(WEPs) are often charged with offering college-wideinitiatives. This includes initiatives such as outreach programs for prospective engineeringstudents [1-3], summer bridge programs for transitioning engineering students [4-6], and mentoringprograms for current engineering students [4, 7, 8]. While engineering colleges typically share thecommon goal of improving recruitment and retention, the specifics of these initiatives cansignificantly vary across universities. This variation makes it difficult for practitioners (i.e., thoseinvolved in leading recruitment and retention efforts) to learn from other institutions and, morespecifically, successful practices are not always shared in a manner that facilitates benchmarking.Benchmarking is defined
study, but provide stronger evidence thatstudent involvement in HFOSS promotes student learning in the areas of tools and techniquesand technical knowledge about the process and tools used to develop an HFOSS project.1. IntroductionSoftware engineering programs as well as most computer science programs desire to providestudents with experience working on a real-world project in order to supply students with anunderstanding of professional practice including such skills as teamwork, communication, workethic, self-confidence and more. In fact, the SE 2004 curriculum guidelines2 emphasize the needfor including professional practice in the education of software engineers. A common way toprovide this experience is through instructor and/or student
-grantuniversity. In addition to the two lecture-based meetings, students attended a workshop sectionduring the third meeting of the week. Unlike traditional lab classes, CBWs are given to thestudents in a structured format that includes a challenge question and five step approach to guidethe students in the direction of both solving the challenge question and understanding theunderlying concepts. The challenge every week consisted of a hypothetical scenario intended tomake the students imagine they were engineers working in industry trying to solve a problem fortheir employer. Following the CBI technique, students work to solve the challenge question via researchand experimentation through a five step process: [1] The first step was to
strongly they identified as engineers (identity) and theirappreciation of diversity in engineering (diversity), see Table 1. Approximately one-third of theparticipants on any one survey were female, and approximately one-tenth of the participantswere underrepresented minorities (URM).ProceduresThe research team visited these two courses on the first day of class near the end of the lectureperiod. Students were presented with the research project and asked to complete a consent formif they were willing to participate. Consent forms were collected during the first week of thesemester. Consenting students were then contacted via email and asked to complete an onlinesurvey five times during the semester. The surveys were sent during weeks two, five
, multi-year study revealed that engineering differs from othermajors by “a dearth of female students and a low rate of migration into the major.”1 And, therigid, often lock-step nature of engineering programs presents a barrier to student migration intoengineering programs. Others have cited the need for increased flexibility in engineering degreeprograms and have experimented with novel approaches for flexible baccalaureateprograms.2,3,4,5 In a study that compared the students in Purdue’s highly flexible and coursechoice-friendly multidisciplinary engineering (MDE) program, it was found that “male studentsin MDE are more likely to be intuitive, feeling and perceptive than male students in otherengineering majors,” leading to the conclusion that
chapters and self-assessingcurrent understanding via a follow-up assessment makes for more productive educationalactivities in-class.10The inverted Bloom’s taxonomy captures the essence of the flipped format12 and its focus on thehigher order stages of thinking in face-to-face class sessions that create time for effectivepractice of engineering design. Figure 1. Flipped format for an engineering design classroom12.Advantages of a flipped classroomFlipped classrooms are credited with many learning benefits,12 such as more rigorous studentpre-class preparation, in which independent content mastery is tied to student ability to self-manage, self-assess and recognize connections between previous and new knowledge; respectinga student’s own pace
theexperiences they had in the RET, but rather to better understand the perceptions they and theirstudents bring, as a means to consider how to design professional development experiences thataim to enhance diversity of the engineering pipeline.Conceptual frameworkRecruitment and retention of students from groups underrepresented in engineering has been thefocus of a great deal of recent research. We take that stance that interest development is the firststep for recruitment of students who otherwise might not consider engineering. Interestdevelopment is needed but insufficient for real change, as students who become interested butare poorly prepared are not likely to persist in engineering [1]. We therefore focus on strategiesthat develop interest and
responsibility" to the more specific, "ability to recognize ethical and professionalresponsibilities in engineering situations and make informed judgments, which must considerthe impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societalcontexts"1 (p. 28). While this criterion pertains to undergraduate engineering education, thecriteria for Master programs include the "fulfillment of the baccalaureate level generalcriteria"2 (p. 5).Several researchers have examined various methods on how to effectively teach engineeringethics, with an emphasis on what topics should be included and what kind of format should beused. In particular, debate has ensued on whether ethics should be taught as a 'standalonecourse' or if it should be
to the growing database. Asrequired by the university, the data was anonymized by assigning each student a code. Becausethe database is extensive and spans multiple courses taught by multiple instructors, theresearchers have the ability to track an individual student from their first course as a freshmanuntil that student graduates.This paper is based on the data from 2,836 students, who were enrolled either in non-math ormath intensive classes. The detailed demographics are summarized in Tables 1 to 3. The onlystudents not included in the following data are those who dropped out of the courses and thosewho arranged to receive an incomplete. At the time of this paper, there was not enough data toreport on the performance of students who
would need to design and implement several logical steps including thedetermination of the distance between two locations, ranking hotels based on locations,querying airport information, and identifying nearby gas stations. Moreover, after thisapplication has been developed, it cannot be easily reused by another softwareapplication due to potential interoperability issues, such as the difference of programminglanguage and development platforms.Under the SOP paradigm, the development becomes easy and flexible. The problem isfirst decomposed into several components: (1) a hotel query component that takes anaddress, a radius, and the hotel type as input and returns a list of hotels nearby and relatedinformation such as names, addresses, and
teaching paradigm, is a progression fromabstraction to idealization to mathematical modeling to simulation to performance evaluation to,finally, relating to reality.1 First-year students learn mathematical and engineering concepts andthen progress through courses involving design testing and assessment. Ultimately, engineeringprograms should produce graduates who can successfully apply engineering concepts to realworld problems. The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) sets thecriteria that colleges and universities should follow in order to produce engineeringprofessionals. ABET Criterion 3: Student Outcomes, originally published 20 years ago, has beenrevised over the years, but has always included an emphasis on student
active learning strategies usedincluded a high amount of “individual” problem solving. The electrical engineering introductionto computing course also served as one of the active courses, and this course contained a highamount of “group” problem solving. For the remainder of the paper, these courses will bereferred to as “traditional,” “individual,” and “group.” Preliminary qualitative observations of thecourses verified that these courses fit these characteristics, and the course instructors alsoconfirmed these characteristics reflected their type of teaching. The three courses sampled aresummarized in Table 1. The traditional and individual courses were predominantly taken bysecond year students, while the group course was taken by
program of research is: How can we effectively and ef- ficiently promote cyberlearning in complex knowledge domains such as STEM (science, technology, en- gineering and mathematics)? Towards this direction, she (1) investigates the development of higher-order thinking and complex problem-solving competencies following a comprehensive framework that includes cognition, metacognition, cognitive regulation, motivation, emotion, and epistemic beliefs; (2) develops innovative assessment methods that can benchmark progress of learning and the development of com- plex problem-solving competencies; (3) develops new and effective approaches to design state-of-the-art digital learning environments (such as intelligent tutoring
. professional attitudes and habits related to ethics, lifelong learning, developing professional networks, passion and balance in life9 (slightly modified block quote)Within this framework of abilities and skills, the following research questions were examined todetermine how the future faculty seminar influenced students’ understanding of faculty work.The research questions that were explored in this study are: (1) How do doctoral students describe successful engineering faculty after participation in the preparing future engineering faculty seminar? (2) How do doctoral students’ descriptions of successful engineering faculty change from participation in the preparing future engineering faculty seminar?We
path to follow are some of life’s biggest.Further, decisions about where and who to work for are value-laden. Especially for soon-to-beengineering graduates, job choices can have distinct social and ethical pressures from oneself,friends, family, and society given that engineering work can conflict with societal beliefs aboutwhat is “good” (i.e., manufacturing weapons for the military, mining for precious metals, drillingfor oil, etc.). Although what is “good” may differ from person to person, the engineeringprofession has a duty to society often referred to as social responsibility. Social responsibility ishighlighted by professional societies and academic bodies as a key engineering principle [1], [2][3], and several Bodies of Knowledge (BOK
language models (LLMs) AI that permeate popular discourse. Student familiarity andsentiments regarding AI are collected at the start and end of class to understand how the courseactivities influenced their perceptions of AI’s utility. By exposing students to many facets of AI,with a focus on engineering applications, we seek to develop student capabilities utilizing AI inworking through their academic and professional duties.1 IntroductionTechnology improvements are a part of the human story from the earliest of our historical records,controlled fire and rolling wheels in prehistoric times, to automobiles and computers in moderntimes. Each of these changes has brought about questions about the pros and cons of a giventechnology compared to the
, focusing on exploration and testing of technologies such as Google Glass, smartphone technologies that make up the Digital Doctor’s bag, Virtual and Augmented Reality, 3D Printing, and now Butterfly iQ handheld ultrasound machines. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025IntroductionWith the rising need for hospitals to deliver higher quality care, healthcare innovation hasaccelerated rapidly within recent years [1, 2]. This is due to the incorporation of newtechnologies such as artificial intelligence, wireless health, and personalized medicine throughgenomics [3, 4, 5]. Physicians need to be involved as active participants in healthcare innovation,as their input and “buy-in” can catalyze and sustain
to problem-solvingmentioned above, this work seeks with explicit intentionality to observe the processsurrounding formation of the team, and specifically, observing what that informs as itrelates to a team working together on a sociotechnical research project. We 2conceptualize this work underpinned by the assumptions stated here: 1) ascriptions tomeritocratic and depoliticized ideologies are pervasive across engineering; 2) suchbeliefs are socialized into and through engineering education; and 3) the values heldby an engineer will translate to some extent, at a minimum, into their technologies andinnovations. Given the situated assumptions, the “who, how
textual data. For instance, we recently codedapproximately 10,000 state K-12 computer science standards, requiring over 200 hours of workby subject matter experts. If LLMs are capable of completing a task such as this, the savings inhuman resources would be immense.Research Questions: This study explores two research questions: (1) How do LLMs compare tohumans in the performance of an education research task? and (2) What do errors in LLMperformance on this task suggest about current LLM capabilities and limitations?Methodology: We used a random sample of state K-12 computer science standards. We comparedthe output of three LLMs – ChatGPT, Llama, and Claude – to the work of human subject matterexperts in coding the relationship between each state
of Engineering at Virginia State University. She received the B.S. degree in Mathematics from Virginia Union University, B.S. and M.S. degrees in Electrical Engineering (EE) from Howard U ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 1 Exploring Minority Students’ Learning Experiences in a Summer QISE Laboratory Course Backgrounds Quantum Information Science and Engineering (QISE) is a rapidly growing field of studyand is expected to revolutionize society in the coming decades. In the U.S., this talent need hasbeen
differences in age-based discrimination at Finnish technology workplacesIntroductionMany engineering/technology workplaces are (still) characterized by masculine cultures,connected to various forms of discrimination (e.g., [1]). Discrimination has been suggested asone explanation for the persistent gender gap in engineering/technology [1], [2]. A recentmeta-reanalysis of audit experiments [3] finds that women are discriminated against in hiringto relatively better paying male-dominated occupations, while women applicants are favoredin the (relatively lower paying) occupations dominated by women. The authors conclude thatgender-based employment discrimination thus preserves the status quo of gender distributionsand
yearchemical & bioprocess engineering course at a university in Ireland, and an upper level chemicalengineering core course (Transport II). The design challenge required students to design, build,and test a heart-lung machine to simulate the performance of a clinical cardiopulmonary bypasssystem. The project proved to be adaptable and transferrable to different contexts with differentlearning objectives, assessment, instructional strategy, student population, and details ofimplementation.1. Introduction1.1. Biomedical EducationBiomedical engineering is a relatively new, interdisciplinary field existing at the intersection oflife science, medicine, and engineering. An aging population and increasing focus on healthissues are accompanied by a
howstudents’ innovative capability influences such transfer capacity. The goals are: (1) to explore thepedagogical practices used to support non-traditional students in community colleges to informpersistence, (2) to understand whether such practices are effective in offering non-traditionalstudents a program that enables them to stay in engineering and science majors and to transfer toa four year college or university, and (3) to determine if students’ propensity for innovativeproblem solving influences use of pedagogical practices and ultimately, transfer persistence. Theresearch targets five research questions: (1) What are the patterns of pedagogical practices thatcommunity colleges employ to enhance students’ transfer success in engineering and
in rural areas, and engaging in the scholarship of teaching and learning. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Perceptions and Applications of Honors Contracts in Developing an Undergraduate Engineering Research ExperienceAbstract: Honors colleges have become very effective in attracting and recruiting highlymotivated and talented students to institutions of higher education [1, 2]. The Honors Path allowsstudents to earn an Honors Diploma and provides them with unique educational opportunities,which facilitates strong personal and academic growth [1]. At Western Carolina University(WCU), two ways to earn Honors credit include taking an honors course (often a generaleducation
Paper ID #16074Promoting Engagement through Innovative and Pragmatic ProgramsDr. Ronald W. Welch, The Citadel Ron Welch (P.E.) received his B.S. degree in Engineering Mechanics from the United States Military Academy in 1982. He received his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Civil Engineering from the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana in 1990 and 1999, respectively. He became the Dean of Engineering at The Citadel on 1 July 2011. Prior to his current position, he was the Department Head of Civil Engineering at The University of Texas at Tyler from Jan 2007 to June 2011 as well as served in the Corps of Engineers for over
learned were: (1) design definitions vary across disciplines anddepartments need to explicitly develop design guidelines across all programs offered, (2)significant efficiency can be gained by developing one set of Program Education Objectives andOutcomes encompassing all programs offered, and (3) capstone design classes will need muchattention to detail if a single class is for multiple degree programsIntroductionOver the last several decades, and in response to a variety of drivers, departments of civilengineering at universities across the United States have expanded and many now supportmultiple degrees. Over the same time period, ABET’s Engineering Criteria 2000 introducedoutcomes-based assessment to the accreditation process for engineering
studentmotivation, and the connection between SRL, PI, and FTP has been described in previousliterature27. While theory and literature has shown connections exist between SRL and FTP,including quantitative studies of engineering students10,28, research is lacking to describe thenature of these connections. This pilot study will begin looking qualitatively at why and howengineering students connect their views of the future to the self-regulation of their learning inthe present.Research PurposeThis research is a pilot of a piece of a larger, mixed methods project which seeks to understandthe connection between engineering students’ FTP and their SRL strategy use throughinvestigating the sub-questions as outlined below: 1) What SRL strategies do IE
engineering, the role of engineers, and global health. Bycombining technical training with critical reflection on systemic inequities, this course equipsstudents with the skills and mindsets necessary for inclusive, impactful engineering practice. Thefindings underscore the potential of integrating AOP into engineering education to cultivatesocially conscious, globally engaged engineers capable of co-creating equitable solutions withdiverse communities.1. IntroductionAs global connectivity and communication networks continue to grow, so too does awareness ofthe disparities in health, resources, and opportunities across different regions of the world. Thisheightened awareness has spurred a shift among engineering students, who are
-part hypothesis motivated further study and change in the assignment gradingscheme: 1. Can the de-coupling of “evaluation” and “assessment” criteria in an assignment reduce student stress? 2. Can the same de-coupling assignment design improve student writing effectiveness?Literature ReviewAssignment construction is a long-researched endeavor continuing to evolve as scholars study thecomplex relationship between faculty and students. Research questions focused on the increaseddemand on faculty in academic settings, such as increases in class sizes compounded by higherresearch productivity goals, are sometimes answered by use of new technologies allowing forautomations of the grading process [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Potentially
EM student leadership series andcapstone course intervention is also discussed. Video data from legacy hackathons will becompared with the new data extracted from the first full run of the EM-infused competition.Finally, the paper will discuss lessons learned from the initial implementation of theinterventions that can be applied to future competition trials.1. IntroductionHackathons have emerged as a beneficial platform for fostering innovation and practicalproblem-solving skills among students. These events encourage participants to prototypesolutions to complex problems rapidly and promote personal and professional growth. As onepart of a grant effort, it was proposed to study how students reflect upon, articulate, and exhibitthe