needs. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Work in Progress: Integrating Writing throughout the Engineering CurriculumIntroductionCommunication skills continue to be a top ‘soft skill’ many employers consider weak, whileeducators believe engineering students possess strong communication skills upon graduation [1],[2]. In fact, in an ASME survey where 647 industry supervisors, 42 department heads, and 590early-career engineers responded to a question on mechanical engineering graduates strengthsand weaknesses, there was a discrepancy in how industry rated communication skills compare tothe other two groups [1]. Only 9% of the
crosslistedas a multidisciplinary course in the School of Arts, Science, and Engineering at the University ofRochester instructs on how to interface sensors and actuators with microcontrollers in order to makemeasurements and control objects in the real world.While learning objectives for this course center around teaching students to properly interfacemicrocontrollers with sensors and actuators, the course was designed with a number of meta-objectivesin mind. One such goal is the desire to enhance the employability of our engineering students byproviding them with more and earlier opportunities to acquire and demonstrate technical knowledge andskills, which have been shown to be very important to engineering employers [1] Second, this initiativesought
Work in Progress: Introducing negotiating skills in capstone courseIntroductionEmployers of 21st century engineering and technical students are looking for individuals who inaddition to their technical skills, also possess soft skills. Those soft skills include at a minimumcommunication, teamwork, and interpersonal skills. Several studies have recommendedrevisions to existing engineering and technical curriculums to incorporate soft skills [1-3]. Inaddition to industry professionals indicating a desire for increased soft skills in graduates,students also see the need for additional exposure while in school [4]. Because there is no formaldefinition of soft skills, it is necessary to determine for each
she mentors 1-2 young undergraduates in the NSF REU program for 10 weeks, advocating and training for a graduate education. And for 4 years running now, she has made and demonstrated an Augmented Reality Sandbox for the annual summer science and engineering festival at WPI, TouchTomorrow.Dr. Katherine C. Chen, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Dr. Katherine C. Chen is the Executive Director of the STEM Education Center at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI). Her degrees in Materials Science and Engineering are from Michigan State University and MIT. Her research interests include pre-college engineering education, teacher education, and equity in education. American
prosthetics to tissueengineering to bioinformatics [1]. As the field continues to evolve, undergraduate biomedicalengineering programs have also continued to grow and evolve. To support the needs of thegrowing field, biomedical engineering (BME) curricula were established as broad andinterdisciplinary, integrating knowledge from both basic sciences and engineering disciplines.This training prepares graduates for a wide variety of careers in medicine, government, andindustry. The first BME programs were accredited by ABET in the early 1970s [2] and at presentthere are 139 programs accredited, with new programs accredited each year [3].In an effort to define the core content of a BME undergraduate curriculum, the VaNTHcurriculum project identified key
framework, ConcepTests are typicallyqualitative and require no or very minimal numerical calculation, although they may requiremental imagination of the development of key equations. Also, some ConcepTests are intendedfor summative assessment and should follow specific guidelines; others may be open-ended andintended to provoke debate and force students to verbalize and justify their assumptions whenanswering questions (Beatty et al. 2006).Since the workshop, the team has had virtual meetings every 1-2 months to discuss conceptquestion development and to review progress. A systematic review process was set up toprovide feedback on all of the different questions, and to plan and manage initial student testingconducted at three different institutions
findings will be used for further examination in a larger population. This study can begin tocapture reasons that influence Black women to leave the engineering workforce. Results of thiswork can provide ideas to improve efforts to support Black women in the workforce.Introduction and Literature ReviewIn the past few decades the participation of women and racial-ethnic minorities in science andengineering has increased; however, there are still gender and racial disparities that exist [1, p.389]. When examining Black women post-graduation, they are considerably underrepresented inacademia and engineering industry. Black women make up 4% of all women engineeringprofessors [2] and comprise only 0.72% of engineers in engineering industry [3][4
, gaining significant traction in the K-12 system is standards-based grading. With standards-based grading, grading is based upon “measuring students’proficiency on well-defined course objectives.” [1] Instead of arbitrary grading scales, studentsare assessed multiple times regarding their performance on course outcomes. By doing this,there is an increase in student engagement and a more thorough comprehension of coursematerials. [2] Standards Based grading focuses on the specific, relevant skills a student shouldlearn and helps instructors to assess how well students are learning and tailor their teaching tomeet areas of concern. [3] By measuring these goals, students continue to learn. By usingrubrics to articulate these goals, students can use
thecoming decades [1]. The following year, the Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) wascreated by two engineering deans and an engineering college president--and endorsed by theNational Academy--as a way to help undergraduate engineering students prepare to tackle thesechallenges [2]. The program is centered on five competencies considered crucial to complementa conventional undergraduate engineering degree: talent competency (mentored research orcreative experience), multidisciplinary competency, viable business or entrepreneurshipcompetency, multicultural competency, and social consciousness competency [2]. Every schoolwith a GCSP designs its own program of coursework and co-curricular activities to supportstudent development of these
mathematicsdepartment, among others. Recognizing that these departments can function differently, and thatcourses within them can focus on entirely disparate tool sets, this study draws on principles ofsituated cognition to frame questions about the development of computing proficiencies acrossdisciplinary and departmental boundaries [1]. We investigate how mathematics courses whichsupport the engineering curriculum may or may not contribute to important repeated and earlyexposure to software and programming tools in contextualized ways that help engineeringstudents develop the ability to skillfully leverage domain-specific software, practice algorithmicthinking, and become familiar with the behavior and limitations of computational tools [2].Even when
discipline focused onthe creation of smart and autonomous systems and processes in an integrated and interdisciplinaryfashion towards improving the quality of human lives. Despite the growing need for MREprofessionals and increasing numbers of undergraduate and graduate degree programs, this fielddoes not yet enjoy recognition as a distinct and identifiable discipline.A distinct and identifiable engineering discipline must address four questions: 1) What is the bodyof knowledge that practitioners must master? 2) What skills must practitioners demonstrate? 3)What are the ways of thinking that permeate the discipline? 4) How do practitioners define anddistinguish the discipline? Within the MRE community, there is disagreement over how thesequestions
at OU, and was a co-PI on the Oakland University WISE@OU NSF ADVANCE Partnerships for Adaptation, Implementation, and Dissemination (PAID) grant. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 WIP - Mentoring Early-career Engineering Faculty: A Faculty Development Coordinator ModelIntroductionThe benefits that flow to both early career faculty mentees and their academic institutions frommentoring activities continues to be well documented [1] [2]. Research productivity, teachingskills, and service contributions are common factors by which a new faculty member will beassessed on the path to promotion. Yet navigating one’s department and
and engineering identity, if it exists, could alloweducators and researchers to quantitatively measure engineering identity and gain further insightinto motivational patterns.Theoretical FrameworkThis work-in-progress focuses on uncovering patterns between engineering identity andacademic motivation. Both constructs involve student self-perception. This study closelyexamines how students perceive themselves as engineers, how they perceive success, and howthey respond to failure. Our work is grounded in several theories that report on these perceptions.IdentityIdentity is defined in this study as how a student perceives themselves to fit in a group [1]. Thisstudy focuses specifically on engineering identity, which can simply be defined as how
the content of essays andresearch papers in general writing courses [1]. Second, not only do the types of audiences varymore in engineering but so do the audiences’ levels of knowledge about the content. Yet a thirddifference is that the expected level of precision in engineering writing is higher than theexpected precision in general writing [2, 3]. Still a fourth difference is the complexity ofengineering formats, which have to account for incorporation of illustrations, equations, sections,and appendices. Until students learn the principles of engineering writing, a significant gap exists betweenwhat those students have experienced in general writing courses and what those students areexpected to produce in reports for design courses
activitiesby participants, and the mentorship required by program instructors (engineering faculty,graduate students, and undergraduate student mentors), the participant pool was limited, and thepopulation for the camp was 45 students. Table 1 shows the demographics of the participants.Table 1. Demographics of student participants Category Number (Percentage) Age in years N (%) 13 8 (17.7%) 14 37 (82.2%) Sex N (%) Male 34 (75.5%) Female
Bioengineering also at Clemson University. Dr. Gomil- lion’s long-standing research interests are in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Specifically, the work of her research group focuses on three general areas: (1) design and modification of biomaterial scaffolds to study cell-biomaterial interactions and to provide cues for directing cell behavior for tissue regeneration; (2) application of engineered tissues for aesthetic and functional tissue replacements; and (3) advanced application of tissue engineering strategies for developing in vitro tissue models for studying disease systems. Dr. Gomillion is committed to the integration of her biomedical interests with education research endeavors, with a specific
presentation skills in an Introduction to TechnicalCommunication course. In this initial study, we aim to: (1) provide a set of curricular materialsthat engineering educators can use to integrate reflection in any presentation assignment and (2)discuss self-reported student data regarding development of presentation skills. Students reportedthat viewing their recorded presentation and reflecting on their performance helped them gainconfidence and improve their presentation skills for future use.Although effective communication skills are required for success in all engineering disciplines,many programs do not teach technical communication for a variety of reasons, including lack ofinstructor experience or buy-in regarding the value of teaching
Demographics and Career Perceptions of Manufacturing (Work in Progress) Introduction While manufacturing continues to be considered the backbone of economic growth in theUnited States (Nadine & Gielczyk, 2018), manufacturers continue to express concerns related tothe availability of a skilled workforce to fill the projected workforce demands—3.5 millionavailable manufacturing jobs by the year 2025 (The Manufacturing Institute & Deloitte, 2015).The 2018 report by Deloitte and the Manufacturing Institute revealed that manufacturingexecutives believe there to be three main factors contributing to this concern: (1) the retirementof the baby boomer population, (2) the shifting
teaches the additive manufacturing technology through the dedicated undergraduate (MET 4173) class as well as through the hands-on training sessions and certification (level 1 to 4) in the Endeavor Digital Manufacturing Maker Space.Mr. Aaron Alexander, Oklahoma State University Aaron Alexander is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering Technology at Oklahoma State University. He received his BSE from Messiah College, his MSME from Purdue University, and his PhD from Oklahoma State University. Before entering academia he spent eleven years as an Acoustical/Noise Control Engineer in industry and still continues to consult in that field. His research interests are fluid flow, wind turbines
Paper ID #29807Work in Progress: Student and faculty perceptions of rotating facultyfacilitators for introductory biomedical engineering problem-basedlearningDr. Sara L Arena, Virginia Tech Sara L. Arena is a Collegiate Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics (BEAM) at Virginia Tech (VT), where she has been teaching since 2017. Prior to this position, Sara was an Assistant Professor of Exercise Science at High Point University (2013-2017). The BEAM Department at Virginia Tech offers two undergraduate programs: (1) Engineering Science and Mechanics and (2) Biomedical Engineering. Sara teaches
Northridge (CSUN). In 2009, he moved to Texas to work at the Science and Engineering Education Center, and Caruth Institute of Engineering Education. He specializes in Engineering, STEM, and Project Based Learning instruction. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Student Dispositions Toward STEM: Exploring an Engineering Summer Camp for Underrepresented Students (Work in Progress)IntroductionEngineering fields continue to evolve and grow rapidly [1], resulting in an increasing demand forskilled workers [2]. However, representation within engineering fields is often inequitable, withwomen, Latinos, and African
research interest include, Deformation & Failure Mecha- nisms, Materials Science, Fracture Mechanics, Process-Structure-Property Relationships, Finite Element Stress Analysis Modeling, Failure Analysis, ASME BPV Code Sec VIII Div. 1 &2, API 579/ASME FFS- 1 Code, Materials Testing and Engineering Education. Professionally registered engineer in the State of Texas (PE).Dr. Matilda (Tillie) Wilson McVay, Texas A&M University Associate Professor of Instruction, J. Mike Walker ’66 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Texas A&M University from 2006 - present (2020) Undergraduate Program Director, Department of Mechanical Engineering, from January 2017 - 2019 Lecturer, Department of Aerospace Engineering
developers.Faculty Development as Interdisciplinary Work In the work of faculty development, faculty developers bring their own disciplinarybackgrounds to their roles, collaborate across disciplines, and operate at disciplinary borderswithin institution-wide and discipline-specific academic units [1]. In this project, facultydevelopment is framed as interdisciplinary work where faculty developers work to integratemultiple perspectives towards creating educational solutions and supporting faculty and graduatestudents in the development of their teaching and learning practice. Within theseinterdisciplinary interactions, challenges and conflict may arise because academic disciplineshave different ways of seeing problems and different methods for problem
classrooms that are equally diverse. Divided into teams of five teachers of engineering foreach school level, TF's are creating guidelines for quality engineering instruction. In turn, theseguidelines are to be used by educators who want to incorporate engineering in their classroomsbut have little experience with the field and minimal access to professional development [1].While current support for such novice engineering teachers is often delivered in a "train-the-trainer" format using ready-made curricula, [2] TaLENt TF's are writing discrete sets of specific,measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART)[3] criteria that will facilitate K-12curricula development of customizable school-level engineering resource. TaLENt aims tosupport a
the course materials. Their levelsof engagement were monitored during the semester.Course DescriptionA junior level software engineering course, CIS 375 (Software Engineering 1), offered by theComputer and Information Science (CIS) department is organized as a 14 week, four credit-hourcourse. This is a required course taken by all computing majors in the CIS department whichincludes: Computer Science (CIS), Software Engineering (SE), Data Science (DS), andCybersecurity and Information Assurance (CIA). Pre-Covid19, this course was typically offeredusing a synchronous, face-to-face format with the live lectures being recorded for streaming on-demand by students taking the same course asynchronously. The ABET student outcomes forCIS 375 appear
, 2020WIP: The predictive power of engineering undergraduate students’ academicself-efficacy and test anxiety for their academic performance in a dynamicscourse Introduction Self-regulated learning (SRL) is a vital factor that positively affects students’performance in academic settings, as a wealth of study findings have shown [1], [2]. SRL hasreceived increasing attention from the engineering and technology education researchcommunities as of late [3]. Considering that low academic performance is one of the reasons thata large number of engineering students leave engineering majors and transfer to another major[4], it is important to explore factors that contribute to academic performance in
complimentary education on user-centered research methods toenhance their ability to define new opportunities, user behaviors, the use environment, and socialand cultural influences. Students will practice these techniques through clinical rotations andlearning forums at the Salem VA Medical Center (SAVMC) and Walter Reed National MilitaryMedical Center (WRNMMC), respectively. A pilot program with 15 students began in Spring2020. Student outcomes will be based on evaluating (1) the students’ ability to recognize unmetneeds that, if addressed, will benefit patients/providers and have the potential to supportcommercialization efforts, (2) the students’ appreciation for different roles and skill sets inmedical device development, and (3) the students
Education, 2020 Understanding Impact of a Design Thinking Intervention on Students’ Resilience (Work in Progress)IntroductionRecent developmental psychology research has revealed that, in an effort to protect youth fromharm/difficulties, current generations of students tend to be more sheltered from challengingopportunities [1]. As a result, students may be less able to cope with stressors and overcomeobstacles than earlier generations [2], making them underprepared for today’s demanding anddynamic work environment [3]. Many students do not possess the 21st Century skills needed toeffectively approach novel problems and produce innovative solutions [3],[4].In particular, individuals who have been sheltered from
troubleshooting process. Studentsexplore basic equipment operating principles, identify failures and repair devices as a team.In previous course iterations, students expressed unfamiliarity surrounding common parts criticalto equipment e.g. solenoid valves, IR sensors (personal experience). Guided inquiry hasdemonstrated benefits in bridging the scientific gap in knowledge in students as described byNworgu [1]. To address this unfamiliarity among women and men alike, an intervention in theform of guided worksheets was introduced and its effect on student performance assessed.MethodsThe course utilizes a flipped classroom format where all students watch lecture videos andcomplete course readings and pre-labs individually before class. In class, directions
their learning [1], [2]. TheMSLQ is one of the most extensively used scales designed to assess self-regulated learning [3].Pintrich and colleagues developed the MSLQ [2] to measure three components (motivation,metacognition, and behavior) of self-regulated learning [2]. It has been widely validated anddeployed in university engineering education settings. The MSLQ has two parts: Motivation and Learning Strategies. Motivation scales arecomposed of three dimensions (value, expectancy, and affective) with 31 items subdivided intosix subscales: intrinsic goal orientation, extrinsic goal motivation, task value, control beliefs,self-efficacy for learning and performance, and test anxiety. The learning strategies scalemeasures two dimensions