., Carnes, M. T., & Ohland, M. Returning students in engineering education: Making a case for “experience capital.” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. Vancouver, BC: American Society for Engineering Education, 2011.10. Schilling, W. Issues Effecting Doctoral Students Returning to Engineering Education Following Extensive Industrial Experience. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. Pittsburgh, PA: American Society for Engineering Education, 2008.11. National Academies Press (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC.12. Dreyfus, H. & Dreyfus, S. (1986). Mind over Machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the age
Paper ID #28623The Sequential Nature of Engineering Problem SolvingDr. Carolyn Plumb, Montana State University Carolyn Plumb is the recently retired Director of Educational Innovation and Strategic Projects in the College of Engineering at Montana State University (MSU). Plumb has been involved in engineering education and program evaluation for over 25 years, and she continues to work on externally funded projects relating to engineering education.Rose M Marra, University of Missouri - Columbia Professor Rose M. Marra is the Director of the School of Information Science and Learning Technology at the University of
consider to have been ambiguous. Interviews will beanalyzed using phenomenography, leading to outcome spaces that define a hierarchy of waysthat each group experiences ambiguity. These outcome spaces will then be used to develop ataxonomy of ambiguity that can be used in future studies of engineering problem solving.Ultimately, we aim to provide better instructional materials, methods, and tool kits for teachingstudents to solve ambiguous engineering problems.IntroductionHow do engineers handle ambiguous problems? This is a common question pondered by bothacademic and professional engineers. “Maturity of mind is the capacity to endure uncertainty,”said John Huston Finley [1], former President of the College of the City of New York,Commissioner of
Paper ID #33459Framing Engineering as Community Activism for Values-Driven Engineer-ing(RFE Design and Development - Year 2)Dr. Joni M. Lakin, University of Alabama Joni M. Lakin (Ph.D. , The University of Iowa) is Associate Professor of Educational Research at the University of Alabama. Her research interests include educational assessment, educational evaluation methods, and increasing diversity in STEM fields.Dr. Daniela Marghitu, Auburn University Dr. Daniela Marghitu is a faculty member in the Computer Science and Software Engineering Department at Auburn University, where she has worked since 1996. She has published
visualization approach used in linear algebra instructions. World Applied Science Journal 2009, 1046-1052.24. McGrath, M. B.; Brown, J. R. Visual learning for science and engineering. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 2005, 56-63.25. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., Eds. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 1999.26. Frankel, F. Translating Science into Pictures: A Powerful Learning Tool. In Invention and Impact: Building Excellence in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education; AAAS Press, 2005; pp 155-158.27. Smith, J. M.; Van Ness, H. C.; Abbott, M. M. Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics, 7th ed
label of “Maker” is the source of pride.Discussing Overlapping IdeasDuring both approaches terms that overlapped in the descriptions of making and engineeringwere recorded. These terms were used to create a definition of the relationship between Makersand engineers.From the ad-hoc post-it approach several key concepts were seen in both responses to What isMaking to You? and What is Engineering to You? First is the use of ambiguous direct objectssuch as thing(s), something, and stuff when talking about accomplishing tasks. This suggests thatwhile engineers may be considered more specialized both groups accomplish some various task.Next is the use of action verbs making, building, creating, and make. What comes to mind whenMakers thing of
Paper ID #33631Assessing Metacognition Awareness of Freshmen Engineering StudentsMuhammad Dawood, New Mexico State University Dr. Muhammad Dawood received his BE degree from the NED University of Engineering and Technol- ogy, Karachi, Pakistan, 1985, and his MS and Ph.D. degrees, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, in 1998 and 2001, respectively, both in electrical engineering. Dr. Dawood is involved in teaching both nationally and internationally since 1995. At present, Dr. Dawood is an Associate Professor at the Klipsch School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, New Mexico State University (NMSU), Las Cruces, New
HumanitiesAll experiments were designed with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals andglobal connection in mind. For example, the jar test experiment encourages students to considercreative methods of purifying water. Additional activities and supplementary material weredeveloped to further engrain the connection between engineering and the humanities.3.1 Semester ProjectWhile students explore solutions to global problems through the algae experiments, they will beasked to think about how these solutions can work for countries around the world. At thebeginning of the curriculum, students will be broken into small groups and each group will beassigned a country. Students will be responsible for researching demographic, political, andeconomic
themajority of caregivers shared how this engineering design program afforded them time to spendwith their child(ren), as well as make connections with their child(ren). As one caregiver stated,it allowed her a space to enter into her son’s domain. “…having to do it as a family brought mecloser to Zac, and to his mind, and to his world.” This was dedicated time and space that wasoften spent on the chaotic day-to-day tasks. As stated by another caregiver, “I guess the mostthing that I got out of the program is that it gave me a chance to do something with my kidsbecause there wasn't a lot of time that was put in to doing things with them. Between me going towork, them at school, coming home and running over here, running over here, trying to
mill. That involved no red tape atall, but also a complete change for me. It’s in an extremely rural area, which I had never lived inbefore. I don’t know. It’s really weird, right? You don’t think of electrical engineering studentsworking in a steel mill, which was scary but also exciting. Since it’s private industry, notgovernment, I would make a lot more money. These two potential jobs were really fighting me,fighting each other in my mind. I was really struggling with the thought that I have to choose whatpath my life is going to take right now, and the choice that I make is going to determine my future,which isn’t something that I really had to do all by myself before. When I was selecting a college,I got input from my parents and friends
Paper ID #26725Board 31: Engineering with Engineers: Revolutionizing a Mechanical Engi-neering Department through Industry Immersion and a Focus on IdentityDr. Yen-Lin Han, Seattle University Yen-Lin Han is an Assistant Professor in the department of Mechanical Engineering at Seattle University. Her research interests include micro-scale molecular gas dynamics, micro fluidics, and heat transfer ap- plications in MEMS and medical devices as well as autonomous vehicles and robotics. She is passionate about Engineering Education and experienced in developing inverted classroom lectures and facilitat- ing students’ learning
. Engineering students at the Westinstitution were interviewed about their beliefs and attitudes on various diversity-related topics;interviews ranged from general conceptualizations of and experiences with diversity (e.g.,experiences with discrimination) to the specifics of their first-year engineering teamingexperiences, mirroring the interviews at the Midwestern institution. Through these personal andoften uncomfortable conversations about diversity, participants revealed that having anopportunity to talk candidly about diversity may be a catalyst to shifting attitudes about diversity[15]. Students indicated that the opportunity to discuss the topic of diversity was “mind-boggling(George)” and made them “think about how [they behave] with other
Paper ID #17860Catalyzing a Research Agenda for Enhancing Engineering Education throughInstitutional CollaborationsDr. Keith W. Buffinton, Bucknell University Keith W. Buffinton is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and former Dean of the College of Engi- neering at Bucknell University. He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Tufts and his M.S. and Ph.D. from Stanford. Following his graduate studies, he worked as a post-doctoral researcher in the Institute for Mechanics at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland. From 2001 through 2004 he served as co-director of Bucknell’s
each year and state. In these regressions, weuse underrepresented minority engineering share as an outcome, i.e., the proportion of engineeringgraduates in the state and year who do not identify as non-Hispanic White or Asian/PacificIslander. In our estimates we account for year and state fixed effects and control for a limitedvector of state-level covariates (racial composition of residents and the total number of graduatesin the state). We cluster standard errors by state. We emphasize that our methods are not suited forcausal inference, i.e., we cannot whether concentration affects the diversity of engineering degreeproduction. With that caveat in mind, our estimates indicate that states with less concentrationgenerally have more diverse
Paper ID #15339Spatial Skills Training Impacts Retention of Engineering Students - Does ThisSuccess Translate to Community College Students in Technical Education?Ms. Susan Staffin Metz, Stevens Institute of Technology (School of Engineering and Science) Susan Metz is Executive Director of Diversity and Inclusion and Senior Research Associate at Stevens Institute of Technology. Metz is a founder of WEPAN, Women in Engineering ProActive Network. She is a recipient of the Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring, the Maria Mitchell Women in Science Award and is a Fellow of the
Paper ID #14633Enhancing Verification and Validation Education Using Active Learning ToolsDeveloped through an Academia-Industry PartnershipDr. Sushil Acharya, Robert Morris University Acharya joined Robert Morris University in Spring 2005 after serving 15 years in the Software Indus- try. His teaching involvement and research interest are in the area of Software Engineering education, Software Verification & Validation, Data Mining, Neural Networks, and Enterprise Resource Planning. He also has interest in Learning Objectives based Education Material Design and Development. Acharya is a co-author of ”Discrete
Paper ID #8011Engaging Community College Students in University ResearchDr. Maria Teresa Napoli, UC Santa Barbara Dr. Maria Teresa Napoli received a Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of California at Santa Barbara, in 2004. In 1999, she also earned a Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering from the University of Padova in Italy. Currently, she holds positions as project scientist in the Mechanical Engineering Department, and as Community College education coordinator at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Prior to this appointment, she worked for several years as a microsensors system
engineering programs to develop anentrepreneurial mindset among their engineering students with the belief that this will lead tothem being more productive and innovative whether their career path leads them into establishedindustry (becoming “intrapreneurs”) or later as entrepreneurs.While this trend toward developing more entrepreneurially minded engineering students issupported by global economic trends and a rapidly changing work environment, one factor hasbeen largely overlooked in this process. Statistically, most entrepreneurial ventures fail, withdisproportionately large value being created from a minority of entrepreneurial endeavors [8].Given this fact, until we find ways to drastically increase the success rate of entrepreneurialventures
. Page 26.987.11[14] S. Farrell and R. P. Hesketh, "An Introduction to Drug Delivery for Chemical Engineers," Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 198-203, 2002.[15] A. V. Struck Jannini, C. S. Slater and M. J. Savelski, "Experiments in Pharmaceutical Engineering for Introductory Courses," Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 239-249, 2014.[16] S. Chatterjee, "FDA Perspective on Continuous Manufacturing," in International Forum on Process Analytical Chemistry, Baltimore, 2012.[17] K. Plumb, "Continuous Processing in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Changing the Mind Set," Chemical Engineering Research and Design, vol. 83, no. A6, pp. 730-738, 2005.[18] Accreditation Board for
community or marketplace in a community. “In my mind, innovation is recognizing a need, or a gap, or a circumstance that could be better and then bringing to bear new ways of putting things together, [things] that usually exist, to be able to meet that need, or that gap.” Richard “Simply put, it’s a new way of doing things. It’s breaking tradition and taking a new approach to solving an old problem. I think an innovation is actually only truly innovative if it is delivered to the world and widely adopted, and enjoyably used.” Riley2. A two-stage definition of the engineering innovation process: the front-end, or discovery and development stage, and the back-end, or implementation and adoption stage. Engineering innovators defined
) promotion ofengineering habits of mind. However, this is not a robust enough definition of engineering at theK-12 level to be implemented by practitioners. As we look towards providing a morecomprehensive definition of K-12 engineering education in an era of standards-based reform, weneed to establish clear, coherent, and important content as developmentally appropriate learningoutcomes. The document Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?2 concludes that the firststep toward improving the quality and consistency in K-12 engineering education is to “articulatethe essential core ideas” (p. 37) of engineering that are appropriate for students at this level. Theresearch presented here reports the development of the Framework for Quality K-12
average engineering and computer science students. Asnoted, the faculty input indicated that some consideration of the development of self-sufficiencyis necessary in the definition. In addition, the greater importance placed by faculty and industryon teamwork indicates that that should be considered of greater importance than independentwork. With these factors in mind, the definition of a successful URE for average engineeringstudents is now proposed as follows.The goals for a successful URE for average engineering students are1) The URE should develop applied engineering, problem solving, and critical thinking skills ofthe students to help prepare them for a career as an engineer, likely in industry.2) The URE should improve the communication
examples from our respective experiences teaching engineering” (Lande, Jordan, & Weiner, 2017). § “Makers are a growing community of STEM-minded people who bridge technical and non-technical backgrounds to imagine, build and fabricate engineering systems. Some have engineering training, some do not. We explored the educational pathways of adult Makers and how they intersect with engineering” (Foster, Jordan, & Lande, 2017). § “This research is guided by the following research questions: (1) What can we learn about the educational pathways of adult Makers through the lens of constructivist grounded theory? and (2) How do the educational pathways of Makers intersect with engineering? This
. Wigfield, “MOTIVATIONAL BELIEFS,VALUES, AND GOALS,” 2002.[12] J. S. Eccles, A. Wigfield, and U. Schiefele, “Motivation to succeed,” in Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development., Vol. 3, 5th ed., N. Eisenberg, Ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1998, pp. 1017–1095.[13] Jacquelynne S. Eccles, “GENDER ROLES AND WOMEN’S ACH IEVEMENT- RELATED DECISIONS,” Psychol. ofWmn Q., vol. 11, pp. 135–172, 1987.[14] G. Hofstede, Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. 1991.[15] R. L. Kajfez, M. J. Mohammadi-Aragh, A. Clark, S. Sassi, and J. Petrie, “Board 29: Initial Qualitative Exploration into First-Year Engineering Community and Identity,” in 2019 ASEE Annual
University. She spent 12 years teaching secondary science and engineering in Oklahoma, and is a 2014 recipient of the Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching.Dr. Nick Lux, Montana State University Dr. Nicholas Lux has is an Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction in MSU’s Department of Education. His teaching and research interests are in the area of educational technology. He has worked in the fields of K-12 and higher education for 18 years, and currently teaches in the Montana State University Teacher Education Program. He has experience in educational technology theory and practice in K-12 contexts and teacher education, with a focus on STEM teaching and learning, technology
analysis.When asked to define adaptability, managers explicitly described it in terms of behaviors fromthe IAT framework, including learning new knowledge, being open-minded, adjusting toambiguous and unpredictable situations, and handling unexpected challenges. They also namedcuriosity about new knowledge as a key mindset to adaptability but did not mention othermindsets present in the CCT framework, such as confidence, feeling in control, or feelingconcerned (i.e., invested) about their work.Beyond the IAT and CCT frameworks, managers also mentioned other mindsets and behaviorsassociated with engineering adaptability, alluding to three categories: technical, interpersonal,and intrapersonal (our characterization). Engineering managers suggested that
Engineering Education, vol. 34, pp. 1726-1740, 01/01 2018.[18] F. T. Villavicencio, "Critical Thinking, Negative Academic Emotions, and Achievement: A Mediational Analysis," 2011.[19] M. H. Immordino‐Yang and A. Damasio, "We Feel, Therefore We Learn: The Relevance of Affective and Social Neuroscience to Education," Mind, Brain, and Education, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3-10, 2007, doi: 10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x.[20] N. L. P. Stedman and A. C. Andenoro, "Identification of Relationships between Emotional Intelligence Skill & Critical Thinking Disposition in Undergraduate Leadership Students," Journal of Leadership Education, vol. 6, no. 1, 2007, doi: 10.12806/V6/I1/RF10.[21] D. Bairaktarova and A. Woodcock, "Engineering Student’s
Paper ID #12674Exploring Implicit Understanding of Engineering Ethics in Student TeamsDr. Eun Ah Lee, University of Texas at Dallas Eun Ah Lee is a graduate student at University of Texas at Dallas. She received her PhD in science education from Seoul National University in Korea and has worked for STEM education in which she has strong interest. Currently, she is studying for dual masters’ degree in Applied Cognitive Science and in Emerging Media and Communication for her professional development.Prof. Nicholas Gans, University of Texas, Dallas Nicholas Gans is an assistant professor in the Department of Electrical
Paper ID #17281Unique Potential and Challenges of Students with ADHD in Engineering Pro-gramsDr. Arash Esmaili Zaghi P.E., University of Connecticut Dr. Arash E. Zaghi received his PhD in Civil Engineering from the University of Nevada, Reno, where he worked on the seismic behavior of novel bridge column and connection details. After graduating, he stayed with UNR as a Research Scientist to overlook two major research projects involving system-level shake table experiments. In 2011, Dr. Zaghi joined the Department of Civil and Environmental Engi- neering at University of Connecticut as an Assistant Professor. His research
. S. Dweck, Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House Incorporated, 2006. [15] National Research Council et al., How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. National Academies Press, 2000. [16] S. Tayal, “Engineering design process,” International Journal of Computer Science and Communication Engineering, pp. 1–5, 2013. [17] T. Floyd-Smith, D. Wilson, D. C. Jones, M. Plett, R. Bates, and N. Veilleux, “Investigation of belonging for engineering and science undergraduates by year in school,” in ASEE (American Society of Engineering Education) Conference, 2012. [18] D. W. Knight, L. E. Carlson, and J. F. Sullivan, “Staying in engineering: Impact of a hands-on, team-based, first-year