-ingDr. Catherine Mobley, Clemson University Catherine Mobley, Ph.D., is a Professor of Sociology at Clemson University. She has over 30 years experience in project and program evaluation and has worked for a variety of consulting firms, non-profit agencies, and government organizations, including the Rand Corporation, the American Association of Retired Persons, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Walter Reed Army
does the university prepare students for graduation? For what is the university heldaccountable? How do students participate in their preparation process? What does industrycontribute? These are questions that faculty and engineering programs must consider to besuccessful preparing minds for the next step in their students’ life’s journey. The universitysetting is expected to provide an environment to help students transition from high school tobeing an adult. Are graduates really prepared for what lies ahead? 1Each year Baylor University graduates another class of students who will begin theirprofessional life. For those faculty who have had the privilege of teaching both freshman andgraduating
: Involve engineering in K-12 lessons that map to state standards for math and science. Further, states should follow the lead of Massachusetts and enact state standards for engineering 4. Use/Improve K-12 Teachers: Engage more K-12 teachers in outreach efforts and curriculum writing, and increase teacher salaries to attract the best technological minds to teaching 5. Make Engineers “Cool”: Outreach to urban schools and females more aggressively, and create more mentors and role models to attract these constituencies 6. Partnerships: Create better incentives for all groups to engage in K-12 outreach (especially higher education and industry)2According to Dougless, Iverson and Kaylendurg there is no magical list
briefintroduction to the objectives of the activity, 2) conducting the activity and 3) discussing how toimplement the activity in their individual classrooms. Four activates were chosen for the Institutediscussed in the paper, with math and science teachers in mind: Forces and Math, Pendulums andGraphing, Water Rocket Design and Analysis, and Yogurt Cup Speakers. The workshopactivities were taught as ‘engineering’ activities and were not aimed specifically at math orscience teachers. The activities are briefly described below; full lesson plans are included asAppendices A-D, respectively.Forces and Math. The ‘Forces and Math’9 activity explores loads and reaction forces. Inaddition, the activity can be used to practice graphing experimental data, and/or to
AC 2008-1467: PHYSIOLOGY CONCEPTS AND PHYSIOLOGY PROBLEMS FORBIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTSRobert Linsenmeier, Northwestern University Robert A. Linsenmeier has a joint appointment in Biomedical Engineering in the Robert R. McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science, and in Neurobiology and Physiology in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences. His primary teaching is in human and animal physiology. He is the Associate Director of the VaNTH Engineering Research Center in Bioengineering Educational Technologies, former chair of the Biomedical Engineering Department at Northwestern, and a fellow of the American Institute of Medical and Biological Engineering and the
they just had some confidence, satdown and did it, that—I mean I’m sure they could all do it, you know, just as well.”Another way that men and women may be different in how they approach engineering refersback to our findings about design activity priorities. Some women have described gendereddifferences in approaches to team projects. For instance, one woman described how [G]uys are different from girls, when we're working on projects and stuff, and sometimes there's -- they have like one track mind where it's like let's just get through this and then we can go. And then—but then I guess when I'm in a group then I sort of have to pay attention to the little details surrounding it, like, oh, what about this, what
AC 2008-1946: ENHANCING ENGINEERING EDUCATION: LEARNING TOSOLVE PROBLEMS THROUGH SERVICE-LEARNING PROJECTSMary McCormick, Tufts University Mary McCormick is currently pursuing her Master of Science degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Tufts University. Her current research interest is in the development of assessment methodologies to measure the educational benefits of experiential learning.Chris Swan, Tufts UniversityDouglas Matson, Tufts UniversityDavid Gute, Tufts UniversityJohn Durant, Tufts University Page 13.542.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2008 Enhancing
engineers, who limit their concept of technology to particularcontemporary objects or physical systems. Carl Mitcham, in his book Thinking Through 2Technology, observes that one commonality among the definitions of technology prevalentamong those who consider technology from a philosophical perspective is that in every case“technology is pivotally engaged with the human.” He goes on to assert that “as such it is to beconsidered in relation to the essential aspects of a philosophical anthropology – with differencesdrawn between its manifestations in the mind, through bodily activities, and as independentobjects that take their place in the physical and
AC 2008-2731: DEVELOPING A PRACTICAL APPLICABLE COURSE INSUSTAINABILITY – AN ENGINEERING CHALLENGECindy Orndoff, Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. CYNTHIA (CINDY) ORNDOFF is an Associate Professor in the Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering. She received a B.S. in 1984, an M.S. in 1997 and a Ph.D. in 2001, all in Civil Engineering from University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Prior to her coming to FGCU she was an Assistant Professor in Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Missouri, Columbia. She has taught courses in infrastructure management, planning, introduction to transportation and construction management. She has a passionate interest in
course. The assessment was designed with engineering students in mind. Theassessment consisted of five multiple choice questions, and five Likert Scale ranking questionsand one open ended question. Only the multiple choice questions are relevant for this paper.The five multiple choice questions had two themes. Two of the multiple choice questionspertained to the concept of critical thinking, asking students to demonstrate their understandingof critical thinking. A listing of the assessment questions is available in Appendix C. Forexample, one of the questions was: Aspects of critical thinking involve all of the following EXCEPT: a. Critical judgments b. Elements of reasoning c. Essential intellectual
AC 2009-2160: SERVICE-LEARNING IN ENGINEERING SCIENCE COURSES:DOES IT WORK?John Duffy, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Professor, Mechanical EngineeringCarol Barry, University Massachusetts Lowell Professor, Plastics EngineeringLinda Barrington, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Service-Learning Coordinator, College of EngineeringManuel Heredia, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Doctoral Research Assistant, Renewable Energy Engineering Page 14.1055.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Service-Learning in Engineering Science Courses: Does It Work?Keywords: service-learning, faculty development, citizen
number of capstonedesign course environments. Additional research is needed to develop and test the measurementof reflective practice.IntroductionSuccessful engineers of the twenty-first century will be markedly different from engineers of thepast. Having sound understanding of engineering sciences, successful engineers will also need tobe problem solvers and innovators who work effectively in times of rapid change. They will needto be global-minded, socially-responsible, systems-thinkers who adeptly address complexproblems having significant human dimensions. [1-4] Engineers will need to perform a varietyof roles in the context of their work: analyst, problem solver, designer, researcher,communicator, collaborator, leader, self-grower, achiever
reflection depends on the instructor’smotivation for introducing reflection in the first place. While assessment seems appropriate forreflections geared towards understanding of course content, integration of bodies of objectiveknowledge, and application of foreign bodies of objective knowledge to the field of engineering,it could be argued, as sources indicate above, that with other purposes – such as personaldevelopment or self-assessment – students would be more truthful if they did not anticipate beingassessed or even needing to turn in their reflections. However, one must keep in mind the pointalready cited: assessment, even of subjective reflections, may help students improve theirreflection skills.c) Factors in Successful ReflectionA number
Paper ID #31588Designing an Engineering Computer Instructional Laboratory: Working withthe PanopticonDr. Shehla Arif, University of Mount Union I am a thermal-fluids sciences educator. My doctoral and postdoctoral work is on experimental fluid dynamics of bubbles. My emphasis is interdisciplinary moving between mechanical engineering, geology, and biology. I acquired PhD from Northwestern University, IL and a post-doc at McGill University, Canada. I am passionate about integrating Engineering education with liberal arts studies. To that end, I am interested in embedding social justice and peace studies into engineering
more important for the other computing programs thatrequire it than for the software engineering program because this is often the only exposure tosoftware engineering principles that the non-software engineering students get. It will be OK ifsome topics found in classic introduction courses and considered essential for a fullunderstanding of software engineering are left out. Those that we had covered previously werenot being covered at a level that imparted that full understanding to begin with, and the softwareengineering students would see the full breadth and depth of those topics later in their program.With our redevelopment guidelines in mind, we set the primary goals for the course to be: Instill good entry-level software
Paper ID #22387Characterizing Students’ Intercultural Competence Development Paths Througha Global Engineering ProgramMs. Kirsten Davis, Virginia Tech Kirsten Davis is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech, where she also completed her master’s degree in Higher Education. She is the graduate assistant for the Rising Sophomore Abroad Program, a global engineering course and study abroad program for first year engi- neering students. Her primary research interests are engineering study abroad, developing intercultural competency in engineering students, and international higher
Paper ID #25326Cui Bono. Engineering and Technological Literacy and Higher EducationDr. John Heywood, Trinity College Dublin John Heywood is professorial Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College Dublin- The University of Dublin. he is a Fellow of ASEE and Life Fellow of IEEE. he is an Honorary Fellow of the Institution of Engineers Ireland. He has special interest in education for the professions and the role of professions in society. He is author of Engineering Education. research and development in Curriculum and Instruction; The Assessment of learning in Engineering Education; The human Side of Engineering, and Empowering
Paper ID #26761Exam Wrappers, Reflection, and Student Performance in Engineering Me-chanics – Part IIDr. Ashraf Badir P.E., Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. Badir is an Associate Professor in the Environmental and Civil Engineering Department at the U.A. Whitaker College of Engineering in Florida Gulf Coast University. He earned his B.Sc. (1982) in Civil Engineering and M.Sc. (1985) in Structural Engineering from Alexandria University, Egypt. He also holds a M.Sc. (1989) and a Ph.D. (1992) in Aerospace Engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology.Dr. Jiehong Liao, Florida Gulf Coast University Dr. Jiehong Liao is an
importance of developing a community of like-minded peers forsharing resources, studying, motivating each other, and forming an academic network. Thesepeers encouraged each other to participate in research, to speak with professors, and to study.Students also found in this peer group of STEM students in the seminar course, an importantgroup of friends and social support. Although not examined in detail in this study, participationin undergraduate research, internships and professional competitions, can also be considered“socio-academic integrative moments rather than solely academic experiences, because of thesocial nature of STEM. During research students learn to engage in the social environments ofscience and engineering laboratories, including
Paper ID #15756Becoming Boundary Spanning Engineers: Research Methods and Prelimi-nary FindingsProf. Brent K. Jesiek, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Brent K. Jesiek is Associate Professor in the Schools of Engineering Education and Electrical and Computer Engineering at Purdue University. He is also an Associate Director of Purdue’s Office of Global Engineering Programs, leads the Global Engineering Education Collaboratory (GEEC) research group, and is the recipient of an NSF CAREER award to study boundary-spanning roles and competencies among early career engineers. He holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from
Paper ID #16973A Principlist Approach for Thinking About the Social Impacts of Engineer-ingDr. Jonathan Beever, University of Central Florida Jonathan Beever is Assistant Professor of Philosophy and faculty with the Texts & Technology Program at The University of Central Florida. He has held postdoctoral positions with Penn State’s Rock Ethics Institute and with Purdue University’s Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering before joining UCF. He has held fellowships with the Kaufmann Foundation, the Aldo Leopold Foundation, and the Global Sustainable Soundscape Network. Jonathan works and publishes at the intersection of
Paper ID #14867Enhancing the Pedagogy of Bio-inspired Design in an Engineering Curricu-lumDr. Jacquelyn Kay Nagel, James Madison University Dr. Jacquelyn K. Nagel is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering at James Madison University. She has eight years of diversified engineering design experience, both in academia and indus- try, and has experienced engineering design in a range of contexts, including product design, bio-inspired design, electrical and control system design, manufacturing system design, and design for the factory floor. In 2012, Dr. Nagel was recognized by the National eWeek Foundation
Paper ID #14862Ethnic Student Organizations in Engineering: Implications for Practice fromTwo StudiesDr. Julie P Martin, Clemson University Julie P. Martin is an assistant professor of Engineering and Science Education at Clemson University. Her research interests focus on social factors affecting the recruitment, retention, and career development of underrepresented students in engineering. Dr. Martin is a 2009 NSF CAREER awardee for her research entitled, ”Influence of Social Capital on Under-Represented Engineering Students Academic and Career Decisions.” She held an American Association for the Advancement of Science
Paper ID #11862First-year Student Assumptions on Diversity in Engineering EducationDr. Chirag Variawa, Northeastern University Dr. Chirag Variawa teaches first-year engineering design at Northeastern University. He received his Doctorate in Industrial Engineering, focusing on Language Inclusivity in Engineering Education from the University of Toronto. His undergraduate degree is from the same institution, from the Dept. of Materials Science and Engineering.Dr. Susan F Freeman, Northeastern University Susan Freeman, is a member of Northeastern University’s Gateway Team, a group of teaching faculty expressly devoted to
Paper ID #13316How Engineering Students Study: Alone, Together, or Start Alone, End To-getherDr. Denise Wilson, University of Washington Denise Wilson is a professor of electrical engineering at the University of Washington, Seattle. Her research interests in engineering education focus on the role of belonging, self-efficacy, and other non- cognitive aspects of the student experience on engagement, success, and persistence.Dr. Cheryl Allendoerfer, University of Washington Dr. Allendoerfer is a Research Scientist in the College of Engineering at the University of Washington.Prof. Rebecca A Bates, Minnesota State
drop of 1.4% to 13% is observed to occur from end of freshman to end of sophomore year, as Bridge students make up their mind to continue to pursue a degree in engineering or not. An anomaly for the retention rate of Cohort 2 Bridge students can be seen as per the numbers reported in Table 5 for the end of sophomore Page 26.662.15 year. The retention rate is below the target retention rate of 86% originally proposed. This is Table 5: STEP Bridge Year-To-Year Student Retention as of End of 2013 Fall Semester Freshmen to Sophomore to Pre
Paper ID #13572Increasing Success and Retention in Engineering and other STEM FieldsMs. Karen M. Groppi P.E., Cabrillo College Karen Groppi is an Engineering Instructor at Cabrillo College and California registered Civil Engineer whose work focuses on teaching and mentoring students through hands-on projects which benefit the campus community. She was co-PI on a five year NSF grant for recruiting and retaining students in STEM fields.Dr. Susan Tappero, Cabrillo College Susan Tappero obtained a Ph.D. in pure mathematics from University of California, Santa Cruz in 1992. She has been teaching mathematics and developing
Paper ID #12719Increasing the Number of Sponsored Mexican Graduate Students in Engi-neeringMs. Maria Claudia Alves , Texas A&M University Ms. Maria C. Alves is the Director for Engineering International Programs at Texas A&M University. She has been in this position since July 2012. In this position she is responsible for internationalizing the research and education activities of the Dwight Look College of Engineering. Alves started working at Texas A&M in 2005 as Assistant Director for Latin American Programs, and in 2009 she was promoted to Program Manager for South America in the same office. While at
Paper ID #12714Theorizing can contribute to marginalized students’ agency in engineeringpersistence.Mr. Stephen Douglas Secules, University of Maryland, College Park Stephen is an Education PhD student at UMCP, researching engineering education. He has a prior aca- demic and professional background in engineering, having worked as an engineer and project manager in building acoustics consulting firms for 5 years prior to becoming an educational researcher. His research interests include socio-cultural dimensions of engineering classrooms.Dr. Ayush Gupta, University of Maryland, College Park Ayush Gupta is Research
joke back, they really don’t mind that, they’re used to, or have gotten used to it whether they like it or not they, they’ve learned, adapted to that situation and are fine. And then the people that it really bothers, um, I think that’s, that’s difficult (Female faculty)The issue seemed beyond some of the faculty members’ comfort levels: Yes…I don’t think engineers are traditionally very good about addressing some of the touchier issues, and I would certainly not feel comfortable. If I had to do it, I’d give it a good shot, but I’d rather just have them know that I don’t want to hear that kind of language, but I don’t want to discuss precisely what it is I don’t want to hear. You should have your own