Venkataraman, San Diego State University Satchi Venkataraman, Ph.D., is a Professor of Aerospace Engineering. He has served as Graduate Advisor for the Aerospace Engineering program (17 years) and as an Associate Director at the Computational Sciences Research Center at San Diego State University (11 years). His expertise is in computational mechanics and optimization applied to design of lightweight and durable composite aircraft structures. He has extensive experience in developing programs for student professional development and broadening participation (co-PI and PI on three NSF S-STEM grants). ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Exploring Interdisciplinary Identity Formation in
between individual predispositions and thetransformative potential of these programs.AcknowledgmentThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.NSF-EEC #2106229. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.References[1] R. Vandeveer and M. L. Menefee, “Study abroad, international internship and experiential learning: A world-class adventure in learning,” in Decision Sciences Institute Southwest Region (SWDSI), 2006.[2] S. Shandilya, S. Y. Yoon, G. Raju, and C. A. Kwuimy, “Engineering Students’ Transformative Learning Experiences from A Virtual
, “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams,” Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 350–383, Jun. 1999, doi: 10.2307/2666999.[2] A. Edmondson, The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth, 1st ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2019.[3] C. Cole, J. Marhefka, K. Jablokow, S. Mohammed, S. Ritter, and S. Miller, “What Is the Relationship Between Psychological Safety and Team Productivity and Effectiveness During Concept Development? An Exploration in Engineering Design Education,” Journal of Mechanical Design, vol. 144, no. 11, p. 112301, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1115/1.4054874.[4] P. Cauwelier, V. M. Ribiere, and A. Bennet
discipline, and two tables in Appendix C reportedthe results by item. Understanding of CS and CmpE was relatively high on the pretest.Understanding of IT was initially relatively low (44%) and almost doubled (81%) on the post. Table 1. Pre and Post Test of Participants’ Perceptions of Computing Skills by Discipline Discipline(s) Items Pre Post Change Computer Science 5 80% 80% +0% Computer Engineering 4 85% 98% +13% Information Technology 7 44% 81% +37% Information Technology and Computer Science 3 93
online instruction, the course comprises group projects, quizzes,homework assignments (four of which are ISBL assignments), and a midterm exam. The samples Figure 1: A snapshot of the immersive simulation model used in the sample ISBL moduleused in our analysis include two sections of remote delivery and two sections of in-persondelivery. The same instructor provided identical materials in both delivery modes.Four ISBL modules are integrated into the course to mimic real-life information technology anddatabase problems. Students are given two weeks to complete each ISBL assignment followingthe lecture on the respective topic(s). Each ISBL module includes a description of the system andthe database problem(s) to be solved. In each module, the
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology in 2006. Matthew received his doctorate from Clemson University in 2011 in Mechanical Engineering, focused primarily on automotive contDr. Sean Tolman P.E., Utah Valley University Sean S. Tolman is an Associate Professor in the Mechanical Engineering Program at Utah Valley University in Orem, UT. He earned his BSME degree at Brigham Young University in 2002 and a MSME degree from the University of Utah in 2008 before returning toAmanda C Bordelon, Utah Valley University Amanda Bordelon, PhD, P.E. joined Utah Valley University’s faculty in the new Civil Engineering program in August 2018. She has all of her degrees in Civil and Environmental Engineering emphasized in
11published research conference papers and scientific journals, and securing one patent,highlighting the importance of engaging with PM training in graduate education.One study conducted by Ravankar et al. [15] did include doctoral students, but this study did notfocus specifically on STEM students. They revealed the applicability and value of PM training,demonstrating that engagement in PM training aligns with graduate students’ career aspirationsand satisfaction across various fields [15]. Despite these studies, Arditi et al.’s [16] review ofcivil management and construction master's programs in the U.S., highlighted a notable gap inPM training within this field. Their survey of 21 world-leading universities indicated a lack ofPM education, which
organization that brings hands-on curriculum to K-12 students. He is the Co-PI of an NSF grant to develop an engineering program consisting of hands-on technical curriculum at Imperial Valley College. He also collaborated with the Inclusive Engineering Consortium (IEC) on developing a graduate pathways program.Prof. James Friend, University of California, San Diego James Friend leads the Medically Advanced Devices Laboratory in the Center for Medical Devices at the University of California, San Diego. He holds the Stanford S. and Beverly P. Penner Endowed Chair in Engineering and is a professor in both the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Jacobs School of Engineering and the Department of Surgery, School
programs, and mentors. For FGS in engineering majors, many of the studies thatwere conducted looked at the barriers for FGS and posed the research in a deficit model. We aimto reframe this mindset and look at the capital and assets that FGS possess and how they navigatestructures of engineering. We also want to understand what culture and support leads to successin engineering. Martin et al. [13] began the turn in questioning the “deficit” framing of thisgroup. We aim to build on this research with our study. We will use mixed methods tounderstand their experiences and the capital, beyond networks, that they used to persist inengineering. Building off of Martin et al.’s [13], [14], [40] work, this project focuses on identitydevelopment alongside
) and macroethical situations (e.g., anengineering profession’s social responsibility considered collectively) (Herkert, 2005). Thisexists against a backdrop of increased attention on companies’ efforts on corporate socialresponsibility (CRS), given that “companies perform their CSR duty to fulfill their socialobligations not only to extend their market reach but also as a strategy to fulfill the socialobligation[s] placed on firms by society” (Lin, Banik, & Yi, 2016, p. 108). Looking at these side-by-side, it is almost unsurprising that some researchers such as Smith et al. (2021) would call forthe need for grounding engineering ethics education around CRS efforts to enhance students’ roleethics.Codes of ethics arise frequently in
descriptive statistics, and t-tests were performed to compareresponses from the midterm survey to responses from the end of term survey. The quantitativeresults from questions Q1-Q4 are shown in Figures 2–5, and the responses to the open-endedquestion Q5 are discussed below. (a) Responses (b) Statistics (p = 0.195).Figure 2: Responses to Q1: “The specifications grading scheme helps me learn in this course.”In (b), the red line indicates the median, the blue circle indicates the mean, the top and bottomedges of the box indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles, and the whiskers extend to data points notconsidered to be outliers. Outliers, if they exist, are plotted as red +’s. Responses from the
network. Page 22.1306.12References: 1. cross-tab. (2009). Online Reputation in a Connected World. Retrieved from: http://www.microsoft.com/privacy/dpd/ 2. Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. Philadelphia: Basic Books. 3. Hoofnagle, C. J., King, J., Li, S., & Turrow, J. (2010). How different are young adults from older adults when it comes to information privacy attitudes and policies Retrieved from: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1589864 4. Debatin, B., Lovejoy, J. P., Horn, A.-K., & Hughes, B. N. (2009
Release v. 2 http://www.economicmodeling.com/ accessed October 15, 2008.[15]. G.E Hoachlander, and R.D. Mandel, Developing Materials for Industry Based Education, NSF-ATE, (2002).[16]. H.W. Hodgins, Into the Future: A Vision paper, Produced for the Commission on Technology and Adult Learning co-sponsored by ASTF and the National Governors Association, (2000).[17]. Greenville Technical College, Office of Planning and Grants. 2002 Fact Book and 2001 Fact Book.[18]. A.K. Gramopadhye, B.J. Melloy, S. Chen, J. Bingham, Use of Computer Based Training for Aircraft Inspectors: Findings and Recommendations, In Proceedings of the HFES/IEA Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, (2000).[19]. R. Held, and N. Durlach, Telepresence, Time Delay and
; Development, Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 5-22. [6] Hong, N. S., Jonassen, D. H., and McGee, S. (2003). “Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 6–33. [7] Jacobson, M. (2000). “Problem solving about complex systems: Difference between expert and novices.” In B. Fishman and S. O’Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth International Conference of the Learning Science, Erlbaum Publishing, Mahwah, NJ. [8] Hmelo-Silver, C. and Pfeffer, M. G. (2004). “Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions.” Cognitive Science, Vol. 28, pp. 127 -138. [9] Smith
defined self-regulated learningas “learning that results from students‟ self-generated thoughts and behaviors that aresystematically oriented toward the attainment of their learning goals” (p. 125). In addition,Bandura9 showed that self-efficacy beliefs impact performance because these beliefs representpeople‟s perception of their capabilities to perform a task at designated levels. These researchershave provided empirical data on causal or correlational relationships between self-efficacy andepistemic beliefs and self-regulated behaviors and performance in subjects such as mathematics5,10 .During problem solving, students assess the difficulty of the task while disambiguating theimportant from irrelevant information. According to Jonassen11
sources for engineering and technologyinformation. The paper is divided into five sections: J.B. Johnson: an Engineer, Scholar, Pioneerin Informatics and Humanist; The First Years up to the 1950’s; The Sixties and Seventies; The1980’s through 2009; and The Ei Village and its Creator John Regazzi. Each section describesmajor changes, improvements, management and editorial decisions introduced. It also presentssome information on the people that have made The Engineering Index (Compendex) a valuableresource such as J.B. Johnson, Bill M Woods, John E. Creps, and John Regazzi.IntroductionThe prominence of The Engineering Index as a technical and scientific information service hasbeing recognized through the years. In 1976, Mildren1 described it as
defined a series of objectives for adesign project than the designer- whether in a consulting office or in a classroom- want to findout what the customer really wants. Questions such as: what is an economic project? How doyou define the best design? What is a safe design? What are the factor(s) that will affect thedesign the most? Phrasing it differently, knowledge resides in the questions that can be asked andthe answers that can be provided (2) .A sequence of inquiry characterized by a hierarchy: certainquestions need to be asked and answered before other questions can be asked. There is a setprocedure which constitutes the inquiry process in an epistemological context. Taxonomies ofsuch a procedure or inquiry process have been extended to
Effectively 3h Understanding of the Impact of Engineering Solutions in Global, Economic, Environmental, and Cultural/Societal Contexts 3i Recognition of and Ability to Engage in Life-Long Learning 3j Knowledge of Contemporary IssuesThe EPSA method is a discussion-based performance task designed to elicit students’ knowledgeand application of engineering professional skills. In a 45-minute session, small groups ofstudents are presented with a complex, real-world scenario that includes multi- faceted,multidisciplinary engineering issues. They are then asked to determine the most importantproblem/s and to discuss stakeholders, impacts, unknowns, and possible solutions. The EPSRubric, an analytic rubric, was developed to measure the extent to which
our researchsubjects. The categories and codes are being refined iteratively using both inductive anddeductive approaches, which allow us to leverage our prior knowledge of the domain of interestas well as our growing familiarity with the collected data. The current categories include: • National Cultures Involved: Including host location and culture, and guest culture(s). • Situation-Motivation: The main reason or motivation for the situation or case, such as ex- patriate assignment, greenfield plant start-up, cross-national collaborative project, etc. • Situation-Cultural Dimensions: Relevant cultural dimensions evident in the case, such as those drawn from Hofstede’s work (e.g., power distance, individualism vs
approach.Object-oriented methodologiesThe usage of object-oriented methodology in constructing engineering and businessapplications has grown exponentially since the early 90’s. Object-oriented softwaredesign focuses on objects versus functions and functional decompositions. An object isintroduced as a distinct entity, containing its data and functions. The main features ofobject-oriented methodology are encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism.Encapsulation refers to wrapping object attributes and behaviors in an enclosed entity,inheritance deals with object reuse, and polymorphism concerns with object havingaccess to a behavior where the knowledge to the access is known at runtime.ObjectObject encapsulates the attributes (data or member data) and
outcomes L-S based onprofessional societies input and departmental requirements. In preparing for this new curriculumand related assessment practices, the senior-level M. E. capstone design course “Plant andFacilities Design” was selected in October 2000 as a pilot course, for the development of thestudent capstone portfolio concept and the capstone outcomes assessment process.In particular, the M. E. Department wished to determine best methods of demonstratingachievement of seven “difficult” or “non-traditional” program educational outcomes which havenot classically been “taught” as part of the M. E. curriculum. These include: 1) an ability tofunction on multidisciplinary teams; 2) an understanding of professional and ethicalresponsibility; 3
such as GPAs, scores in prior courses from which the knowledge is to betransferred, etc. To date however, this has not been done. Finally, the think aloud methodologyused in this study has been shown in the past to positively influence student performance suchthat this activity may overestimate actual student performance “in the field” (Gagne et al., 1962;Davis et al., 1968).4. Presentation of DataThis paper presents data taken from the analysis of a single interview from this study. In this casea faculty member in a mechanical engineering department was the participant. Two main themesemerged in the analysis of the data; (1) the extensive use of reflection by the participant inevaluating their problem solving approach and solution(s); (2) the
the response, the next prompt (as shown in Figure 2.4(b)) is prepared to classify the students’ responses into the given categories. The prompt provides clear and specific information (as a context) for guiding ChatGPT response, i.e., assigning the persona, the categories to which the responses should be classified, the question(s) for which the student responses are collected, giving enough time for the model to think, and explicitly mentioning the boundaries in case the model is not sure about prediction for any of the fed students’ responses. Figure 2.4(a): Providing Bandura’s research work as a context. Figure 2.4(b): Prompt prepared for data classification. 2) In the second prompt, we have included
, University of Dayton Kelly Bohrer is the Executive Director of the ETHOS Center, a community engagement center connecting students, faculty, and staff with NGOˆa C™s around the world for technical projects as part of immersions, teaching, and scholarly activity. She also is thDr. Kellie Schneider, University of Dayton Kellie Schneider is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Management, Systems, and Technology at the University of Dayton. Prior to joining the faculty at UD, she was an instructor in the Freshman Engineering Program at the University of Arkansas. Her research interests are in the areas of engineering education and community-based operations research.Mrs. Marjorie Langston Langston
/s) and must decelerate to a speed of 220 mph (100 m/s) at landing. During re-entry, thenose and leading edges of the wings experience temperatures as high as 3000 °F (1650 °C).1One of the major decisions to be made during the shuttle development was the design for thebooster rockets. Options included using liquid or solid-fueled boosters, and whether the boosterswould be expendable or reusable. NASA believed that solid rocket boosters would be lessexpensive to develop, even though they had had higher projected operational costs than liquidboosters. The shuttle was the first manned spacecraft to use solid rockets.1 There is somespeculation that the Air Force pressured NASA to use solid fuel boosters because they wanted todevelop the
? What is a safe design? What are the factor(s) that will affect thedesign the most? Phrasing it differently, knowledge resides in the questions that can be asked andthe answers that can be provided (2) .A sequence of inquiry characterized by a hierarchy: certainquestions need to be asked and answered before other questions can be asked. There is a setprocedure which constitutes the inquiry process in an epistemological context. Taxonomies ofsuch a procedure or inquiry process have been extended to computational models(4) , to theintricacy between asking and learning(5) , and would also apply to the questions students askduring a class and/or tutoring session(6).There are two classes of questions within a design context; the first is the
differences might seem natural before any formal designtraining occurs. They also inform educators about gaps in expected student performance inparametric tools and suggest that pre-designer education should emphasize multidisciplinaryproblem-solving to avoid narrowing student competency for those interested in designprofessions.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant #2033332. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.The authors would also like to thank ShapeDiver GmbH for their support in providing theresearch team with access to
embedding empathy in graduateengineering education would also lead to impacts on undergraduate students given graduatestudents’ unique role as both learners and teachers.References[1] “Grand Challenges - 14 Grand Challenges for Engineering.” Accessed: Jan. 30, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.engineeringchallenges.org/challenges.aspx[2] J. Walther, S. E. Miller, and N. W. Sochacka, “A Model of Empathy in Engineering as a Core Skill, Practice Orientation, and Professional Way of Being,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 106, no. 1, pp. 123–148, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20159.[3] B. Penzenstadler, G. Haller, T. Schlosser, and G. Frenzel, “Soft Skills REquired: A Practical Approach for Empowering Soft Skills in
Construction 4.0.Buildings, 13, 2535. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13102535.[2] Forcael, E., Ferrari, I., Opazo-Vega, A., & Pulido-Arcas, J. A. (2020). Construction 4.0: A literature review.Sustainability, 12(22), 9755.[3] Karmakar, A., & Delhi, V. S. K. (2021). Construction 4.0: what we know and where we are headed?. Journal ofInformation Technology in Construction, 26.[4] Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) (2023). ABC 2023 Tech Report. Retrieved January 4, 2024 fromhttps://www.abc.org/Portals/1/ABC_2023_TechReport_web.pdf?ver=-r7DJgKWDeTn-BwOBjj3NQ%3d%3d[5] McKinsey & Company (2023). From start-up to scale-up: Accelerating growth in construction technology(webpage). Retrieved January 4, 2024, from https://www.mckinsey.com
packages. The software can also be run on a Windows platform with minimalmodification.Bibliography1. M. Piccardi. “Background subtraction techniques: A review,” Proc. IEEE Int’l Conf. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics: Vol. 4, pp. 3099 – 3104, 2004.2. R.J. Radke, S. Andra, O. Al-Kofahi, and B. Roysam. “Image change detection algorithms: A systematic survey,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 294–307, 2005.3. S. Cheung and C. Kamath. “Robust techniques for background subtraction in urban traffic video,” Proc. SPIE, Vol. 5308, 881 (12 pages), 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1117/12.5268864. O. Masoud and N.P. Papanikolopoulos. “A novel method for tracking and counting pedestrians in real