Jason Weaver is a graduate research assistant at the University of Texas at Austin. He is currently pursuing a PhD in Mechanical Engineering. Previously, he received a Masters from the University of Texas and a Bachelors from Brigham Young University. His current research focuses include Transformation Design Theory, design methodologies, energy harvesting, and environmental power sources for wireless sensor arrays.Kristin Wood, University of Texas, Austin KRISTIN WOOD is the Cullen Trust Endowed Professor in Engineering and University Distinguished Teaching Professor at The University of Texas at Austin, Department of Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Wood’s current research interests focus on
Ethics & Computer Ethics: methods and concepts from Computer Ethics with significant implications for engineering research and practice such as intellectual property, privacy, and safety-critical systemsPlans call for the online modules to be piloted in a graduate engineering course in earth systemsmanagement as well as a graduate course in ethics and emerging technologies.Model IV – Ethics and the LabThis model is based on the idea that scientists and engineers sometimes disregard traditionalethics training in the classroom because they don’t see how the lessons could pertain to theirdaily work or how the ethics instructor could understand their situation. Holding these sessionsin laboratories where the students are comfortable
Without Borders and Engineers for a SustainableWorld, as well as university-specific opportunities. Student interest and involvement in theseprograms has been explosive. Yet, partly due to the grassroots development of many of theseprograms and to their rapid rise, there are scant findings on the impacts of these programs onengineering education. Preliminary findings suggest that students participating in PBSL early incollege are retained in engineering at higher levels, women participate in voluntary PBSLopportunities at higher levels than their representation in engineering overall, PBSL fulfills avariety of ABET learning outcomes, and PBSL enhances student preparation to practiceengineering design. The community impacts of these projects are
AC 2009-1259: TOWARD A DESIGN TAXONOMY AS A PARADIGM IN DESIGNPEDAGOGICSKeelin Leahy, University of Limerick Keelin Leahy is a PhD Researcher with the Department of Manufacturing and Operations Engineering in the University of Limerick. In 2005 she successfully completed a first class honours Bachelor of Technology, Materials and Construction concurrent with Teacher Education at the University of Limerick. On Graduating she won the Advanced Scholar Award. She has also received the IRCSET scholarship for the duration of her PhD completion. She also assists in the teaching of design strategies and design communication at the University of Limerick.William Gaughran, University of Limerick
provided a strong foundation of findings, one limitation was that the studypredominantly focused on science students and not engineering undergraduate researchers.Our own prior work 7 on undergraduate research experiences previously focused on socialcognitive aspects of an NSF funded Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) program,finding that the experience positively impacted participants’ academic and career plans,especially for doctoral level work. We utilized a mixed-methods approach to gain in-depthinformation about the impact of the undergraduate research experience, and particularly the roleof graduate student mentors, on participants’ self efficacy
car design and give a “rally cheer.” Give a team-based poster presentation to a diverse audience. Compete in the Incredible Edible Car Competition for points based on: distance, durability, design, creativity, edibility. Write a team-based Executive Summary of their design project.The Edible Car Competition occurs during “E-Day,” an open house atthe end of the Fall semester where freshmen, senior, graduatestudents, faculty, and industry representatives participate. BSEN andAGEN alumni are present with their company/agency displays,seniors show their capstone design projects, and graduate studentspresent posters on their research projects. Faculty, staff, parents, highschool students, and the media provide a
Oregonrespectively, do not indicate sustainability within their online site planning course descriptions.Carnegie Mellon University (third ranking) - provides a sustainable design statement for theirwhole program: “Sustainable design rediscovers the social, environmental and technical valuesof pedestrian, mixed use communities, fully using existing infrastructures, including "mainstreets" and small town planning principles, and recapturing indoor-outdoor relationships.Sustainable design avoids the further thinning out of land use, the dislocated placement ofbuildings and functions.”University of Texas at Austin, (fourth ranking) - offers a graduate course titled “Topics inSustainable Development” which is orientated toward service learning: “This course is
all of these options it is difficult to iden-tify the best model. Each serves to further the student’s understanding of industry challengescommonly encountered and expose students to real world problems.Substantial benefits can be realized by both industry and academia when the unique re-sources of each institution are focused upon achieving a common goal. Replicating the ex-periences and knowledge that students gain through practical application of their knowledgein an industry setting is unrealistic in a classroom environment. Many institutions have im-plemented industry placement programs as a part of their curriculum in order to expose stu-dents to industry applications. Cooperative Education for Enterprise Development (CEED) is
Section I, the team resolved to build three to four experiential designexperiences (with a minimum of two hands-on projects) into the curriculum, and to re-task the learning work spaces to enable the implementation of these experiential designprojects.e) Minimizing impact on total credits and resources: Given that students must complete126 credits to meet graduation requirements, and that there is strong push by theuniversity to decrease the total credits to accelerate student graduation and cut operatingcosts, a constraint that the design must satisfy is that it must have no impact on the creditrequirements as well as the financial resources available to the Department.Step 2: Define the level of proficiency for each SKAIn the second step, the
shared practice: Design engineers’ learning at work. Jyvaskyla Studies inEducation, Psychology and Social Research, Jyvaskyla.22. ibid., p. 12.23. ibid., p. 27.24. ibid., p. 28.25. Schrage, Michael. (2000). Serious Play: How the World’s Best Companies Simulate to Innovate. HarvardBusiness School Press, Boston MA.26. Trevelyan, J. (2007). Technical coordination in engineering practice. Journal of Engineering Education, 96 (3),p. 191.27. ibid., p. 191.28. Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., Lee, C., B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: lessons for engineeringeducators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (2), pp. 139-151.29. Korte, R., Sheppard, S., & Jordan, W. (2008). A qualitative study of the early work experiences of
is especially interested in bridging the "worlds" of formal and informal learning in order to design seamless learning environments. http://www.enge.vt.edu/johriRobin Anderson, James Madison University ROBIN ANDERSON is a professor and practitioner in Center for Assessment and Research Studies where she serves as the Associate Director. Previous to serving at James Madison University, Dr. Anderson worked with Blue Ridge Community College and the Virginia Community College System where she coordinated the System's core competency assessments. Dr. Anderson started the Journal of Research and Practice in Assessment and currently serves as the President of the Virginia Assessment Group
considerably decreasingoriginality and fluency of ideas generated in fact resonates with many. Industry has perceivednew BS engineering graduates as lacking design capability or creativity, as well as anappreciation for considering alternatives. Further, a 1995 ASME report ranked creative thinkingas 5th of 56 top desired “best practices” for new BS-level engineers as seen by industry andacademe.12 In the past several years, universities have responded to these challenges by addingmore design content and introducing more open-ended design problems into their engineeringcurricula. Articles discussing the guarded success of these initiatives have appeared in journals.Yet the need to increase the creative potential of graduates still persists. 13 In fact
was arranged to take place in South Africa for the firsttime in the summer of 2004, and was offered again in 2006 and 2008. Approximately the sameformat for the three visits was employed. The procedure followed in the program was first of allto set up a collaboration with the School of Bioresources Engineering and EnvironmentalHydrology (BEEH) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) in South Africa to facilitatestudent interaction via teamwork on mutually selected capstone design projects. Bothundergraduate and graduate students were recruited from the Department of Agricultural andBiological Engineering at a large, public mid-western research-extensive university during thefall semester prior to the summer visit.Early in the spring
and synergy. The construction of teams with members fromdifferent disciplines and backgrounds is necessary for pervasive computing design. We postulatethat individuals are more engaged in groups that form randomly in a loosely coordinatedenvironment that is both self-organizing and self-managing.The research questions guiding our inquiry are: 1. What instructor strategies help to create an interdisciplinary environment that facilitates quick formation of cohesive teams? 2. How do self-organized and self-managed teaming impact individuals’ engagement in teaming and design?The results of this research describe pedagogical approaches that can be used to help expediteand facilitate team formation and improve collaborative practices
concepts are taught with passive lecturesand “recipe” labs. A balance must be provided between engineering science andengineering practice to prepare students for the real world. This preparation is alreadyunderway in the architectural engineering (AE) field at some universities. To build onthis foundation, in the electrical and lighting option within AE, developing a relationshipbetween the academic community and the electrical construction industry will helpbridge the gap between fundamental engineering principles and practical installationexperience. This relationship is currently being implemented between the NationalElectrical Contractors Association (NECA), its research foundation ELECTRIInternational (EI), and AE students at the University
instructor) and a final report prepared in the form of a journal paper.Student authors were given the opportunity to submit their manuscripts to the Journal ofUndergraduate Materials Research (JUMR) for consideration. The assessment of individualstudent performance was in the form of quizzes, teammate assessment and class participation.In addition to assessing the impacts on student learning and engagement for the re-designedcourse, this paper also reports on future plans to conduct follow-on research to assess the impactsthe re-designed course may have on the senior year capstone design experience.IntroductionThe beginning of the 2006 academic year marked the first semester of a re-design of thecurriculum in the Department of Materials Science and
services to foster success in Calculus I as it isknown to be a roadblock for student success in STEM fields. The second activity supports theimplementation of Challenge-Based Instruction (CBI) in selected key courses. CBI, a form ofinductive learning, has been shown to be a more effective approach to the learning process thanthe traditional deductive pedagogy. The third activity supports faculty development workshopson CBI techniques and other locally developed teaching tools with a focus on increasing studentsuccess, and finally the fourth activity develops and supports pathways to STEM fields betweenSTC and UTPA. This project provides a model that is expected to have a significant impact onthe number of STEM graduates and that will be simple to
globalengineers requires a shift in paradigm in their formation.In 2006, Continental Corporation funded the first scientific global engineering study conductedby eight prestigious universities around the world2. The study resulted in four recommendations: (1) A key qualification of engineering graduates must be global competence; (2) Transnational mobility for engineering students, researchers, and professionals needs to become a priority; Page 14.296.2 (3) Global engineering excellence critically depends on a partnerships, especially those that link engineering education to professional practice; and (4) Research is urgently needed
AC 2009-2071: DESIGN OF A FLEXIBLE RF/IR DATA LINK AND ASSOCIATEDLABORATORY CURRICULUM IN A FIRST ANALOG ELECTRONICS ANDDEVICES COURSEKip Coonley, Duke University Kip D. Coonley received the B.S. degree in physics from Bates College, Lewiston, ME, in 1997 and the M.S. degree in electrical engineering from Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, in 1999. Following graduation from Dartmouth, he developed electronically controlled dimmers for fluorescent and incandescent lamps at Lutron Electronics, Coopersburg, PA. From 2001 to 2005, he was a Research Engineer at RTI International, where he designed high-efficiency thermoelectrics using epitaxially grown superlattice thin-film structures. Since 2005, he has
preference of anyparticular person.Thus, there is no best style in general; every style (level, motive, perception of opportunity) willhave advantages and disadvantages relative to the problem at hand. This more balancedperspective certainly has implications in engineering, both in terms of educating future engineersand within engineering practice, as other researchers have discussed3,4,5,14,17,20. As Lopez-Mesaand Thompson note, for example20: “The problem-solving approach taken by a strong Innovatoris quite different to that taken by a strong Adaptor. It is not that one is better than another, butrather that the appropriate style be used to obtain the appropriate solution.” Once we understandthat style is independent from level and that all styles
. Her current research interests include the effect of instructional technology on student learning and performance, effective teaching strategies for new graduate student instructors, and the impact of GSI mentoring programs on the mentors and mentees.Joanna Mirecki Millunchick, University of Michigan Joanna Millunchick is Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, and is affiliated with the Applied Physics Program and the Michigan Center for Theoretical Physics at the University of Michigan. Prior to joining UM in 1997, Millunchick was a Postdoctoral Fellow at Sandia National Laboratories. She received her B.S. in Physics from DePaul University in 1990, and her Ph.D. in
Michigan State University. He earned his M.S. degree in pavement engineering in 1988 from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor and his Ph.D. in pavement and materials engineering from Texas A&M University, College Station, in 1995. Dr. Buch began his academic career at Michigan State University in 1996. Dr. Buch teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in concrete materials and pavement engineering. He is also involved in teaching short courses on pavement design and rehabilitation and pavement materials for practicing engineers in Michigan. He is a co-PI on two National Science Foundation grants in the areas of integration of computation in engineering curricula and in the area of
AC 2009-1083: A MODEL FOR THE PLANNING, MARKETING, ANDIMPLEMENTATION OF A DEPARTMENTAL LAPTOP INITIATIVEMark Bannatyne, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis Dr. Bannatyne is a Professor of Computer Graphics Technology at the Purdue School of Engineering at IUPUI, and acting Department head for the Department of Design and Communication Technology. Dr. Bannatyne is a graduate of the British Columbia Institute of Technology where he studied Machine Tool Technology, Utah State University (BSc., 1988, MSc. 1992), and Purdue University (Ph.D., 1994). Dr. Bannatyne is an active member of AVA, ITEA, ASEE, Phi Kappa Phi, and Epsilon Pi Tau where he is a member of The Board of Editors
14.1170.2This study is one of a series of investigations that our “Technology Education Teaching andLearning Project” has been engaged in over the past three years, for the purpose of studyingTechnology Education teaching practices and student learning outcomes. This work is framed bytwo seemingly simple questions: 1) What does technology education teaching look like? 2) Whatare technology education students learning? We charted this path because of the dearth ofresearch on Technology Education teaching and learning. In the early 1990s, Zuga conducted acomprehensive review of Technology Education research and concluded the vast majority ofresearch and scholarship in the field to that point had focused either on curriculum developmentor on teacher
,completed a brainstorming activity that averaged 3 pages, completed a team log that was at least6 pages long, and turned in a final report that averaged 10 pages in length. All of these files weregraded electronically by the GTA and returned to the students. An estimate of the total savingsof paper is listed in Table 2.Table 2: Paper savings estimates for each deliverable of the semester-long design project Assignment Estimated Number of Total Paper Saved Length Submissions Research Report 5 pages 343 1,715 pages Brainstorming Inventory 3 pages 343 1,029 pages Design
. Grantham Lough served as a research scientist for 21st Century Systems where she has added risk assessment techniques to their existing defense software products. Also, she was involved with projects to identify both hardware and software failures in mechatronic systems. She received her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at UMR in 2005. Dr. Grantham Lough’s current research interests are product design theory and methodology, sustainable design, as well as failure and risk identification and mitigation. Page 14.1367.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 What New Faculty
, Virginia Tech Maura Borrego is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Dr. Borrego holds an M.S. and Ph.D. in Materials Science and Engineering from Stanford University. Her current research interests center around interdisciplinary graduate education in engineering. She has an NSF CAREER and Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) award for this work.Kacey Beddoes, Virginia Tech Kacey Beddoes is a Ph.D. student in Science and Technology Studies at Virginia Tech. Her current research interests are interdisciplinary studies of gender and engineering education. She serves as Assistant Editor of the journal Engineering Studies and co
feature. Edmondson9 also describes a threaded approach to building teamskills across the curriculum.In a previous paper10 we described our approach that involves threading teaming elements in asequence of core design courses starting in Freshman Year. For practical reasons we did not tryto adhere closely to a particular model of teaming from a research perspective but have beenguided by Tuckman's11 model of team development (forming, norming, storming, performing,adjourning). In that sense it allows students to deal with issues of general acquaintance and taskfamiliarization during the first semester. It then builds a more formal instructional componentand peer assessment in the second semester. This is reinforced in the next course and
learning outcomes desired of engineeringgraduates. Work on this project began with a literature review searching for learning outcomesfor engineering students [5]. See Figure 1 for the project elements and procedure.Figure 1. Activities E-NSEE and E-FSSE Development.The initial research review uncovered 44 outcomes, of which 12 were addressed in ABETcriteria 3a – 3k and 4 [6]. Another five outcomes also fit a minimum citation criterion, yielding 17 Page 14.1344.3“fundamental” learning outcomes. These outcomes were sorted as relating to analysis,experimentation, and design (“Technical”) or to communication or other people-related skills(“Social
inEngineering Programs: Evolving Best Practices, Association to Institutional Research, Tallahassee, FL, Chapt. 8,2008.5. McCaulley, M. H., “The MBTI and Individual Pathways in Engineering Design,” Engineering Education, 80 (5),537-542 (July/August 1990).6. Wankat, P. C. and F. S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, Chapt. 13, 1993. Availablefree as pdf files on the web at https://engineering.purdue.edu/ChE/AboutUs/Publications/TeachingEng/index.html7. Montgomery, D. C. and G. C. Runger, Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers, Wiley, New York, pp.436-441, 1994.8. Watson, K., “Guest Editor’s Page. Change in Engineering Education: Where Does Research Fit?” J. Engr. Educ.,98 (1), 3-4 (Jan. 2009).Table 1. Concentrations in