, ormathematics (STEM) 6. And less than 40 percent of students pursuing undergraduate degrees inSTEM majors completed their program6. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)Digest of Education Statistics (2001) reported that of the four million ninth graders in the US,less than half graduated from high school7. And of those high school graduates, one third had nocollege plans and 56 percent of them were not ready for college7. As Figure 1 illustrates, thestudy found that the STEM pipeline leaked 96 percent of potential STEM graduates.Figure 1: Illustration of the leaky STEM pipeline. Data is from the NCES Digest of EducationStatistics & Science Engineering Indicators, 20087.Effective personalized learning may have the potential to greatly
industrialengineering students to study and propose changes to their current regional distribution centerrecycling program.The engineering economy course at Penn State University Park is 15 weeks in length. Thecourse is 3 credits and it meets for 150 lecture minutes per week. During fall 2014, the class mettwice per week for 75 minutes each class period. The detailed engineering economy course Page 26.191.5outline can be found in Appendix A.1. 116 students were enrolled in the course during the fall2014 semester. 29 groups of 4 students each competed in the case study competition. Acompany kickoff event was held in class during week 8 of the course. An 8-page
development (Figure 1) that guides the work of theauthors7 8 is based on our hypothesis that a student’s ethical development is influenced bymultiple explanatory variables within four major domains: student characteristics, institutionalculture, formal curricular experiences, and co-curricular experiences. The primary outcomevariable of ethical development is measured using three constructs: knowledge of ethics, ethicalreasoning, and ethical behavior. Page 26.247.3 Figure 1. Conceptual model of the variables of ethical development7.A rigorous approach to instrument development included following guidelines in the surveymethodology
spentmore than 20 hours a week preparing for class2. Meanwhile student responses on theCooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey show high school seniorsspent much less time studying or doing homework in their senior year of high school, and overthe past twenty years the amount of time students indicated they spent studying or doinghomework their senior year has been decreasing3 (see Figure 1). 35 30 Percent of Respondants 25 20 15 1987 10 2006
project using Sentaurus Process simulation software from Synopsiswas assigned. It was confirmed that the user-friendly environment of the software allowed thestudent to obtain a hands-on exposure to the integrated-circuit fabrication process developmentwithout any of the complex logistics and safety issues that would be involved in offering ahands-on experimental experience with real hardware. Seventeen students including 16undergraduates and 1 graduate took this course during the fall 2014 semester. Page 26.71.4A new computational project and new computational labs were developed for the ECE 4293-01/6293-01, Nano-electronics course. The Medici
experiment will convey. Page 26.1158.2EquipmentThe equipment is shown in figures 1 and 2.Figure 1 shows the vessel which is glass, 210 mm in diameter with 250 mm straight side and aflat base. There is a removable steel ring to which four vertical baffles are attached. The widthof the baffles is 1/12 of the vessel diameter which is standard in industry. This allowsexperiments to be carried out in baffled and unbaffled configurations.The drive has a 1 kW motor with a maximum operating speed of 1800 RPM and is supportedfrom a steel frame. The speed is controlled by a variable frequency drive (VFD) which hastorque and rotational speed indicators.A variety
reporting graduation rates in the range of 40-60%.1-7 Students seem to experience a loss ofinterest and lack of motivation for engineering in part due to the demanding engineeringcurriculum of the first two years.2,3 The first two years are recognized as critical to promotestudent retention in engineering.To improve student retention, the first-year engineering curriculum have experienced significantchanges in the last decade. There is a growing trend towards incorporating engineering conceptsin first year engineering courses. The purpose is to demonstrate that engineering is fun,rewarding, relevant, and interesting. With these changes, there has been an increase in theimplementation of hands on activities that promotes student engagement in a
used for specialproject classes at the undergraduate and graduate level. The student feedback and learningassessments for all these cases is included in the paper.BackgroundThis paper discussed a novel way to approach the teaching of Programmable Logic Controllers(PLCs) via N-Scale Model trains. A problem with teaching PLCs is that they are generally usedto control large and usually very expensive equipment. This makes developing a realistic Page 26.1597.2laboratory experience very difficult. Most labs consist of toggle switches and pushbuttons forinputs and lamps for output. An example of this type of interface is shown in Figure 1. Whilemore
qualitative, or “interpretive”,approaches. The need for and timeliness of this work rests on the following three observations ofthe emerging, interdisciplinary field of engineering education research: The field of engineering education is embracing an ever broader range of interpretive methods of inquiry [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6].This epistemological and methodological diversity has stimulated a debate around what constitutes rigorous research, that is, acceptable ways of conducting and assessing research [2; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11]. At the same time, a crucial body of qualitative work is emerging through the increased adoption of qualitative methods [4; 6; 12] and recent NSF funding efforts, particularly in the
skills can be readily obtained on the job; the entrepreneurial mindsettakes years of practice/refinement. In particular, extensive feedback from employers indicatesthat creativity and innovation are two of the most highly sought skills of engineering graduates.“Established companies understand the value of creativity…. IBM surveyed 1,500 chiefexecutives in 33 industries around the world in 2010 to gauge how much they valuedcharacteristics like creativity, integrity, management discipline, rigor, and vision in anincreasingly volatile, complex, and interconnected world. Creativity topped the list.”1 Anothersurvey of 305 employers conducted on behalf of the Association of American Colleges &Universities found that the one of the “most important
higher education. For a number of years within engineering education, engineeringaccreditation boards in the US, Canada, and internationally, have recognized lifelong learning asone of the key competencies of engineering graduates. Characteristics of the lifelong learnerinclude the ability to “set goals, apply appropriate knowledge and skills, engage in self-directionand self-evaluation, locate required information, and adapt their learning strategies to differentconditions” (p. 292-293)1, 2. Inherent in these skills of lifelong learning is the ability for one to bea self-regulated learner with the ability to plan, monitor, control, and adjust his or her behaviourto achieve a desired outcome. In a learning context, self-regulation is highly
transcripts. This allowed students to demonstrate their participation to future employers,and the College of Engineering had some leverage to dictate appropriate behavior in the class.The three key objectives for ECE490 are shown in Table 114. It is worth mentioning that thesecond and third objectives do not lend themselves well to assessment. However, they servedadmirably in the past for student self-assessment. In the Discussion portion of this paper, theirsuitability will be addressed.Table 1: Objectives for Creativity and Innovation in the Engineering Design Process Class.Students Will Be Able to: 1. Use tools and processes that help them to be more creative and innovative. 2. Explain how individuals can be more creative and innovative. 3
exercises. A series of experiments in systemidentification augment a pre-requisite, junior-level dynamic systems modeling and analysiscourse (EML 4312), a pre-requisite to the laboratory course (EML 4301L) in the mechanicalengineering curriculum. Experiments in control systems are used to augment a senior-levelcontrol of machinery course (EML 4313), a co-requisite course to the laboratory course asillustrated in Figure 1. Laboratory equipment is utilized by the one-credit, senior-level laboratorycourse (EML 4301L) in system dynamics and control that bridges the junior-level, three-creditcourse in dynamic systems to the senior-level, three-credit course in control systems. Figure 1: Course Relationship DiagramThe
helps to promote deeperlearning.IntroductionWith the wide adoption of project-based learning (PBL) in engineering programs, many researchstudies were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness in engineering education [1-3]. Someresearch results showed that PBL is not only effective to deepen students’ understanding ofengineering principles, but also helps them to develop abilities to apply those principles inengineering design practices [3]. In the meantime, many engineering educators have sharedsuccessful stories of using PBL to improve student learning in their practices [4-8]. Evidentially,PBL has shown a strong promise as an effective teaching pedagogy in engineering education.Naturally, a follow-up question is how to develop an effective
. Learningstatements are completed through experiential learning and are written in the form shown in thebottom of Figure 1. Page 26.537.3 Figure 1: Learning Statement StructureOur objective in this paper is to understand the effects of authentic design problems ondevelopment of student competencies. We track the change overtime of student competenciesusing self-reported student data. The collected information on student competencies can serve asa baseline, so that AME4163 can be improved to enhance learning and the development of careersustaining competencies by our graduates. In the following section the basis of
, we combined activities, assessments, and evaluations to encouragestudents to develop both metacognitive awareness and confidence in solving complex problems.The course was a junior-level physiology course for biomedical engineering students. Each weekincluded three 50-minute lectures and one 75-minute discussion section.ApproachProblem-Solving ActivitiesDuring the first discussion section of the course, we focused on a multi-step word problemunrelated to course content (Figure 1). The unfamiliar problem separated problem-solving skillsfrom content material and allowed students to focus on the problem-solving process. As in realengineering problems, there was both too much and too little information. The successful studentwould 1) decide how
skills. Today’s future engineers enter college with pre-college experiences whichmay lead them to have misconceptions about the nature of engineering problems [1]. Oftentimes,they perceive that engineering problems have linear problem solving processes, are well-defined,highly constrained and are quick to solve. To interrogate this misconception, the researchers setthe following research goal: To empirically examine the “interplay” between mathematicalthinking and design thinking, as experienced by students engaged in open-ended design tasks,and identify situations where mathematical thinking may impede design thinking, and vice versa.The study that ensued recruited first-year engineering students to spend three hoursindependently designing a
research project may increase a teacher's use of the engineering design process and STEMlearning concepts in the classroom.[4,6,7,8,9,15] This work in progress focuses on the followingquestions:1. How does the Teachers in Industry: K-12 Teacher Internship Program change teaching practices to increase the classroom use of STEM learning concepts?2. How does the Teachers in Industry: K-12 Teacher Internship Program change teaching practices to increase the classroom use of the engineering design process?Program DescriptionSince 2011, the Teachers in Industry: K-12 Teacher Internship program has been placing K-12classroom teachers into a 4-week summer industry work experience. This program is acollaboration between North Dakota State University
understanding of the theory by providing real world applicationsthat foster research and design. Bernard M. Gordon [1] presented a review of several institutionsin the United Kingdom and Australia that adopted PBL in different types of engineering courses,and the positive impact the approach had on assessment. Students were encouraged to work ingroups and document their progress throughout the process. Fernandez-Samaca et al[2] designedan undergraduate electrical engineering control system course using PBL. A series of coursesthat had both lecture and laboratory components were offered with the project being the centralelement in the approach. Enikov et al[3] developed the Aeropendulum Project which is a low-costhands-on experiment suitable for a
control volume between 1and 2 simplifies to 𝑃1 𝑣1 2 𝑃2 𝑣2 2 𝑃1,𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 + 𝛼 = + 𝛼 + ℎ𝐿 ⟾ = (𝑧1 − 𝑧2 ) + ℎ𝐿 2𝑔 2𝑔 2𝑔 2𝑔 2𝑔 200000Numerically, ℎ𝐿 = (998∗ 9.81 − 2) 𝑚 = 18.4 𝑚 𝐿 𝑉2The head loss is given by the formula ℎ𝐿 = ( 𝑓 + ∑𝐾𝐿 ) 2 𝑔 . 𝑑 𝜀 1 2.51The friction factor is calculated using Colbrooke’s formula
Success course our students take in the first summerterm) and reviewing/honing mathematics skills. We found no other summer bridge programsthat were as consistent and sustained as long as the SEEP program. Summer 2015 will be theseventh consecutive cohort and the total engineering students enrolled for 2009-2015 will bewell over 200. The engineering cohorts averaged over 30 students per summer. The SEEPprogram has three unique aspects that set it apart from other summer bridge programs: (1)relatively low level of mathematics college preparedness for first year engineering students, (2)10 week length of the program that earns 8 semester hours of college credit, and (3) theconsistency and sustainment of the program.Analyses PerformedWe chose to
and Computer Engineering Education PracticesAbstractThis research paper describes results from an international survey of electrical and computer(ECE) educators and stakeholders about the current state and future directions of ECEeducation. Technological, economic, and social pressures are reshaping higher education, butthere is little consensus about the future. IEEE created a Curricula and Pedagogy Committee(CPC) and charged it with forecasting the future of ECE education and to makerecommendations regarding roles that IEEE will play in preparing for and crafting that future.To gather more information from members of the engineering education community, thecommittee conducted a global survey. Surveys were deployed in 2014 to those who (1
), CHBE unidisciplinary (n=194). Table 1. Project Timeline Week BIOE CHBE BIOE CHBE Crossdisciplinary Crossdisciplinary Unidisciplinary Unidisciplinary 1 Receive project & begin Receive project Receive project & Phase I & begin Phase I begin Phase I 2 Complete Phase I, meet Meet with BIOE peers & Complete Phase I Complete Phase I with CHBE peers & share review Phase I write-up Phase I write-up 3 BIOEs support CHBE
that same objective were included onsubsequent quizzes, as described in more detail under Method and as depicted graphically inTable 1. Hence, the experimental condition allowed for a within-subjects comparison of massedversus spaced objectives (i.e., would individuals demonstrate greater mastery of objectives thatwere spaced for those individuals, compared to those that were massed?). We were additionallycapable of assessing the effect of spacing between-subjects by contrasting mastery of spacedobjectives in the experimental condition with massed objectives in the control condition (i.e.,would the students for whom some objectives were spaced demonstrate greater mastery of thoseobjectives than the students for whom those same objectives were
Initiative (WPSI). The acronym was changed from“WPSE” to WPSI. We dropped the “E” as our intent was never to be exclusive to non-engineering students or faculty members. At ASEE 2014, we presented preliminary results fromthe first WPSI iteration. Following the 2014 conference, we identified the need for a valid,reliable, and easily replicable assessment measure that could be used both within and outside ofWPSI to measure the attainment of a series of sustainability-related learning objectivesthroughout the engineering education research community.1 In this paper, we present the ongoingdevelopment and refinement of this measure, the Sustainability Skills and Dispositions Scale(SSDS). This instrument evaluates students’ attainment of learning
engineering students. The research questionswere: (1) to what extent are incoming environmental engineering students motivated bysustainable engineering, interested in global work, value interdisciplinary skills, and recognizethe importance of consideration for others in the context of engineering; (2) to what extent areenvironmental engineering students similar to or different from civil and architecturalengineering students in these attitudes; and (3) are there correlations between these attitudes. Toanswer these research questions, a survey consisting of 7-point Likert items was given tostudents at the beginning of the semester in courses designed to introduce first year students toenvironmental, civil, and/or architectural engineering at the
. Based on the data collected from multiple years, students’ writing quality and theirassessment scores were found to improve. This case study of student writing in an engineeringmaterial laboratory course was conducted to study the effect of various pedagogical tools onstudents’ lab report scores and their perspectives on writing. Data collected in student surveysand a focus group show that students found one-on-one sessions reinforced their learning fromfirst-year composition courses, identified the expectations of the lab report as a genre, anddeveloped their understanding of the rhetorical features of writing in the discipline ofengineering.1. Introduction Hands-on learning experiences such as laboratory activities, design projects, and
with 30 questions and tests students’ ability tomentally rotate three-dimensional objects represented on a two-dimensional surface. Figure 1shows an example of the tasks involved in PVT. A typical task provides an example of mentalrotation and then directs the student to identify a similar rotation for a given object. The timelimit for PVT is 20 minutes and students are required to complete all the tasks within this time. Astudent with an excellent SV skill can complete all the 30 tasks within the given 20 minutes,whereas one with very poor SV skill may struggle on the tasks. Figure 1. A sample task from Purdue Spatial Visualization of Rotations TestEngineering Graphics Course at Tuskegee University The engineering graphics
26.34.2IntroductionProgram evaluation and knowledge sharing are key elements in programs targeting ethnicdiversity in STEM.1 Yet time and responsibility constraints in addition to a lack of familiaritywith evaluation methods and statistical techniques has been observed in the authors’ interactionwith staff from programs that support underrepresented minority (URM) students. For thepurpose of this paper and in alignment with the National Science Foundation (NSF), the URMdesignation is defined by the following race/ethnicities: American Indian or Alaska Native,Black or African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or 2 ormore Races which includes a URM ethnicity. This designation is given since as a group they area minority because
design course that wouldinclude an extensive fabrication component. The funding for the development of this course wasprovided through a generous private benefactor with strong ties to the University and theMechanical Engineering Department along with a history of support for undergraduateeducation. This provided summer funding for course development and the hiring of a teachingassistant for the first semester. The instructional staff associated with the course during its initialfour semesters is given in Table 1. The course was initially offered using the department’scourse development number, ME 601. This developmental course number would proveproblematic to the stated course goals due to our intended target audience. The course is