a Professor of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering at the University of South Florida’s College of Engineering . Richard is the Co-PI for an NSF grant that supports FLATE, Advanced Techno- logical Education in Florida ,the the NSF Center of Excellence, which was founded through substantial funding from NSF. FLATE, now funded by the NIST MEP program and the Florida Department of Ed- ucation, addresses curriculum, professional development, and outreach issues to support the creation of Florida’s technical workforce. Richard has over 30 years of experience working with the K-14 education community. Other funded efforts include projects for the NIH and the US Department of Education. The latter was for the
on Undergraduate Research (CUR) Faculty Mentoring Award in Mathematics and Computer Science.Dr. Ann C. Gates, University of Texas at El Paso Dr. Ann Quiroz Gates is the Vice Provost of Faculty Affairs at the University of Texas at El Paso. She holds the AT&T Distinguished Professorship and served as the Chair of the Computer Science Depart- ment (2005-2008 and 2012-2020) and Associate VP of Research and Sponsored Projects (2008-2012). Gates is the Executive Director of the Computing Alliance for Hispanic-Serving Institutions (CAHSI), an NSF National INCLUDES Alliance promoting the importance of inclusion and equity in advancing innovation and discovery. She also directs the NSF-funded CyberShARE Center
. This series of key engineering activities constitutes the major elementsof system architecture, which is an essential predecessor to any successful engineering effort,especially as the complexity of systems/systems of systems and socio-technical systems continueto grow.Unfortunately, these architecture-centric activities and system thinking techniques are nottypically part of an engineering curriculum. Undergraduate academics are so filled with corecourses and humanities that domain learning is primarily limited to the upper class years, leavinglittle room for system architecture. Noticing the gap in system architecture education, severaluniversities have recently started offering architecture related graduate degrees/certificates.However
has plans to actively continue the development of practical teaching tools that bring industry applications to the classroom.Dr. Farid Breidi, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dr. Farid Breidi is an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Technology at Purdue University. Farid received his B.E. in Mechanical Engineering degree from the American University of Beirut in 2010, his M.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2012, and his Ph.D. in Agricultural and Biological Engineering from Purdue University in 2016. The primary focus of Farid’s research is modeling and design of fluid power and mechanical systems. He is interested in integrating machine learning and data
Paper ID #33792Engineering Faculty’s Beliefs About Teaching and Solving Ill-structuredProblemsSecil Akinci-Ceylan, Iowa State University of Science and Technology Secil Akinci-Ceylan is a PhD student in Educational Technology in the School of Education, co-majoring in Human-Computer Interaction at Iowa State University.Yiqi Liang, Iowa State University of Science and Technology Yiqi Liang is a PhD student in Aerospace Engineering in the College of Engineering at Iowa State Uni- versity.Dr. Kristen Sara Cetin P.E., Michigan State University Dr. Kristen S Cetin is an Assistant Professor at Michigan State University in the
access, which in turn may lead to widedifferences in the quality and complexity of physical prototypes. There is a clear need for FYEengineering design curriculum that affords students an opportunity for hands-on, open-endedprototyping in an online-only setting.In this paper, we introduce a novel hands-on, mechanically-oriented product design module,called UDGears, which could be offered with fidelity in FYE engineering courses in acompletely online course setting. The UDGears curriculum was designed for a large-enrollmentcourse format but can be scaled to fit any class size. The curriculum addresses financial,material, and student safety constraints inherent to FYE courses of any size enrollment whilealso presenting students with a substantive
Paper ID #33383Broadening the Middle School Computational Thinking Interventions Be-yondBlock ProgrammingDr. Mohsen M. Dorodchi, University of North Carolina at Charlotte Dr. Dorodchi has been teaching in the field of computing for over 30 years of which 20 years as an educator. He has taught the majority of the courses in the computer science and engineering curriculum over the past 20 years such as introductory programming, data structures, databases, software engineering, system programming, etc. He has been involved in a number of National Science Foundation supported grant projects including Scholarship for STEM
students are required to learn materials that “others” prescribe. It hasto be done as per a set schedule, i.e. in prescribed time blocks, semesters or quarters, andfollowing a prescribed prerequisite structure. After finishing four years of curriculum studentsgraduate and join the workforce. Current education paradigm uses the “Empty ContainerParadigm.” It is assumed students will start a given course knowing nothing about the topic andwhile they are enrolled in it knowledge will be poured in their head as is done in an emptycontainer. In this current model, learning occurs individually, there is a lot of emphasis onprerequisite structure and requirement for basic knowledge, and assessment is based on grades intests rather than acquiring of a
integration of music into STEM than currently exists. Web-based applications can significantly contribute to this spread, as they allow easy access tointeractive hands-on experiences. 2LTW development went through three main stages. It started in a very small scale throughpersonal connections with teachers. Then, it moved to large public schools with heavy supportfrom LTW’s team. Finally, LTW created web-applications and curriculum to be used by teachersanywhere in the world with internet access. In this paper, I expand on the details of these stagesand offer general advice for developing impactful programs. To learn more about LTW, watchtutorials, and
fundamentals. It offers design and hands-on laboratory courses. Designis integrated through the curriculum that includes a senior level capstone design sequence. Thedepartment has established a set of specific learning objectives to support the mission and thegoals of the department and meet the requirements of ABET accreditation under the EngineeringCriteria 2000 (EC-2000). The objectives have been reviewed and approved by the majorconstituencies of the department. A process for systematic evaluation and updating of thedepartment’s undergraduate educational objectives and outcome is in place. The faculty of theMechanical Engineering Department and the College Accreditation Committee conduct theseevaluations. The Accreditation Committee has developed
less than 0.5 °Cvariation under 15 W heat load from devices-under-test (DUTs). A hermetic DUT environmentwas designed using nitrogen purging and active humidity sensing to control relative humidity (RH)within the environment to beneath 5% RH. Undergraduate students gained experience designingfor manufacturability and machining with CAD tools not typically explored in typical electricalengineering design projects. An automated switch-matrix was designed and implemented toautomate testing and allow for programming of complex stress-measure-stress reliability testingprofiles. Control and automation were enabled using common Mbed processors used throughoutan undergraduate electrical engineering curriculum. To accomplish a unified design which
the University of Virginia (UVA), a hybrid model was adopted. Students were giventhe option to take the class 100% remotely, or they could attend lab in person every other week.During the second week of the semester, entire sections met online for team forming. Thoughsome attempt was made to group in-person students in the same team, several teams had a mixof in-person and remote students. The curriculum was redesigned into two-week blocks. Duringthe ‘on’ week, students collected data from an experiment they performed in person or watchedvirtually. During the ‘off’ week, they worked in teams on various activities including report peerreview workshops, a team project, and post-processing of the previous week’s experiments. Thispaper will
-based curriculum, less effort has been made to understand how the current population of ‘‘grassroots’’ Makers have come to identify with this movement.” (Weiner, Lande & Jordan, 2017). § “We [have] analyze[d] critical incident interviews of young adults who frequent shared- use community workshops, or makerspaces. Employing a theory-driven thematic analysis, we developed an initial process framework for Maker identity formation that could provide educators with a useful perspective when implementing Maker-based programs in their institutions” (Weiner, Lande & Jordan, 2017).Prototyping as a Learning Tool/Experience § Prototyping in design provides ways to navigate ambiguity in the design
effectively in engineering education.The following is a review of the quantitative results from this 2006 quasi-experimentalaction research study, which investigates the perceptions of teachers and studentsinvolved in problem-based simulation activities used in high school design engineeringcurricula. The purpose of the research is to investigate the potential for problem-basedsimulation activities to be used as curriculum and instruction aids for engineeringeducators. Also included is a discussion of survey results from engineering faculty whoattended NSF sponsored workshops designed to learn and practice problem-basedsimulation activities using dynamic analysis software, and reactions from universitystudents experiencing the experiential learning
-yearengineering students, signifying entry into the discipline. While surveying is not as integral tothe modern civil engineering curriculum as it once was, it continues to be instrumental inunderstanding the difference between training and education [1].In 2020, the COVID pandemic forced educators to pivot to an online teaching modality in themiddle of a spring semester. As the pandemic raged throughout the summer, educators werefaced with the prospect of delivering courses online for the foreseeable future. This presented avery real challenge for the venerable survey laboratory which is by nature very hands-on. Inpreparation for a summer offering of a surveying and geomatics class in the Civil Engineeringprogram at Northern Arizona University, faculty
Receiver/Transmitter (UART), (c) integration of sensors and otherdevices into one "Base station", and (d) using the "Base station" with an ESP8266 WiFi moduleto send data to the cloud. One of the term projects required the students to use the collectiveknowledge of the laboratory experiments outlined above to create an IoT-based detectionsystem.. Despite the health pandemic, remote instruction and delivery of course materials, aswell as the evaluation and assessment of the submission of each student was successfullyaccomplished.IntroductionEmergent technologies in wireless data communication and computing are rapidly altering theengineering landscape. The engineering programs at universities across the world must adapttheir courses and curricula
) Practices Outside the Classroom Integrity of Practice [4] OC1 Have one-on-one conversations with students IP1 Acknowledge there is more than one way to teach OC2 Do outreach on campus or with K-12 students and learn OC3 Do Land acknowledgements IP2 Be aware that it is important to be intentional OC4 Do course preparation or revamping curriculum IP3 Acknowledge the educator’s role in normalizing OC5 Ensure building accessibility inclusivity OC6 Talk with other faculty as a site of inclusion IP4 Be flexible OC7 In grading, include meaningful comments IP5 Think
in thispaper.Design courses, which can provide many opportunities for sociotechnical integration, aredeprioritized in most engineering programs, as are courses in the humanities and social sciences[15], [16]. Through choices in curriculum and content, we see that engineering education oftenreinforces the false divide between the social and technical in engineering [17]. Thoughuncommon, sociotechnical integration has been attempted within the context of specific courses.These include Andrade and Tomblin’s inclusion of social context in the course Engineering forSustainability [18], [19], sociotechnical engineering taught in an introductory course [20], ateam-taught, community-engaged engineering projects course [21], and a controls system
accessible to a large number of Proceedings of the 2021 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference Baylor University, Waco, TX Copyright © 2021, American Society for Engineering Education 2engineering students at all educational levels (bachelor’s, integrated bachelor’s/master’s, master’s,and doctoral). IntroductionIn order to excel in their future careers, engineering students not only need a strong technicalbackground, but also an understanding of the design process in order to adequately address thephysical and social constraints of real-world problem solving. While the
admitted to a university engineering program. Feedback fromthat initial deployment will drive enhancements to be incorporated in subsequent, and moreexpansive, distributions of the products (courses).As referenced previously, these college preparatory courses are an integral and foundationalelement of a larger enhancement strategy for the secondary school to first-year collegeengineering transition space. To build on the benefit of the pre-teaching activity provided bythese college preparatory courses, college instructors will need to “stimulate recall of priorlearning” (Gagne event number 3) [8, p. 248] in their lessons. Further reinforcement occurs withthe embedding of basic skills development in the college curriculum [9]. Looking to the
. Engagement Measurement System (EMS)The EMS classroom layout is illustrated in Fig. 2. Each student may make use of either their ownlaptop camera or utilize a small desk camera dedicated to them. Wristband biometric dataincluding heart rate will also be collected and integrated into the classification if determined tobe an effective data point. Overview cameras (wall-mounted cameras), typically one to a few perclassroom, will capture overall student movement and gestures. Figure 2: EMS classroom layout.Features are extracted from the sensors using deep learning approaches. These features are thensent to the classification engine for classification of emotional and behavioral engagement.Cognitive engagement is further classified by a
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Engineering Education Summary and conclusionPlacing the communication course in the curriculum as a requirement for graduation inundergraduate general electrical engineering degree is neither beneficial to the students nor to theenhancement of the curriculum. The communication course can be expanded in two or morecourses and placed as an elective for those who would like to pursue a communication career andgraduate education. This should be case in many other disciplines that have traditionally beenpart of the electrical engineering program and have emerged as a standalone disciplines suchbiomedical engineering, electronic devices and integrated circuits, computer science
Paper ID #32647Lessons Learned: How Our Agile Department Survived the COVID-19 PivotDr. Diana A. Chen, University of San Diego Diana A. Chen is an Assistant Professor of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. She earned her BS in Engineering from Harvey Mudd College, and MS and PhD in Civil Engineering from Clemson University. In collaboration with colleagues, Chen is designing a new engineering curriculum to educate changemakers who understand that engineering is an inherently socio-technical activity. Her scholarly interests include engineering education that contextualizes engineering sciences and
, especially for underserved and underrepresented populations. She is currently a Professor of Education and Engineering at Penn State University where she focuses on developing research-based, field-tested curricula, professional development, and research. For sixteen years, she worked as a vice president at the Museum of Science where she was the Founding Direc- tor of Engineering is Elementary, a groundbreaking program that integrates engineering concepts into preschool, elementary, and middle school curriculum and teacher professional development. Her recent book, Engineering in Elementary STEM Education, describes what she learned. Cunningham has previ- ously served as director of engineering education research at the
University in Erie, PA. His research interests include Global Software Engineering, Affective Domain Learning, Engineering Education Research, as well as Philos- ophy of Engineering and Engineering Education. He is regularly involved in supporting the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem, as well as projects that serve the regional community. He is an active member and volunteer for both the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) Computer Society and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). He has published numerous conference papers and journal articles on innovations in Software Engineering curriculum development and Philosophy of Engineering & Computing
design course, however for manydigital applications microcontrollers provide a very cost effective solution in a compact package.This paper examines the tradeoffs and suitability of CPLDs, Field Programmable Gate Arrays(FPGAs), microcontrollers, and their associated software for digital applications typically taughtin a digital design course in an engineering technology program. IntroductionIn typical electronics and computer engineering technology curriculums (and similarly forengineering) programmable devices fall into either of two tracks. The first would includeCPLDs and FPGAs, and would be used to implement combinational logic, sequential logic, andstate machines, etc. The second would be comprised of
ofaccreditation paradigm. It provided an opportunity for ABET to put forward the newaccreditation criteria-EC2000, which brought a profound impact on engineering educationwithin colleges and universities. In order to cope with the transformation paradigm ofprogram accreditation, colleges and universities carried out various engineering educationreform which included the exploration of a variety of learning outcomes assessment methods,the engagement of a wide range of intellectual resources, the internalization of the philosophyof continuous quality improvement, the integration of evaluation management mechanism,the in-depth reform of curriculum and teaching, and the talents cultivation in line with theEC2000 standard.(2) Understand the concept of
virtualized environments. 1. Use plug and play technologies that require minimum installations in setting up software and hardware platforms. This may significantly reduce the hindrance in learning. 2. Provide extensive preparatory and discussion material throughout the course to ensure adequate support is available to the students. Video recordings of the experimentation and synchronous sessions are good resources to come back to for the students. Schedule periodic support sessions and assessments to avoid gaps in understanding. 3. Adjust the curriculum to modify the component and component integration skills that the students would acquire in a virtualized
format before the pivot to remote learning.Thus, the previous two exams provide a baseline to compare student performance. Studentscompleted pre and post surveys inquiring about student perceptions of both the appropriatenessof the exam and the value of the rubric and practice exam as preparation tools. Key outcomeswere the expression of student creativity, evidence to suggest an elevation of course equity andthe identification of gaps in student understanding that would not have been apparent using amore typical assessment method.The method was also explored in Fall 2020 in Heat Transfer, a junior level course in thechemical engineering curriculum. It was the follow-on course from Fluid Mechanics. Therefore,the cohort was similar. Because the
also an Assistant Professor in the General Engineering Department and Civil Engineer- ing Department where he teaches the First-Year Engineering Program course Introduction to Engineering and Design. He is the Director of Vertically Integrated Projects at NYU. His Vertically Integrated Projects course is on Smart Cities Technology with a focus on transportation. His primary focus is developing curriculum, mentoring students, and engineering education research, particularly for project-based cur- riculum, first-year engineering, and transportation. He is active in the American Society for Engineering Education and is the Webmaster for the ASEE First-Year Programs Division and the First-Year Engi- neering Experience