for the full 5½ years. Many of the subjects running over multiplesemesters; the longest running subject lasts for three years.The curriculum is structured with three Pillars: a challenge / workplace / thesis strand; amastery of topics from the Topic Tree strand; and a Performance Planning & Review strand.The look and feel of each strand will be similar from year to year; however, the level ofknowledge and skill demonstrated by the students in their portfolio is expected to increase eachterm – achieving Engineers Australia stage one competencies for the Technologist by the endof their second placement, and reaching beyond stage one competencies for a ProfessionalEngineer by the end of the degree.The challenge / portfolio strand is built
engineering and science at Science Leadership Academy in Philadelphia. John came to SLA through the Philadelphia Teaching Residency Program as a Noyce Scholar. Prior to teaching, John spent a few decades as an entrepreneur, co-founding WAM Systems, a global provider of supply chain planning and optimization solutions to large manufacturers. Before WAM, he designed spacecraft at GE for many years. John holds engineering degrees from Penn State and Villanova. When not teaching science and engineering, John can be found playing jazz clarinet, practicing yoga, or inventing oddities in his workshop.Jessica S. Ward, Drexel University Jessica Ward serves as the Director of Operations for the DragonsTeach program. She previously
with its own community, set of values, and trajectories of participation.Nonetheless, the shared focus on design, and the shared experience of envisioning, planning, andbuilding something, suggests value in considering making as set of activities that may moveyoung people along a pathway toward engineering 5.Design is usually conceptualized in terms of its component parts – the ability to follow a designprocess, to engage in prototyping and testing and iteration. In this paper, take a different tack toexplore how participating in maker activities, within an open-ended activity system, can shapestudents’ conceptions of themselves as agents who are capable of envisioning, designing, andbuilding things to shape the world they live in. Such
for years 9 through 12 that was primarilyplanned and hosted by female undergraduate students. With 38 attendees, student mentors andfaculty prepared a series of workshops, seminars and activities designed to educate and inspiregirls to consider potential career paths in cybersecurity. Due to the success of this project, weare planning a bigger and more significant event for the summer of 2016 along with asupplemental series of workshops for STEM teachers at middle and high-schools.In this paper we discuss the methods and implementation of our 2015 summer camp. We look atthe perceived strengths and weaknesses of our approach to identify successful aspects andrecommend improvements for the coming year. By including data from entry and exit
Paper ID #14575Spurring Innovation in a Sustainable Manufacturing CourseDr. Young B. Moon, Syracuse University Young B. Moon is Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at Syracuse University and serves as Kauffman Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation. He holds a BS degree from Seoul National University, a MS degree from Stanford University and a PhD degree from Purdue University. His pro- fessional interests include CyberManufacturing Systems, Sustainable Manufacturing, Product Realization Processes and Systems, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems, Systems Modeling and Simulation, Computer
studentswith BSAC members as mentees/mentors.Mentor matching was facilitated by surveys (one to the freshmen and the other to BSACmembers and the upper classes). Prior to the start of the semester, students in BME Design(sophomore-senior) were made of aware of this new program and the new role of the BSACrepresentative. Both groups were asked to indicate their intended track within BME, future plans,and the option to list other interests. We achieved a 100% response rate from the BSACmembers with an additional 13% of the remaining design students volunteering to be mentors forthe 91% of the freshman interested in having a mentor. This equated to two-three mentees permentor.Through integrating the mentorship program with the design curriculum and BSAC
to fill the container approximately 100 ml of water. The valve and the pump are shut off, thecounter is increased in the programming loop, waiting for indication that the next way point insequence is reached in accordance with the mission plan.4.0 Results and DiscussionFor preliminary testing a pond in the UMES__ campus (Figure 8a) is chosen to assess the designedcapabilities of the STRIDER platform. Eight locations are chosen from the Google Earth map ofthe pond and entered in the mission planner and downloaded to the Pixhawk (Figures 8b and 8c). (a) (b) (c)Figure 8: a) Google Earth Image of Campus, UMES pond, b) Mission plan c)Waypoints for Preliminary
questions over all of the previously mentioned topics. Once the studentcompletes the pre-test, the program puts together a study plan based on the questions that theydid not get correct. This allows the student to efficiently use their time to brush up on theconcepts that they forgot while not spending as much time on concepts that they are comfortablewith. The study plan involves more practice problems and examples for the students to workwith on the selected topics until they become more competent with the material. Once thestudents complete their designated study plans on MMT, they take a post-test to evaluate theirimprovement. Students averaged a pre-test score of 62% and a post-test score of 89% for theWinter 2015 Physics Jam, and these are
routinely use scientific, technological, engineering, and mathematical knowledge andskills in their jobs; this knowledge fuels innovation and entrepreneurship.”1 Whereas nationallythere is an increased emphasis on STEM graduates and a specific goal of doublingundergraduates in STEM fields from 200,000 to 400,000 by 2020,2 “the number of (bachelor’s)degrees awarded in science, engineering and computer-related fields declined in Arizona whileholding steady nationally”3. In the field of engineering specifically, the number of jobs isestimated to grow by about 11% but the number of high school students planning to enter thisfield is remaining stable.4 There is a critical need to expand the STEM workforce throughincreasing graduation numbers
areas. Once participating in the externship, teachers understand the importance ofengaging students in these types of activities and therefore may seek out PD opportunities inthese areas. Tables 3 shows the results from the pre- and post-program analysis. The results showone significant item, indicating teachers in the current cohort are planning to have studentsengage significantly more often in the reworking of solutions to problems based on self- or peer-evaluations. All of the teachers in this study have been previous participants or are currentlyenrolled in the Educators in Industry program. Many of these teachers already appreciate theneed for a more in depth understanding of the EDP and STEM learning techniques, and maybethat is why they
have a focus outside of trainingpeople for industrial robotics. Our RobotRun software is functional, but is still underdevelopment. Currently, it provides a 3D view of a robotic arm, allows selection of diferentend-efectors, and allows the user to control the robot through a realistic teach pendant which isanalogous to teach pendants used in industrial robotics. In the future, we plan to ine-tune thesoftware based on feedback, add features, and add some common industrial scenarios whichwould be useful for training.Overview of the SoftwareWe began development on the RobotRun software in the Summer of 2015. Two Computer Sciencegraduate students collaborated with other students and faculty in the Department of ComputerScience and the School of
Paper ID #14392Licensure Issues of Strategic Importance to the Civil Engineering Profession- and ASCECraig N Musselman P.E., A & E Consulting Craig N. Musselman, P.E. is a practicing civil and environmental engineer and is the Founder and Pres- ident of CMA Engineers, a consulting engineering firm with offices in New Hampshire and Maine. He holds B.S.C.E. and M.S.C.E. degrees from the University of Massachusetts and has more than 40 years experience in the planning, design and construction administration of public works facilities. Musselman is a former member of the New Hampshire Board of Licensure for Professional
of the students from early in the process canprove to be instrumental in the future success of the maker space. As opposed to an “If you buildit, they will come” philosophy, it can prove of use to ask the students for input on the matter inadvance as you may find that there is not as big of a desire for a space as anticipated. That’s notto say that a maker space would not be a good addition to your university just that the type ofspace that the students are looking for could be different then you planned, (sewing machinesand vinyl cutters instead of CNC mills and lathes).The involvement of students also plays a crucial role later on the process once the space hasbecome established in maintaining and expanding your maker space. Students can
subjects while being fun at the same time. We intend to use the class as away for engineering students to build their own community and establish their own identity. Wenoticed students working in groups in this class tend to stick together afterwards in study groups,which contributed to their success in other classes. In addition to team building, we view theengineering design course as a “career molding” experience by showing the exciting, hand-onside of engineering. We believe all of these aspects contribute to the improvement of studentretention rates.In this paper, we will address the motivation for redesigning our engineering experience for firstyear students and re-shuffling of the CE 4-year plan based on observations and student
• Could give options of scenarios; different bridge optionsDiscussionThe pilot studies for new entrepreneurially minded learning modules in 2nd-year core engineeringcourses at Western New England University were completed in Spring 2015. Since the resultswere promising, the modules will be implemented in more sections of the respective courses inacademic year 2015-2016. Minor changes to the modules are planned to further address targetEML skills in the respective courses.IE 212Small changes are planned for the next implementation of this assignment. The module will bepitched to the students in a similar fashion; the students’ goal is to convince the CEO of theircompany to locate a new facility in a particular region. The assignment will be
Engineering (3) G * ‘C’ denotes Integrated lab component; & U – Undergraduate, G – Graduate; ** under development;3. Methods (Courseware) The overall goal of the EECE 6032 – Software Testing and Quality Assurance course was foreach student to understand the basic principles of software testing and quality, and their role incontemporary software engineering. An additional goal for graduate students was to examineresearch areas of interest, and be prepared to conduct research in software engineering in general.The ABET student learning outcomes of the course were:• To understand how to develop a test plan for a set of software requirements
to buy a product but they will only have that choice if the product can be made. Thus, students are introduced to manufacturing considerations and work with the instructor to validate the manufacturing and pricing assumptions.7. Technology roadmapping. The fact that this is a freshman level class with a one semester duration necessitates that the process be truncated. The students are required to make a technology roadmap, describing the technologies that need to be developed in order for the product to become a reality. They are, however, not required nor encouraged to embark on the technology development during the course. Instead, the students are asked to make an initial plan to develop these technologies in
professional engineering settings and related professional settings,5,6 as well as otherchallenging ethnographic field sites like family homes.7,8 Because of these prior fieldworkexperiences, we were—in addition to being hopeful—also realistic that negotiating accesssettings would present challenges because every new setting presents its own challenges.However, we had no reason to see these as insurmountable challenges. We were also as sensitiveas possible in our research design; we planned what we call a “sliding scale” approach to eachparticular focal research participant (i.e. new engineer). Depending on how she or he felt aboutthe research, we planned to vary the intensity of our field data collection, with an explicit plan todefer to more
orderto do so, the School of Engineering developed a zero-credit course that was given at the end ofthe sophomore year. This course was originally developed in response to the ABET 2000Criteria, and has been modified over the years to meet changes in protocol, curriculum, andtechnology8. During this course, the students go through an individual interview with theinstructor and take an exam based on the courses from the first two years of the curriculum. Thisinformation is then used during the department’s internal assessment process.This paper gives an overview of this exam, as well as how it is used to help in our internalassessment process and outlines recent plans to use the exam to aid students in their upperdivisional years as well. It also
; manufacturing technology; and renewable energy. By utilizingdata in College, State, and Federal databases, the well qualified research team assembledfor this project will be able to analyze the impact of long-term NSF funding in thesetechnological areas and make recommendations for wider studies to assess post-grantachievement of students funded by NSF ATE, better elucidating the impact of the overallprogram.2.0 Building on prior NSF ATE grants related to this proposal and CREATEConsortium:NSF DUE: 9850283 (ATE Planning), 9950015 (ATE Project), ATE Regional Centers(0202396), (0602615), (1002653), (1239631), and (1345306).CREATE’s initial project had four primary goals: curriculum development, enrollmentand retention, work-based site experiences, and
. In addition, he is a reviewer for the Human Resource Development Review, the Human Resource Development Quarterly, and the Journal for Technology Education. In addition to his academic pursuits, Dr. Foster is President of Foster and Associate, through which he consults regularly in business and industry in the areas of training, facilitation, strategic planning, quality, team dynamics, organizational change, and technical problem solving. Dr. Foster is a certified flight instructor, and a master woodworker. He is an avid reader and regularly writes (sometimes even publishes) poetry. He is married with two children (a son and daughter) and two grandsons.Jason C. Dean, Indiana State University Mr. Jason C. Dean
Same 5 areas of emphasis as Group A. by external forces 3. The types of bonding in polymericPre-lab Followed by completion of a worksheet by each materials (i.e., strong covalent bondslecture student that involved sketching, developing a within chains and weak van der Waals hypothesis, and proposing a plan to test the forces between chains) hypothesis. (Appendix D) 4. How chain alignment can increase
research plan, separate but separate but simultaneous inductive and deductive analysisare underway on the interviews collected at the Bay Area and World Maker Faires to date.Following these analyses, a preliminary theory of Young Makers will be developed, informingtheoretical sampling during our data collection expedition to the Bay Area Maker Faire in SanMateo, CA (in May 2016). We hope to finalize our sampling at this Maker Faire.Maker Theory: Additive InnovationFindings from our qualitative artifact elicitation and critical incident interviews showed thatMakers demonstrate the characteristics of an Additive Innovation2,3 mindset that describes theopen community of sharing and learning that is in the Maker community. Introduced in thispaper as
was driven by the need to provide quasi-real timefeedback for students in project-based courses. In the Software Enterprise8,9 at Arizona StateUniversity, a project-based curriculum is offered to undergraduate and graduate softwareengineering students. In a typical project experience, students are grouped into teams, eachworking on building a software project by incorporating the principles of Agile. A course projectis typically divided into 4-5 sprints spanning 3 weeks each. The requirements for this projectedare accumulated into a product backlog created through a planning process. During each sprint,the team identifies a set of user stories from the product backlog and adds them to the currentsprint backlog. Teams then identify tasks to do
equipment are being used.The Woodshop consists of mostly low-level equipment, however there is a band-sawwhich requires support from faculty.The Outlet is slated to be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week to students who haveaccess through their student identification card. Access is given to students who sign auser agreement which contains the guidelines for use of the lab. Guests can be broughtinto the lab if they are accompanied by a Teslab user (someone who has ID card access)and sign in to a guest binder; the user has the ultimate responsibility for any guest theybring into the lab. Installation of a security camera is planned, due to the fact that the labwill be largely unsupervised.A different policy has been created for a student group
Engineer of 2020 - Visions of Engineeringin the New Century, which indicates that engineers in 2020 need to develop analytical skills,practical ingenuity, creative capability, communication skills, concepts of business andmanagement, leadership, ethical standards and sense of professionalism [9]. The RoyalAcademy of Engineering in United Kingdom published Educating the Engineers for the 21Century - the Industry view, highlighting future engineering graduates need to be equippedwith creativity, innovation and leadership to lead the industry to succeed [10]. A Plan forEducating and Training Outstanding Engineers published by Chinese Ministry of Educationproposed a list of competencies to be possessed by engineering undergraduates upongraduation
small proportion of students majoring inhigh-demand fields such as engineering. The National Science Foundation(NSF) reports that 39% of URMs "plan to major" in science and engineeringfields as freshman, but less than half of these earn an undergraduateengineering degree; rates are startlingly lower for Blacks and Hispanics.One way to increase retention and graduation rates in engineering for allstudents is to enhance their overall skills and readiness for engineering-related work by way of cooperative education (i.e., co-op) and internships1that offer students "real-life, hands on" experience in their major subject. TheCenter for Postsecondary Research at Indiana University identifies suchexperiences as a "high-impact practice" that likely
students in aninterdisciplinary course with students in various departments to design and consult with a ruralHonduran community in need of a safe drinking water supply. During the course students workclosely with the community, a Honduran non-government organization, and professionaladvisors from various disciplines including civil engineering, water system operations, technicalcommunications, and political governance. The course focuses on wrestling with the challengesof defining a need, evaluating alternative solutions, and devising a plan for system construction,operation, and financing. Results of the first two efforts are discussed from the perspectives ofthe student participants, the community recipient, the NGO, and professional partners
differencesemerging from the traditional and alternative course student populations. An example of the fullstudent post-survey protocol can be found in the Appendix, however the survey protocol alsoshifted slightly from term to term.In each term that the course was offered (Spring 2014, Fall 2014, and Fall 2015), weadministered these surveys to compare student responses in the alternative and traditionalcourses. In most terms, students were surveyed at the beginning of the semester, at the end ofthe semester, and in the subsequent semester after students took the class. (In Spring 2014, only apost-semester survey was conducted, and for the most recent cohort a subsequent-semestersurvey is planned for May 2016).In Fall 2014 and Fall 2015 semesters, interviews
instructors and likely designed and maintained by an instructional team1–4. In many ofthese cases, it could be argued that the most significant factors influencing student performancein, and perception of, a large format class come not from the students, nor the instructors, butfrom the curricular decisions of the cross-disciplinary course planning team charged with thedesign of the content, assessment and pedagogy employed within the classroom. Literature concerning methods for high-quality engineering course design is wellestablished, and should form the foundation of any initial course design, or major redesign, in anengineering curriculum. Experts advise that this practice begin with a thorough review of thelearning objectives