approaches change to a unifiedlanguage and discussion around modeling with the intent of contextualizing modeling as afundamental tool within engineering. To evaluate student learning on modeling in engineering,we conducted pre and post surveys across three different first-year engineering courses at thesetwo universities with different student demographics. The comparison between the pre and postsurveys highlighted student learning on engineering modeling based on different teaching andcurriculum change approaches.Introduction Through it is rarely explicitly taught, modeling is fundamental for many core concepts,throughout undergraduate engineering education [1]. There are many benefits to explicitlyteaching modeling, particularly in the first
focuses primarily on the initial workshop offered to teachers as anopportunity to introduce them to engineering content and asset-based approaches to teachingScience and Engineering Practices.IntroductionThis project centers around middle school students and teachers in the U.S.-Mexico border,particularly a predominantly Latinx area in the Southwest, where more than 36% of the residentsare English Learners/Emergent Bilinguals. The number of English Learners/Emergent Bilingualscontinues to increase but they continue to have limited access to appropriate STEM content thataddresses their linguistic practices [1]. As indicated by the National Academies of Science,Engineering and Medicine in their report English learners in STEM subjects
further situated our study within the Colonias,communities situated along the Texas-Mexico border characterized by its rural setting and currentstate of economic distress.Students who participated in the CTE were assembled as part of an autonomousMaking/Production team that worked under supervision by Texas A&M University (TAMU)researchers. For three years, TAMU researchers conducted a daily teleconference supported classto teach basic Making and engineering skills. As a motivating scenario, students are tasked tomake/produce materials for instructional hands-on activities for elementary school students in thesame community. Year 1 of the project focused on familiarizing students with core Maker skills(basic soldering, wire connections, 3D
problems solvedusing diverse methods [1-3].Most problems in engineering are graded using a rubric that accounts for the solution, and not forthe thought process. The simplicity of those rubrics does not permit the identification ofdeficiencies in problem solving skills. In this project, a problem solving rubric developed forPhysics students was adapted to assess the problem solving skills of engineering studentsenrolled in a first semester engineering course. Unlike most rubrics used in engineering courses,this rubric grades the thought process, and splits the problem solving approach into separatecategories: Useful Description, Engineering and Math Approach, Application of Engineering,Mathematical Procedures, and Logical Progression. In this
from the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana in 1990 and 1999, respectively. He became the Dean of Engineering at The Citadel on 1 July 2011. Prior to his current position, he was the Department Head of Civil Engineering at The University of Texas at Tyler from Jan 2007 to June 2011 as well as served in the Corps of Engineers for over 24 years including eleven years on the faculty at the United States Military Academy.Dr. Anand K. Gramopadhye, Clemson University Dr. Anand K. Gramopadhye’s research focuses on solving human-machine systems design problems and modeling human performance in technologically complex systems such as health care, aviation and man- ufacturing. He has more than 200 publications in these
projects and corresponding support activities are instrumentalin engineering student leadership development.IntroductionIndustry has consistently called for professionals with a mix of technical and professional skills.The combination of which is not only necessary to successfully navigate the workplace, but it isalso needed to allow teams with diverse skill sets to effectively solve the complexinterdisciplinary problems that exist today. While the education system has worked to increasegraduation rates of technical professionals-- such as engineers—there are persistent demandsfrom industry to improve professional skill competencies [1], [2]. This NSF-funded project hasworked to bridge this gap by developing a data-driven understanding of how
into the process to assistchemical engineering graduate students in obtaining robust results suitable for extending PhDthesis work to include fundamental and applied modeling along with experimental results. Wepresent up-to-date results on our latest module concept in creating a microfluidics glucosemonitoring system consisting of a flow chamber and a cell phone-based spectrophotometer.Finally, we conclude next steps for sustainability and continuation of the project, and lessonslearned on strategies for mass production for prospective large-scale distribution.IntroductionIntroducing active learning techniques into classrooms has evidential proof that it has positiveimpact on student learning [1]–[4]. Promoting active learning in undergraduate
integrating engineering practices into the science curriculum [1]. Inaddition, in 2018, 46% of high schools reported offering at least one stand-alone engineeringcourse [2]. However, less than 20% of the teachers who are currently teaching these standaloneengineering courses have a major or minor in engineering or an engineering-related discipline,and the majority are not certified to teach engineering [3]. In addition, it was reported in 2018that only 3% of elementary teachers, 10% of middle school science teachers, and 13% of highschool science teachers had completed even a single course in engineering [2].Research has demonstrated that the perceptions that K-12 teachers hold about engineers andengineering are often inaccurate. When K-12 teachers
competence, in particular related to professionalism andcommunication. Student perceptions are detailed, and implications for engineering educationare discussed. IntroductionConnections between college degree completion and successful entry into the workforce is a goalfor educators and external stakeholders alike. Postsecondary leaders and federal and statepolicymakers have identified STEM fields as critical for economic competitiveness [1], [2],including ASEE’s efforts to advocate for key priorities in science and technology legislation [3].College officials are also focused on curricular and co-curricular efforts to ensure STEM studentsuccess. To this end, work-related experiential activities (WREAs) such
, specifically: 1) the ways in which a brief ecological belonging intervention should becustomized for different course contexts; 2) the key mechanisms underpinning how theintervention supports proximal and distal student outcomes; and 3) the efficacy and mechanismsby which course onboarding strategies involving leadership messaging and community learningprocesses are successful across varied course, departmental, and university contexts intransforming each targeted course.In this paper, we focus on the third component and describe our process for building buy-in withleadership and faculty regarding this intervention. As a part of this process, we have gatheredsurvey information to understand instructor willingness to use this intervention in their
ongoing pandemic andtraumatic campus events. We also present emerging themes from qualitative analysis of theinterviews. We expect the implications of this work to guide instructors and administrators indeveloping more motivating and interactive engineering courses and makerspace experiences fordiverse students.Keywords: Engineering identity; sense of belonging; digital badges; makerspacesIntroductionThe development of engineering identity is a vital goal of engineering education. Engineeringrole identity, a subject-related role identity framework related to students’ performance, interestin subjects, and perceived recognition by others [1], is important because it can impact students’persistence and retention in engineering [2]. The extent to
neurodiversities to increased creativityand innovation, as well as the ability to visualize complex systems. Both REU programs areinspired by the strengths-based approach to neurodiversity. This model builds an environmentwhich plays to a neurodiverse student’s strengths, rather than mitigating their challenges.This presentation will provide an overview of the sites and present three datasets: 1) the impactof the programs on the participants’ confidence as engineering students, 2) how the programsimpacted the participants’ views of their neurodiversity, and 3) the profound effect exposure toacademic research has on these non-traditional learners to understand engineering topics andexpand their knowledge base. Consistently, these neurodiverse students
UpdateAbstractThis paper provides an update on our research exploring the college experience of science,technology, engineering, and math (STEM) college students with attention-deficit/ hyperactivitydisorder (ADHD). Individuals with ADHD make up a growing fraction of college students.Despite their increasing college presence, little is known about their college experiences andacademic success. This project involves three sequential studies guided by the social model ofdisability. Study 1 is a quantitative analysis investigating the relationship between pre-collegefactors, college experiences, and academic success of college students with ADHD. Study 2 is ascoping literature review of the college experiences of these students, and Study 3 is aqualitative
NahmaniAmanda SeskoKa Yee Yeung ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 ACCESS in STEM: An S-STEM Project at University of WashingtonTacoma Supporting Economically Disadvantaged STEM-Interested Students in their First Two YearsAbstractAchieving Change in our Communities for Equity and Student Success (ACCESS) in STEM atthe University of Washington Tacoma started as a Track 1 S-STEM program in 2018 and hassupported 69 students to date. This year we received Track 2 funding and welcomed our fifthcohort to campus, with funding to support ~32 additional students through 2026. University ofWashington Tacoma is an Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-servinginstitution (AANAPISI
formalization dueto stereotyped design guidelines. Furthermore, the current engineering curriculum designgenerally lacks the connection/cohesion among different subjects (e.g., material mechanics,structural mechanics, hydraulic mechanics, soil mechanics) for geotechnical engineeringeducation [1]. It hinders geotechnical students’ ability to gain the comprehensiveunderstanding of interdisciplinary study and further affects the ability of creative problemsolving. To address this issue, game-based learning might provide an alternative approach tostimulate the engineering creativity of geotechnical students. Creativity which is the essence of engineering can be neither explicitly taught nortrained in the traditional curriculum of geotechnical
participate in SL/CE: paidinternships or through taking credit hours that counts towards their degree.Literature Review:Although there are not a lot of journal papers on the topics of SL/CE, there are many conferencepapers, especially published in ASEE conference, that address these topics. For example, Koh(2020) [1], developed a “Community Engaged Design” course as a senior design capstone in asmall liberal arts college. Students were able to address pedestrian safety in their community bycoming up with a prototype for a system which detected and warned drivers of the presence ofbicyclists. Jordan (2014) [2] took their service learning all the way to Haiti by working with thelocals there to establish a solar project that can offer sustainability for
and Mentoring (iAM) Program to Promote Access to STEM ProfessionsBackgroundThe Integrated Achievement and Mentoring (iAM) Program at Hofstra University (HU) respondsto the challenge of retaining a diverse STEM student population [1]. This achievement-focusedprogram provides students early access to the hidden curriculum and contextualizes supportservices in a model that is inclusive, promotes belonging, and develops student identity locally inthe STEM community and globally as part of the University community. This is an NSFScholarships in STEM (S-STEM) Track 3 (multi-institution)-funded Program built on thetheoretical framework of legitimate peripheral participation with an emphasis on inclusivity,community, and belonging
MakerspaceAbstractAcademic makerspaces are physical locations that help support engineering classroominstruction and provide exposure to workplace skills like prototyping and design. Makerspaceproponents have championed equitable makerspaces as sites for increased access to tools andknowledge in science and engineering [1]. However, this promise is yet to be realized, with anemerging body of work critiquing the notion they are delivering equitable benefits to all students[2]–[4]. This literature finds that access is not sufficient for true democratization, which cannotbe reached without the full participation of a diverse student population. Hagerty et al. [5], definefull participation as characterized by individuals’ sense of belonging in these spaces.To further
workshop to educate STEM instructors on what active learning is and ways to implement itinto their classrooms. Additionally, this workshop sought to provide instructors with evidence-based strategies that focused on reducing student resistance to active learning. This study used aconducted randomized control trial to investigate the impact of this workshop on: (1) how thisworkshop impacted STEM instructors’ attitudes towards using active learning, (2) theirbehaviors in using active learning, and (3) their use of strategies for reducing student resistanceto active learning. We collected data from 173 instructors and 1676 students. This paper focuses on our preliminary results as well as next steps for the project. Thusfar, we have analyzed
average scoresin all nine outcomes. The largest improvement was observed in lab data interpretation, followedby lab data analysis and lab data presentation. Even with the improvement in their late labs, theengineering undergraduates in the needs improvement group still struggle with addressingtechnical audience expectations, lab data interpretation, effective conclusion writing, and ideadevelopment, even with instructions and productive feedback from the lab instructors and/orteaching assistants.1. IntroductionEngineering undergraduates often said the hands-on engineering laboratories were one of thebest experiences in the engineering curriculum; however, writing lab reports was considered oneof the worst experiences. Writing is known as a
enrollment increases in U.S. undergraduate computing departments, representation ofhistorically excluded groups remains low [1]. This lack of diversity is evident in academic andworkplace cultures and manifests in biased and/or harmful technologies that negatively impactand exclude non-dominant identities [2], [3][4]–[6]. The Alliance for Identity-InclusiveComputing Education (AiiCE, pronounced “ace”) aims to increase the entry, retention, andcourse/degree completion rates of high-school and undergraduate students from groups that arehistorically marginalized in computing [7], [8].Our collective impact approach to broaden participation aims to transform high-school andpostsecondary computer science (CS) education by convening national leaders in K
the community throughmultiple forms of peer review as well as their individual scholarship. More detailed descriptionof the processes as well as related research questions and synthesis can be found in [1] - [6].The proposal reviewing process incorporates the practice of forming small groups, collaborativecreation of reviews, and joint training. A key difference between the proposal review andmanuscript review experiences is the culminating experience of a mock panel review session forproposal reviewing, wherein participants take on typical panel roles of lead discussant, scribe fornote taking, and prepared reviewer. To facilitate forming full panels, quads were used rather thantriads, consisting of a mentor and three mentees. Quad mentors
same issues in the 3D manufacturing simulation while solving the same problemsand proposing qualitative solutions to improve the overall system. Data was collected for theoutside-the-classroom and inside-the-classroom groups in Fall 2021 and Fall 2022, respectively.The results of this study indicated no statistically significant difference in motivation, moduleusability score, engineering identity, self-assessment, or performance between the two groups.1 IntroductionWith the growing prevalence of online learning in today’s society, it has become increasinglyimportant for professors to ensure that lessons and class activities remain engaging andinteractive for their students. Thus, the goal of this study is to compare the results of
outcomesirrespective of academic discipline [1-2]. Despite these findings, the existing constructionengineering programs, for the most part, rarely offer a systematic approach to allow students todevelop a deep understanding of the engineering core concepts and discover systematic solutionsfor fundamental problems. Without properly understanding these core concepts, contextualizedin domain-specific settings, students are not able to develop a holistic view that will help them torecognize the big picture and think outside the box to come up with creative solutions for arisingproblems [3]. An essential element to address this need that is missing in traditional content-centered and didactic teaching methods is an opportunity for active exploration and
Engineers Targeting the Consequences ofVariabilityAbstractVariability is an unavoidable reality. Physical phenomena such as loading conditions, materialproperties, and human behavior all exhibit variability. Engineers must deal with this variabilitywhen designing solutions. Unfortunately, an extensive body of human subjects research suggeststhat people—including engineers—consistently fail to understand variability. This deficit view ofworking with data is focused on statistical inference; identifying stable patterns in data.However, engineering concerns are not identical to statistical concerns! In this paper, we reportresults from two studies: Qualitative Study 1 of practicing engineers (n=24) identified thebehavior of targeting the consequences
for supporting S-STEM student retention and graduationA recent self-study at Stevens Institute of Technology revealed that our 2nd and 3rd year retention ratesfor low-income STEM students are lower than those for our non-low income STEM student body. Toaddress this finding, the goal of our S-STEM program is to implement evidence-based best practices toincrease retention and graduation rates of low-income academically talented STEM students to levels thatmatch our overall STEM population. To accomplish this goal, we are seeking to: 1. implement best-practices with regards to cohort development and faculty, peer, and alumni mentoring programs to support the ADAPT Scholars, 2. develop targeted enrichment and mentoring activities
. In the field of engineering, morespecifically, programs are often characterized by their narrow focus on and rigid adherence tostandardized ways of thinking and traditional modes of instruction and assessment [1, 2]. Thisone-size-fits-all model of teaching and learning limits opportunities not only for traditionallearners to engage in interactive learning and creative problem solving but also for studentswhose ways of thinking fall outside of the typical range. While accommodations such asextended time on exams and assistance with notetaking may provide some form of equity forthese students [3-5], they fail to address the underlying mismatch between the unique abilities ofneurodivergent students and the demands of the traditional educational
engineering being amongst the most active participants in embeddingentrepreneurship into curricular and cocurricular activities [1]. Well-developed and theoreticallygrounded educational interventions have been shown to increase entrepreneurial skills andperception among students [1] - [4]. Organizations including the National Science Foundationthrough the Lean Launch Curriculum and I-Corps program, VentureWell through curriculumdevelopment grants and their E-Team program, and the Kern Family Foundation through theKern Entrepreneurial Education Network (KEEN) have provided significant funding to embedand transform entrepreneurial teaching and practice into colleges of engineering [5] - [7]. Thisactivity combines with an added emphasis among
, exploration, visualization, pre-processing, feature engineering,feature selection, and data mining 6 . We designed the two types of assignments for each topic andused several datasets published on Kaggle, including data about the Titanic disaster, iris flowers,the US census, carseat sales, advertising, automobile, house rentals, and COVIDvaccinations. Figure 1: A snippet of Google Colab Assignment for the Feature Selection TopicIn the Google Colab Assignments, students were required to write Python code to accomplish agiven task. Each assignment included a template Google Colab Python notebook file, which wasread-shared with students. Data science tasks were decomposed into steps, where each step wasdescribed in a text block, along with
car. While there were challenges and learnings, the integrationwas successful, and the students were able to fully utilize MPADs capabilities with their own RCcar design and demonstrate a self-driving scale car. This article will discuss the implementation,testing details, experiences gained and future work.1. IntroductionRadio Controlled (RC) cars are a great way for prospective engineers to learn real-world technicalskills. The low cost and shorter turnaround time allow for rapid development and testing and caneffectively teach many of the same principles as real cars. At XYZ University, ABC is anintroductory design course where remote-controlled scale cars were designed, analyzed, built, andtested by groups of students. Each group was