graduate courses in teacher action research and gender and culture in science education. Her research interests include girls’ participation in science and engineering; teacher’s engagement in action research; and science teachers’ integration of the engineering design process to improve science learning.Jeffrey D. Radloff, Purdue University, West Lafayette Jeff Radloff is a graduate student in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction at Purdue University. His research interests include the examination of K-12 teachers’ enactment of engineering design. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018Exploring the Use of Approximations of Practice in the Context of Elementary Teachers’ Attempts
Engineering by Incorporating Novel Desalination Technology Based Hands-On Laboratory AssignmentsAbstractUndergraduate students were exposed to hands-on novel desalination laboratory experimentsin an attempt to generate interest towards research in the broad field of environmentalengineering and specifically in the field of water desalination. The laboratory exercises weredesigned to introduce desalination techniques, enhance their learning experiences, generateinterest among them, and prepare them as potential researchers in laboratory settings. Thehands-on experience of capacitive deionization (CDI) based laboratory experiments providedfoundational and working knowledge of the CDI concept and allowed
Research Experience for Teachers Site in Mechatronics and Entrepreneurship, a DR K-12 research project, and an ITEST re- search project, all funded by NSF. He has held visiting positions with the Air Force Research Laboratories in Dayton, OH. His research interests include K-12 STEM education, mechatronics, robotics, and con- trol system technology. Under a Research Experience for Teachers Site, a DR K-12 project, and GK-12 Fellows programs, funded by NSF, and the Central Brooklyn STEM Initiative (CBSI), funded by six phil- anthropic foundations, he has conducted significant K-12 education, training, mentoring, and outreach activities to integrate engineering concepts in science classrooms and labs of dozens of New York
problem, activate them to organize information and thinkof the relationships among information, elicit their explanations, and prompt them toself-monitor and self-reflect their learning and problem solving [7]. Davis and Linn alsofound that reflective prompts are able to prompt students' knowledge integration andencourage their reflection [8]. Other researchers have adopted scaffolding strategies to facilitate students to developskills of self-regulated learning and creative problem solving. Blank et al. developed andimplemented a Self-regulated Learning Assessment System as an intervention to helpstudents majoring in electromechanical engineering technology better reflect on feedbackabout their learning, their learning performance, and
include a small number of time points, a lack of a control group, minimalcollection of open-ended data, and software limitations.IntroductionThe addition of both engineering design and practices in the Next Generation Science Standards(NGSS) [1] has provided an opportunity for the development of curricula and new instructionalframeworks that integrates engineering into science classrooms. The development of suchcurricula and frameworks has been the call of many K-12 science education panels andcommittees [2], [3], including the Teachers Advisory Council, who proposed five benefits ofadding engineering in K-12 classrooms: 1) an increased learning in math and science, 2) anawareness of the work of engineers, 3) the ability to engage in engineering
. His educational background is in manufacturing with an emphasis on mechatronics. In addition to his many years of industrial experience, he has taught many different engineering and technology courses at undergraduate and graduate levels. His tremendous re- search experience in manufacturing includes environmentally conscious manufacturing, Internet based robotics, and Web based quality. In the past years, he has been involved in sustainable manufacturing for maximizing energy and material recovery while minimizing environmental impact.Prof. Lucian Ionel Cioca, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu Lucian Ionel CIOCA received the M.Sc. in Machine Tools (1993) and B.Sc. in Occupational Safety, Health and Work Relations
Maker - Workshop Structure and SpecificsThe curriculum covering the topics of computer aided design, reverse engineering, 3D printing,and layering effects on 3D printed parts, as well as the hands-on activities that take place duringa two-day workshop are described in detail elsewhere [7], [8]. Briefly, the workshop is dividedinto six modules, each with an associated hands-on activity. Table 1 shows the schedule for thetwo-day workshop with the topics covered and the hands-on activity for each module. The mainequipment used during the workshop includes: i) a fused filament fabrication (FFF) 3D printer(InventorCloud, Youngstown, OH), which was developed for the MENTOR2 program,sponsored by DARPA [9], and ii) a 3D scanner sensor for mobile
Engineering Scholars Program; Engineering Graphics and Spatial Visualization Courses for the last five years. She was pre- viously the Director of the Engineering Co-op and Internship Program at Ohio State. Olga received her Bachelor’s Degree in Industrial and Systems Engineering from Ohio State and Master’s Degree in Indus- trial Engineering from Arizona State University. She has twelve years of industry experience in areas of Automotive and Systems Engineering.Aimee T Ulstad P.E., Ohio State University Aimee Ulstad, P.E is an Associate Professor of Practice in the Integrated Systems Engineering Department at The Ohio State University. Prior to joining the faculty at Ohio State, Aimee was an industry professional in
andComputer Engineering (ECE). This paper describes how the department is implementing a newpedagogical and organizational model in which the curriculum is no longer treated as a set ofdisparate courses taught in unconnected pieces, but as an integrated system that fosterscollaboration among faculty and students. Calling for a holistic view of the ECE degree, theteam’s approach is novel because they are, in effect, throwing away courses, yet their vision canbe realized within the structural barriers inherent in higher education.In a discipline known for being rigorous and inherently abstract, ECE faculty are stepping out oftheir traditionally autonomous roles to bolster retention by approaching the undergraduateengineering degree as a complex system
institutional cultureat the school in regards to ESI education. The conversations illuminated a range of perspectivesregarding the most effective ways to educate engineering and computing students about ESI.Emergent, thematic coding of the interview data revealed diverging opinions on whether thetopics should be taught in curricular or co-curricular settings, in required or elective courses, byengineering or non-engineering faculty, and in standalone ethics courses, integrated intotechnical courses, or across the curriculum. The results highlight different approaches suggestingbest practices could be better clarified based on context and setting. Despite the varying opinionson settings and approaches, all of the interviewees expressed the importance of
, andCircuits Lab. In developing the CALSTEP online laboratory courses, consideration was given tothe thirteen objectives for engineering educational laboratories defined by the ABET/SloanFoundation effort [8][9]. CALSTEP curriculum development also employs evidence-basedapproaches that maximize persistence and learning in a distance environment, including the useof inquiry and design-oriented activities that engage students in authentic engineeringexperiences. Content is delivered using a variety of formats similar to those used in manyexisting online and hybrid engineering courses [10-16].Introduction to EngineeringThe Introduction to Engineering course is an ideal forum to create opportunities for a rich,engaging, and empowering experience for
ranked journals (e.g. Journal of College Science Teaching), reviewed conference proposals (e.g ASEE).Miss Ezgi Yesilyurt, University of Nevada, Las Vegas Ezgi Yesilyurt is a PhD student in curriculum and instruction/science education at University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She is working as a graduate assistant in an NSF funded grant project in which she assumed major responsibilities such as data collection, data analysis, design and delivery of teacher professional development workshops in the grant project. Also, she is currently teaching science methods courses. She received her MS degree and BS degree in elementary science education. She participated European Union Projects in which she conducted series of
inadditional subject areas, as demonstrated by subject specific licensing requirements in moststates [9]. This can lead to scenarios where teachers struggle to find ways to integrate the twosubject areas, citing that the content within the two disciplines are incompatible [5]. In addition,many teachers feel that the classroom curriculum is already too crowded, and use that belief tolimit extensional activities and content [9].Finally, Cunningham and Carlsen, suggest that engineering and science practices are inherentlydifferent [10]. Engineering design considers trade-offs, an optimal solution to a problem, andfocuses on products, while scientific research focuses on identifying and describing underlyingprocesses and constructing explanations for
surveys of alumni. This paperwill share the significant lessons learned from offering the Entrepreneurship Minor as acurricular option within the Engineering Curriculum for the past decade. In doing so, the paperwill highlight the ways in which Villanova University’s program is unique among EngineeringEntrepreneurship Minors located at other universities.History of the MinorVillanova University started an engineering entrepreneurship minor program in the fall 2008semester. At the time, an entrepreneurship minor was offered in the Business School and a groupof engineering faculty members had been considering offering a minor to engineering studentsbut the initiative did not gain traction until a seed grant was provided by the Kern FamilyFoundation
engineering course was required in most curricula (91.9%) and had the secondlargest range of credits (1.0 to 6.0 credits). An additional four courses were required in at least80% of the programs: structural analysis, soil mechanics, transportation engineering, and thecapstone design course. Many civil engineering specialty courses, such as steel design,foundation design, hydrology/hydraulic systems, and water/wastewater were required in less thanone third of the programs.In his 2000 paper that examined the impact of ABET’s 1997 civil engineering program criteria,Koehn found that practitioners favored civil engineering graduates who had courses in structuralengineering, hydraulic engineering, and design integrated throughout the curriculum [10]. In
theinstrument, responses indicated that teachers thought DET was important and should be taught.However, they had low confidence in integrating DET into their classroom, low familiarity withDET, and held many common stereotypes about engineers [21]. These findings were all on in-service teachers, and some items in the survey may not be applicable to pre-service teachers. Forexample, the question “Did your pre-service curriculum include any aspects of DET?” Studentswho are earlier in the education curriculum may not yet have encountered science or mathmethods courses which is where one would typically encounter DET in an elementary educationcurriculum. The next instrument was the STEM Semantics survey. This consists of five scales, eachof which
…. 29Criterion 3 – Associate Degree Current ETAC Criteria Proposed ETAC Criteria c. an ability to conduct standard (3) not changed; tests and measurements, and to conduct, analyze, and interpret experiments; d. an ability to function effectively as (4) not changed; a member of a technical team; f. an ability to apply written, oral, and (5) not changed; graphical communication in both technical and non-technical environments; and an ability to identify and use appropriate technical literature; 30Criterion 3 – Associate Degree Current ETAC Criteria Proposed ETAC Criteria g. an understanding of the need for Moved to curriculum and
Project Management Institute (PMI). Dr. Parris is actively involved in curriculum design, introduction of innovative pedagogies of engagement and the practice of engineering education through teaching several courses across the department. He is integrally involved in the design and delivery of the Pre-Freshman and Cooperative Education Program and others of that ilk at OSU, as a part of his specific interest in soft skill development, diversity, recruitment and retention initiatives.Dr. Krista M Kecskemety, Ohio State University Krista Kecskemety is an Assistant Professor of Practice in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. Krista received her B.S. in Aerospace Engineering at The Ohio
and referencedASME’s Vision 203010 which stated, “Our students will need to lead not only technically butalso socially, politically and ethically.” Additional recommendations included ethics andprofessionalism integrated into the curriculum. The ME profession clearly wanted ethicseducation in the curriculum and assimilated in different formats and levels. Additionally, ABETrequires students to “demonstrate an ability to design a system, component, or process to meetdesired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political,ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.”11 The MECH programdeveloped a multilevel approach to meet the requirements of the QEP: 1. Freshmen - exposed to the
activities. The survey also sought feedback onperceptions of the sufficiency of ESI education and broad perspectives regarding ESI. At theend of the survey, respondents were asked to provide their email address if they werewilling to be contacted for a follow-up interview. Of the 1448 survey respondents, 230indicated willingness to participate in an interview.The second phase of the study involved conducting interviews with educators to learn moreabout their ESI instructional practices and general perspectives regarding the integration ofESI into the engineering curriculum and educational experiences of engineering students.Between September 2016 and April 2017, 52 survey respondents were contacted forinterviews with the intention of conducting 36
. Owens – marissa.owens@unlv.eduOverview & Objective A STEM integrated problem-based curriculum was developed for third grade, designed toaddress the NGSS Standards, the Common Core Mathematics Standards, and Computer andTechnology Standards. The main objective of the project was to develop curriculum that couldsupport the adoption of the NGSS Standards in the state of Nevada while providing students withan integrated learning experience that could promote achievement among diverse learners. Thelong-term goals of the project were to pilot, revise, and expand upon the curriculum for othergrade levels. One unit in particular, as part of this larger project, was a six-week lesson focused on anengineering design challenge related
,through the interactions of students, faculty, and industry, through participation in engineering-related activities, and through reinforcement of shared similarities. The goal of this project is todevelop a mechanical engineering program where students and faculty are immersed in a cultureof doing engineering with practicing engineers that in turn fosters an identity of being anengineer. This culture of “Engineering with Engineers” is created through changes in four areas:shared vision, reflective faculty, relevant curriculum and pedagogy, and supportive policies. Ineach, a variety of actions create the cultural change, address barriers to change, and ensuresustainability. A common theme unifying these changes is a significant connection to
, published in ranked journals (e.g. Journal of College Science Teaching), reviewed conference proposals (e.g ASEE).Dr. Hasan Deniz, University of Nevada Las Vegas Hasan Deniz is an Associate Professor of Science Education at University of Nevada Las Vegas. He teaches undergraduate, masters, and doctoral level courses in science education program at University of Nevada Las Vegas. His research agenda includes epistemological beliefs in science and evolution education. He is recently engaged in professional development activities supported by several grants targeting to increase elementary teachers’ knowledge and skills to integrate science, language arts, and engineering education within the context of Next Generation
increaseaccessibility for working adults, a new online Electrical Engineering Technology (EET) programwas launched in the Fall 2017 semester. This paper presents the results of a comparative study oftwo groups of students (online and on-campus) doing the same lab-intensive course. The courseis Digital Fundamentals, a 200-level core requirement of the EET curriculum. Four importantresearch questions were posed: i. Can online courses be delivered while maintaining rigorous accreditation standards? ii. Can teamwork be encouraged and maintained in an online setting? iii. Can the integrity of assessment processes be preserved? iv. Can the pedagogical effectiveness of the lab experiences be evaluated?METHODOLOGYTwo groups of students were
communication and thepublic understanding of science. The mission of the American Association for the Advancementof Science includes the following goals: “Promote and defend the integrity of science and its use;Promote the responsible use of science in public policy; [and] Increase public engagement withscience and technology” (AAAS website). These goals frequently collide with an unfortunatereality that currently exists in graduate STEM education: the minimal training students receivetypically focuses only on communicating with domain experts. STEM graduate students oftenlack the formal communication training needed to easily share their work with the generalpublic. Conveying research through a narrative structure with appropriate language and tone
andimplement the original are proposed. However, in case of difficulty to adopt the original designas in the currents case study. An updated design is suggested to overcome the complicationsescalated on the original design. The new design and its implementation is discussed in details.Partial integration of the system is presented due to the lack of full integration results to date.The benefits and drawbacks to students are highlighted to show the potential of the labenvironment to student success. Finally a summary for course curriculums are emphasized toshow the capabilities of the lab environment to introduce a successful learning experience.ReferencesAmazon®. (2017). Amazon EMR Product Details. Retrieved from https://aws.amazon.com/emr/details
engineers face. We review recent empirical work on theethics of care and the role of empathy in engineering. Campbell (2013) asked howengineering “professors can teach students to care”. Other work (Walther et al. 2012;Hess et al. 2014) has begun to build a background of how we could begin this integration.We suggest that these approaches are more consonant with design approaches and hencefamiliar to engineering faculty. Engineering ethics can then integrate seamlessly intoengineering education.This paper considers a combination of the philosophical principles of pragmatism and theethic of care as a broad framework for integrating ethics in undergraduate engineering.Such an approach would integrate ethics into the teaching of engineering in a way
learning in two senior-level courses: Integrated Engineering Design, which is asenior capstone course where students work on a design problem in interdisciplinary teams, andDesign & Manufacturing of BME Devices and Systems, where students work in teams on thedesign of biomedical devices and systems. Providing students with more opportunities to engagein project-based learning earlier in the curriculum would allow students to start developing theirprofessional, technical, and problem-solving skills at an earlier stage and to start putting theirknowledge into practice.One of the challenges of incorporating project-based learning early in an engineering curriculumis finding an appropriate project. The project must integrate knowledge, have real
strain, the Wheatstone bridge was connected to an oscilloscope sothat the change in voltage could be viewed and measured when the strain gage is deflected. Thismodule allowed mechanical and electrical engineering students to learn concepts simultaneouslyfrom two very distinct fields of study. A student survey was developed and measured highstudent engagement in the topic of both circuits and Wheatstone bridge systems.IntroductionThis paper describes a pair of laboratory modules that students encounter in the mechanicalengineering curriculum. The two laboratory modules have been developed to help scaffoldknowledge and increase engagement in a circuits laboratory. The first module includes a bendingbeam with a strain gage that has been documented
uponfeedback received in the previous year’s assessment cycle.Goals: In early fall 2017 the SE Curriculum and Assessment Manager conducted an in-depthquality assurance review of the legacy assessment architecture. The review includedexamination of: • the alignment of defined student performance criteria with program (ABET Criterion 3) Student Outcomes • the alignment of student assessment data artifacts with the performance criteria they were intended to support • assessment data collection and reporting mechanisms completed by course directors and teaching faculty each semester • assessment program continual improvement process • semester and annual results archiving and reporting methodsThe legacy