titlesincluding “Requirements Engineering and Specification”, “Full Stack Development 1: SoftwareRequirements Analysis”, “Software and Safety Requirements Engineering”, and “RequirementsElicitation, Modeling, and Analysis”, many of the other programs embedded requirements concepts intoother courses. This may have been a project-based course or a general introduction to softwareengineering with a more substantial focus on requirements. In all but one case, requirements wereclearly mentioned in one or more courses as a topic outside of the capstone design experience.However, the security area is somewhat concerning. In reviewing the course descriptions, 49% ofprograms clearly required a course which focused on security. Course titles, seemed to be
-Based Enterprise”, and “6: MBSE Capstone Project”. These aredesigned to provide students with enough knowledge and practice to enable them to startapplying MBSE in their professional environments.The interview protocol was constructed to understand instructor experiences using the modules,the scaffoldings they provided to learners, and the effectiveness of the modules as perceived bythem. All the participants in this WIP were involved in the module design process as contentselectors or as content producers. Content selectors were responsible for content selection andestablishing main course goals in the modules while collaborating with instructional designers onthe pedagogical approach. Content producers were in charge of transferring the
Paper ID #39357Work-in-Progress: Hands-on group activities for large fluid mechanicsclasses in a traditional lecture hall settingDr. Fiona C. Levey, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Dr. Fiona Levey is an Associate Teaching Professor the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engi- neering at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. She teaches materials science and thermal fluids classes and advises capstone design projects. She employs active learning and project-based learning in her curricu- lum, using varied approaches for different levels, and correlating course design and teaching techniques to learning outcomes. Dr. Levey
US industrial PhD track v. Block grants to universities to educate STEM doctoral students beyond technical expertise vi. Celebrate alumni outside academia who are making a difference in the world vii. Centers of excellence for engaging studentsviii. Support networks for underrepresented students ix. Doctoral analog to undergraduate capstone collaboration to solve current problems x. Co-advisors / mentors from industry xi. Industry involvement in developing classes, programs xii. Refer undergraduate interns in industry to relevant graduate programs depending on their interests and skillsxiii. Engage industry researchers to teach the skillsets needed, and to establish robust mentoringxiv. Engage
positive impacts of diverse thinking in STEM and how to negotiatediversity to the benefit of a team, project, or product. The same students may then be instructedto use number-based peer-assessment tools that compare team member task completion to thedetails of the team contract. The expectation is that such assessment will address team discord,despite the students never being expressly taught about conflict types, resolution strategies, orthe constructive aspects of well-managed conflict in communication and team settings. Such anapproach invites well-organized complaining based on a narrowly structured and poorlyunderstood team contract from students who may have little to no understanding of or patiencefor perspectives and ways of being that
. IntroductionEngineering curriculum frequently focuses on technical, analytical, and decision makingknowledge and skills, evident by the common focus of courses on math and physics principles[1]–[3]. Course problem sets and projects routinely focus on determining variables and solvingequations where there is one “right” answer [4]. However, engineering work is inherently bothtechnical and social [5], [6]. To address major problems of today’s world, engineering studentsneed to develop contextual and cultural competencies, ethical responsibility, and socialengagement knowledge and skills, as well as the ability to work across disciplinary boundaries[7]–[10]. Engagement in these skills, which we collectively call “comprehensive engineeringknowledge and skills”, are
different situatedlearning experiences can influence lifelong learning orientations (attitudes and values related tolifelong learning). There is wide awareness that the engineering profession has a role to play inaddressing global socio-technical problems such as climate change and digital misinformation[1]. At the same time, rapid technological change and other shifts in the labour system mean thatengineers’ workplace responsibilities and career paths are prone to uncertainty and precarity [2].As will be discussed, lifelong learning competencies can enable individuals to navigate thesechanges and challenges in their individual career trajectories and to make innovativetechnological contributions. As part of a curriculum realignment project in the
) core courses were primarily taught by aBiostatistics & Bioinformatics faculty member along with integration of the Seminar SpeakerSeries taught by a range of faculty and partners from the private sector and other universities.Topics covered a breadth of research relevant to trainees’ projects and beyond. Each yeartrainees were assigned to work in teams assembled in such a way that one trainee from eachresearch core area (Biological Sciences, Engineering and Biostatistics & Bioinformatics) wasrepresented. Each program year from three to five interdisciplinary research teams were formedto conduct capstone microbiome research projects as part of this CSPII course. CSP practicawere cross listed between Duke and N.C. A&T as for-credit
formally taught to engineering students since thelatter half of the last century, either as engineering design or a discipline-specific version of it,e.g., mechanical engineering design, chemical engineering design. The inclusion of design asa core graduate attribute in engineering accreditation requirements [6] and the prevalence ofdesign courses (cornerstone, capstone, industry-sponsored projects) in engineering curriculaworldwide is a testament to the importance afforded to it by engineering educators. This isnatural, as design has always been the distinguishing feature of engineering practice [7, 8].Then, why is there a need for these courses on DT? It should be noted here that the term “DesignThinking” will only refer to formalized DT
’ perception of Community Engaged Learning pedagogy in 2020 at North Dakota State University. Over my final undergraduate years, I created a Humanitarian Engineering lab on OSU’s campus. The lab served over 125 students when I graduated in May 2022. I currently attend Colorado School of Mines to study Humanitarian Engineering and Science. At Mines, I am a teaching assistant for the Engineering With Community Design Studio. It consists of eight capstone projects applying engineering for social good. After Mines, I want to become a lecturer for general engineering courses and Humanitarian Engineering.Dr. Dean Nieusma, Colorado School of Mines Dean Nieusma is Department Head of Engineering, Design, and Society at Colorado
machinery, basic electrical circuits, and linear electronics. He was also one of three faculty responsible for organizing and conducting the capstone design course for the EMET program. Ron received a baccalaureate degree in Electrical Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology in 1971 and an M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from the California Institute of Technology in 1973.Ms. Lara L. Sharp, Springfield Technical Community College Ms. Sharp has a BS in chemical engineering, an MBA, and is currently working on a MS in Industrial engineering. She has worked in both secondary and higher education teaching and developing curriculum and is currently Program Director of Engineering Tech
in their ability to learna particular course’s material and their confidence in the instructor’s ability to teach thematerial. The paper is part of an overall larger project investigating if changes inteaching practices can change student self-efficacy in engineering [1]. Therefore, thefollowing gives a background on self-efficacy, and relates it to students’ confidence intheir learning and to their instructors’ teaching. Also, the following explains howteaching practices can influence students’ confidence. Self-efficacy theory, which has a significant impact on how students view theirown abilities as learners, emphasizes that people’s confidence in performing a certaintask depends on four types of experience: previous success
event that struck the central region of Chile onFebruary 27th, 2010—a joint research project between Japan and Chile was established toadvance the development of technologies and resources to foster tsunami resilient communities.The SATREPS (The Science and Technology Research Partnership for Sustainable DevelopmentProject) program [2] allowed the introduction of the Disaster Imagination Game (DIG) in Chile.DIG was created as a method for disaster drill in Japan [3] and has been used in differentcontexts since then (e.g., [4], [5] ). The game’s overall goal is to promote disaster risk awarenessand resilience. Its core is a teamwork exercise around a printed map, where people discuss andrecord information about the territory under study [6]. We
programmaticintegration as vital to addressing the differences in student reception of sociotechnical problemsolving.Cote and Branzan Albu [9] performed a case study of full integration of socio-cultural impactswhich they define as student-identified topics related to technical projects in a capstone coursefor computer vision technology. The definition of socio-cultural in this context includes but isnot limited to the environment, ethics, social relations, personal development, economics,health/medicine, law, elderly, and politics [9, pg. 697]. The authors describe how both theCanadian accreditation body (CEAB) and the European Network for Accreditation ofEngineering Education (ENAEE, which serves Germany, France, UK, Ireland, Portugal, Russia,Turkey, Romania
problemsthrough human action. Proponents of this Current focus on citizenship at both the local andglobal level, and use strategies like community projects, debates and action plans that actuallyencourage students to stand up for what is just. Educators may have concerns about exposingtheir ideology and political leanings in the classroom, creating some tension with respect to thisCurrent.STSE-Relevant Practices in Engineering educationIn reflecting on the nature of STSE as described above, and considering the integration withengineering, we might start with exploring the nature of the engineering profession, and how thattranslates to the engineering education context. In a critique of engineering education, Pawley(2019) suggested that engineering
macro perspectives, providing faculty development that includes training in both STS and practical ethics; and revision of curriculum materials, including online resources.”16Putting primary focus on micro-ethics in the piloted engineering ethics course provides studentswith the self-awareness of their values and skills to be able to voice those values during theirsenior capstone experience two years later. It also gives students the foundation for weavingethics considerations into the deep dive of researching and writing their undergraduate theses.Course OverviewEngineering ethics courses share a common provocation: When confronted with an ethicallychallenging situation, how can engineers identify the choices and options that will
Antonio, thus showing the transferability ofthe curriculum.IntroductionThe 2017 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines’ report on UndergraduateResearch Experiences (URE) for STEM Students: Successes, Challenges, and Opportunitiesmakes over 50 references to teams and teamwork, such as the URE’s tendency to “emphasize andexpect collaboration and teamwork” [1]. The report does not contain systematic recommendationsfor team training among its numerous contributing sources. This absence may indicate that teamtraining measures do not keep up with the increased curricular use of team projects. In fact,students are often required to work in groups without adequate preparation and guidelines for suchinterpersonal interactions [2-9
people with disabilities. The project startedin an HDT course and continued in a capstone project. This project started with the cycle of love,empathy, and ethics by investigating the needs of an inclusive preschool where loanerwheelchairs for younger children were not readily available. The teams used HDT to iteratethrough several prototypes of a transitional vehicle using adaptive assistive technology.The students contacted the school and met with the occupational therapist to conduct anenvironmental assessment. They researched human-machine interfaces and the ethics of thedevelopment and usage of this technology. Students and the teacher obtained InstitutionalReview Board approval for conducting research with human subjects. Through the
optical imaging and spectroscopy approaches for endoscopy applications, and metabolic imaging of the tumor microenvironment.Prof. Jeff Wolchok, University of Arkansas BS/MS in Mech Eng from UC Davis PhD in Biomed Eng from University of Utah Worked in the medical device industry - 8 years Capstone Design instructor - medical device design There are other authors for this abstractDr. Mostafa Elsaadany, University of Arkansas Dr. Mostafa Elsaadany is a Teaching Assistant Professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering at the University of Arkansas. Dr. Elsaadany teaches Introduction to Biomedical Engineering, Biome- chanical Engineering, Biomolecular Engineering, Senior Design, and Entrepreneurial Bioengineering
State University. The class centers aroundproblem solving and programming in MATLAB and C/C++. In Autumn 2022, there were 8sections of the course taught by 6 instructors, for which the content and format were the samefor all sections. The topics supported by learning theories and resulting course modifications,implemented in Autumn 2022, are discussed below along with their pedagogical rational.Methods - Workshop Content and Classroom InnovationsThe workshop took place over five days and was led by department experts in the topics beingcovered. Morning sessions consisted of learning theory review and instruction. In the afternoon,programmatic areas (e.g., first-year, capstone) broke out to discuss how the theories of the daywere already
Paper ID #39687Board 188: Student-centered and led approaches for improving Mental HealthCody Petitt, Ohio UniversityDr. Greg Kremer, Ohio University Robe Professor and Chair of Mechanical Engineering, founding director of the ”Designing to Make A Difference” ME senior capstone design experience, and PI for the Stacking the Deck for Career Success Initiative.Dr. Timothy CydersEmily McCartyRobert F. LindseyRyan Pytosh ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Student-centered and led approaches for improving Mental Health (Work in Progress)Introduction:Engineering
multiple individual 3and team activities. Seventeen sections with a capacity of 40 students per section of the coursewere offered in the spring of 2022 using a flipped format, where all course content was sharedwith students prior to class time, and hands-on activities and discussions were facilitated duringclass meetings. Students completed three projects throughout the course. The first two groupprojects were designed to help students learn the design thinking process in-depth. The finalgroup-based capstone project challenged students to apply what they have learned to address areal-world problem using the design thinking process to develop a
theprogram learning or teaching deficiencies exists and how best to scaffold the learning for apositive effect on student achievement [e.g., 16 and references therein]. Most programs focus onsummative assessment which takes place at the end of the learning program. Data for summativeassessment of student outcomes is generally taken from student work performed in a capstonecourse, a final exam, or other instrument of a terminal course.Table 1: Generalized Assessment Matrix for typical 4-yr ET programs (adapted from [3]) Intro Methods Intermediate Laboratory/ Advanced Capstone/ Course Apply Concepts Experience Concepts
Paper ID #38349Work in Progress: Insight into the strengths and personality types ofthose involved in a first-year engineering programDr. Melissa M. Simonik, State University of New York, Binghamton Melissa received her B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Union College (Schenectady, NY) in 2014 and her M.Eng. degree in Biomedical Engineering from Cornell University (Ithaca, NY) in 2015. Melissa started at Binghamton University in 2015 as a Mechanical Engineering doctoral student. She served as a teaching assistant (TA) for Watson Capstone Projects for two years. She continued as a TA for the Engi- neering Design Division in
, Edison Academy Magnet School Aditya Daga is a Senior in high school at the Edison Academy Magnet School (Formerly Middlesex County Academy for Science Mathematics and Engineering Technologies) and is interested in data sci- ence, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. These interests cultivated after Aditya explored the intersection of statistics and computer science for his capstone project in his AP Statistics class. Aditya hopes to one day be a Data Scientist and leverage his skill sets to make informed business decisions using the vast amount of data available in today’s world. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 2023 ASEE Southeastern
involves the contribution of studentsand faculty from chemical engineering, electrical engineering, and computer sciences, as a partof a Capstone design project looking for innovations on undergraduate engineering education.The chemical engineering lab-on-a-kit will contribute to modernize unit operations laboratoriesand provide opportunities for K-12 experimental demonstrations and outreach initiatives.IntroductionLaboratory-based courses provide engineering students with important skills including hands-onexperimentation, team dynamics, troubleshooting, and communications. These and other skillshave been recognized as well-defined pillars supporting the relevance of practical work inengineering majors[1], [2]. Unit operations laboratories (UOLs
inequities in student success; and (c) cultivate more ethical future scientists and engineers by blending social, political and technological spheres. She prioritizes working on projects that seek to share power with students and orient to stu- dents as partners in educational transformation. She pursues projects that aim to advance social justice in undergraduate STEM programs and she makes these struggles for change a direct focus of her research.Dr. David Tomblin, University of Maryland, College Park David is the director of the Science, Technology and Society program at the University of Maryland, Col- lege Park. He works with STEM majors on the ethical and social dimensions of science and technology. David also does
. Therefore, in an upper-division setting, it might be most appropriate in a project-based or capstone course. However, it could also be used in other upper-level technical coursesif students were encouraged to leverage the teachings in other project-based courses.Furthermore, this research took great efforts to create a model that could be widely applied. Itsmodular nature enables it to be easily integrated in existing courses, with required instructionalresources available in the Appendices. This facility also supports scaling the activities across abroad range of institutional settings. Finally, its use of identity as a core guiding framework maygive the instruction flexibility in being effective in a variety of settings. This is becauseregardless
third-year architecture studio and the creation of some electives. A numberof support courses could not be fully replicated in the semester curriculum. Courses such asdynamics, engineering economics, surveying, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, electricalcircuits, were listed in the three Fundamental Engineering (FE) elective courses where studentscan choose which they wish to take from a prescribed list. The is also an ARCE TechnicalElective which has a much larger list of courses from which a student can choose.The ARCE quarter program had four culminating experiences to include the three design labsand a separate senior project. The concrete/masonry lab becomes the senior capstone project andthe independent senior project is now an elective
bothengineering design researchers and educators.References[1] C. A. Pradilla, J. B. da Silva, and J. Reinecke, "Wicked Problems and New Ways of Organizing: How Fey Alegria Confronted Changing Manifestations of Poverty," in Organizing for Societal Grand Challenges, vol. 79, A. A. Gümüsay, E. Marti, H. Trittin- Ulbrich, and C. Wickert Eds., (Research in the Sociology of Organizations: Emerald Publishing Limited, 2022, pp. 93-114.[2] W. Mokhtar, "Capstone Senior Project Mentoring And Student Creativity," ed. Atlanta: American Society for Engineering Education-ASEE, 2010, pp. 15.259.1-15.259.16.[3] A. Gerhart and D. Carpenter, "Creative Problem Solving Course – Student Perceptions Of Creativity And Comparisons Of