, distribution, and responses for each of the three surveys in turn. Thepaper elaborates on information provided in the ASCE CEBOK3 Appendix D [6].CEBOK2 Survey, Winter 2017Survey 1 DevelopmentThe process of acquiring input from outside constituencies into the development of the CEBOK3began early. A subcommittee of the CEBOK3TC focused on “outreach to other constituencies”had a conference call November 2, 2016. They continued their work over the following weeks,developing an online survey via multiple iterations. The goal of the survey was to get feedbackfrom a diversity of stakeholders in the civil engineering community on the existing CEBOK2 andpotential new outcomes that were identified via a rigorous literature review process by theCEBOK3TC [7]. New
al. (2016) pointed out that the university-basedentrepreneurial ecosystem is a complex network composed of individuals, projects,departments and units, and supports the realization of commercialization and entrepreneurship in the form of infrastructure, leadership support, education and training, financing and innovation culture. In fact, although some scholars have been discussing the university-based entrepreneurship ecosystem, they have not yet reached a consensus on its concept, but the elements of that ecosystem proposed by scholars also share some commonalities (Table 1). Table1 University-based entrepreneurial ecosystem dimensionsBuilding blocks for University
transition and provide a strong foundation for the change.Keywords: Construction education, change management, construction leadership.IntroductionThe construction industry is one of the major contributors to the national US economy. In 2016,the industry employed 10.328 million people in the United States alone, with a payroll ofapproximately $792.5 Billion. AGC estimates that an extra $1 billion in nonresidentialconstruction spending adds about $3.4 billion to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (AGC 2018).Preparing a qualified and well-trained workforce to manage construction projects is theresponsibility of academic and vocational institutions. This effort is supplemented by the on-the-job-training provided by the industry. Currently, the industry is
academia. Prof. Hastak is a Professional Engineer (PE) and a Certified Cost Professional (CCP). He has authored over 200 publications and re- ports in his area of expertise as well as co-authored and edited three widely used books (1) Infrastructure Planning, Engineering, and Economics (McGraw-Hill 2006 and 2015), (2) Skills and Knowledge of Cost Engineering (AACE 6th Ed. 2015), and (3) CCP Certification Study Guide (AACE 2nd Ed. 2016). He served on the AACE Education Board from 2004-2016. In addition, Prof. Hastak has developed and cur- rently manages several websites as a public service to the construction industry including: (1) Emerging Construction Technologies, (2) Academic Breakthroughs in CEM, (3) Purdue Index
onConstruction Management (CM) Programs. There is a growing need to replace an aging constructionworkforce and shortfall in skilled tradespeople, especially considering many do not considerconstruction an ideal career choice. A vital point often overlooked is the underlying motivation topursue STEM or CM as a career choice. Despite attempts, there is an opportunity to gain deeperinsights from individuals in CM degree programs. This study explores the following research questions:1) What are the common attributes of college students that decide to pursue CM degrees; and, 2) Whatkey motivational drivers that encourage students to remain in STEM majors? The study populationconsidered were those students enrolled in CM undergraduate degree program in the
, mathematically, and technologically literate populace” is the effective integration oftechnology and engineering in K-12 curricula. Key to this process is current teachers, and evenmore critical, future teachers (pre-service). This work is particularly interested in the engineeringtraining of pre-service teachers during their engagement with middle school students, theirunderstanding of their role in strengthening the engineering pipeline, and their development ofSTEM lesson plans. Engineering faculty instruct pre-service teachers to explore STEM issues ina capstone course entitled “Contemporary STEM Issues”. Successes and challenges of the courseare presented relative to 1) pre-service teachers’ preparation (through a capstone course) toeffectively
are often considered the most foundational for engineering students.Yet, these courses have become impenetrable from changes in content and pedagogy and areoften abstracted from any human or societal context. One reason for this abstraction may be dueto the understandably prolific use of the “engineering problem-solving method” (EPS) or“engineering as problem definition and solution” (PDS), which teaches students how tomethodically approach a technical problem and produce easily checked solutions [1]. However,the EPS method has perpetuated the dominance of mathematical problem solving as the highestvalue in engineering [2], often unintentionally reinforcing the worldview that technical rigor ismore important than the context in which
andmicroprocessor development is inevitable. However, there are issues and challenges in choosingwhich family of microcontrollers to select, such as Microchip PIC, Arduino ATMEL, ARM etc.for engineering education and training. The Texas Instruments (TI) ARM M4 microcontroller was selected because the NSF I-CorpL project results indicated that the academic community needed a new advanced microcontrollerplatform to meet industry technical training demands [1]. The TI ARM M4 based curriculum designand development project illustrates how the collaborative efforts between faculty at differentinstitutions can be beneficial in developing instructional materials that lead to effective teaching andimproved student learning. There are several other
tochange, so too will the content and format of the EGCI. Monitoring the EGCI’s performanceagainst current trends and practices in engineering graphics can help keep the instrument a usefultool in engineering education research. With the instrument having met its intended level of rigor[1], widespread testing can now be done on different psychometric aspects to better prepare it forwidespread use. One of the first measures to be further substantiated is the instrument’s validity.BackgroundThe EGCI was developed as part of a larger project examining understanding andmisconceptions in engineering graphics with a goal of creating an assessment instrument.Experts in the field were consulted to identify important topics in the field which included
that collaboration required each author to think deeply about her existing expertise,gain new knowledge, and effectively model interdisciplinary curiosity and collaboration forour students. We will describe the development and implementation of these seminars, andtheir assessment and refinement over four offerings. This cornerstone experience lays afoundation for integrative education and fosters an understanding of the need forinterdisciplinary collaboration.The National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges (Table 1, [1]) are inherentlysociotechnical, multidimensional and context-specific problems whose resolution requiresmeaningful collaboration among and across multiple disciplines. At Lafayette College, weemphasize this complexity, and
Learning TrajectoriesDr. Cindy Rottmann, Prof. Doug Reeve, Dr. Serhiy Kovalchuk, Mike Klassen, Milan Majkovic, Prof. Emily MooreTroost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (Troost ILead)Paper accepted to the 126th American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition—Tampa, Florida, June 16-19, 2019. To be published in the ASEE conference proceedings on June 16th, 2019.Abstract:In the early 1950s, many science and technology focused organizations in the United States andCanada began to formalize a technical career track to accommodate the professional aspirationsof engineers reluctant to abandon technical work for management [1-7]. While the resulting dualcareer track model
this pedagogy.Consequently advancing an unorthodox pedagogical approach that not only provides studentswith a unique educational experience but also equips them with know-how and knowledge toutilize emerging technologies.Project Goals and ObjectiveThe goals of this research are to (1) incorporate VR to revolutionize learning throughexperiential simulations; (2) advance students’ engagement through modeling various spatialrepresentation of data to align with building sciences; and (3) foster an informal learningenvironment that provides technological knowledge to advance our future workforcerequirements. The research objective is to demonstrate an opportunity to implement a novelhaptic learning environment, which increases learners’ engagement
,aswellaswiththeSpanishculturecoursethatallstudentswereenrolledin.Thissummerstudyabroadprogramhasbeenavaluableandpopularadditiontothestudyabroadoptionsforouruniversityandthebiomedicalengineeringdepartment,offeringourengineeringstudentsawaytoexperiencestudyabroadthatfitswiththeirneedsandincreasestheflexibilityofourprogram.MotivationforEngineeringStudyAbroadProgram:Studyabroadprogramsallowstudentstoexploreothercultures,developtheirlanguagefluency,improveempathy,andalteranindividualstudent’sworldviews.Recentstudieshaveindicatedthatstudyabroadcanincreasegraduationrates(1)andalsoincreasestudents’salarieswhentheyapplyforjobs(2).Culturalcompetency,languagefluency,andempathydevelopmentareskillsthatengineersneedtodevelop,yetmostengineeringprogramsaresoengineeringfocused,withsignificantemphasisoncoursecontentandcoverage,thattheyhavenolanguagerequirement.Thus,manyengineersgraduatewithoutlanguagefluency.Forthisreason
sophomore-level electricaland computer engineering course. Historically, engineering courses have been structured with adivision between the theoretical lecture and the applied lab, preventing students from makingclear connections between the two. Today’s students do not find this legacy approach effective[1], [2]. In order to enhance student learning and concept retention in a large electrical andcomputer engineering program, a faculty team is redesigning the sophomore year experienceusing a project-based learning approach. This study describes the work of one instructor teachinga freshman-level course as part of the experience of exploring the full integration of labs andlectures that incorporate industry-level, real-world problems. The questions
learning, engagement, and success [1], [4], [6]. Walberg andBoy et al., for instance, reported that educational productivity is dependent on the psychosocialaspect of the classroom, which combines psychological factors with the surrounding socialenvironment [7], [8], [9], [10]. These prominent results indicate that educators must not onlyprepare to disseminate content with clarity, structure, and enthusiasm, but should focussimultaneously on creating an environment that engages diverse learning styles and stimulatesacademic development.Despite the research endeavors conducted on the laudable effects of classroom environments, andthe increased attention it has received by educators and administrators given its immediate andlong-term benefits, not
andgraduate students at both VU and UW-Platteville, and support from USUCGER. The materialsfor each activity include: (1) a summary sheet for the instructor with learning objectives andinstructions; (2) the activity handout to provide to the students; (3) the solution set; (4) anexample rubric for the activity; and (5) supplemental information, if applicable. The required in-class time for the activities ranges from as short as one to two minutes to 50 minutes, to allow forflexibility in implementing the activities in existing courses. All of the activities were created forsmall informal groups. The activities vary widely in their format (e.g. "typical" quantitativeproblems, group jigsaws, concept questions/discussion, group presentations
research partnerships [1]. In support of this overall goal, the followingobjectives are addressed: 1. To provide underrepresented and financially needy undergraduate students with information on the benefits and opportunities associated with graduate education 2. To provide underrepresented and financially needy undergraduate students with enhanced financial support and career experiences to improve the likelihood of completing both a B.S. and an M.S. in engineering 3. To provide personalized integrated industry and academic mentoring and professional development that results in increased enrollment and completion of graduate engineering degrees involving industry beneficial research 4. To increase
instructor taught the course in both quarters covering the sametopics. Both quarters had approximately 120 students enrolled. Four students from the Winterquarter retook the course in the Spring. Surveys were completed by 50 and 78 students in theWinter and Spring quarters, respectively. Table 1 shows the breakdown of students by genderand year in the program.Table 1. The number of students and their college year. Quarter Total Female Male 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th+ year Winter 117 15 112 0 13 68 36 Spring 122 18 104 0 17 69 36Course DesignIn the Winter quarter, the instructor lectured
?The focus of this paper is on experiences flipping an introductory database class. In particular,what are the best practices for holding students accountable for preparing for class? The authorhas employed online reading quizzes as well as guided study assignments. Examples ofassignments as well as multiple measures of student perceptions of learning are presented.1. Active LearningActive learning is constructivist rather than exposition-centered learning. Students areencouraged and supported in a learning process where they are directly engaged with and takeresponsibility for their own learning. The merits of active learning (as opposed to passivelylistening to a lecture) are well-documented. A meta-study by Freeman et al. (2014) examined225
designed to solve the same problemto compare the strengths and weaknesses of how each performs.1-PS4-1 Plan and conduct investigations to provide evidence that vibrating materials canmake sound and that sound can make materials vibrate.2-PS1-1 Plan and conduct an investigation to describe and classify different kinds ofmaterials by their observable properties.2-PS1-2 Analyze data obtained from testing different materials to determine whichmaterials have the properties that are best suited for an intended purpose.*4-PS4-3 Generate and compare multiple solutions that use patterns to transferinformation.5-PS1-3 Make observations and measurements to identify materials based on theirproperties.MATERIALS
consulting with nonprofits, museums, and summer programs. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Creation of an Engineering Epistemic Frame for K-12 Students (Fundamental)AbstractIn implementation of K-12 engineering education standards, in addition to the professionaldevelopment teachers need to be trained to prepare students for future engineering careers,assessments must evolve to reflect the various aspects of engineering. A previous researchproject investigated documentation methods using a variety of media with rising high schooljuniors in a summer session of a college preparatory program [1]. That study revealed thatalthough students had design
at Cal PolyPomona to gauge the impact of the video library on their academic career. Information wasgathered on awareness of the video resources, frequency of viewing, perceived usefulness, andother topics. The majority of students were aware of the video resources, felt the videos had apositive impact on their education, and felt the videos helped improve their grades in at least oneclass.1. IntroductionThe open courseware movement has grown significantly since the early 2000s. Today manyprestigious institutions with large endowments such as MIT [1] and Harvard [2] have developedextensive databases of videos and other free education resources, including complete self-pacedonline courses. These courses are sometimes created in partnerships
II) would beheld in the Engineering Education Garage (EG), which is the aforementioned (15,000 ft2)makerspace, and would focus on fundamental engineering skills application and integration.Seven different fundamental engineering topics were mandated by the committee as follows: 1. Engineering Professionalism (ethics, culture, and risk) 2. Basic Computational and Programming skills 3. Communication (graphical, oral and written) 4. Problem Solving 5. Design Analysis 6. Teamwork 7. Project ManagementIt is also pertinent to note the committee additionally mandated that the Paul-Elder CriticalThinking Framework [1-6] be taught and utilized throughout the sequence, and that diversityissues would be discussed as part of the
are highly valued in engineering are psychological or pseudo-cognitiverather than purely cognitive: self-efficacy, curiosity, and grit (perseverance). Creativity, apseudo-cognitive construct, is likewise cited as a desirable trait among engineers. In previouswork we showed that a project-based design course rich in brainstorming activities resulted in asemester-long improvement in certain aspects of creativity compared to a course that wasrelatively poor in brainstorming activities [1]. Not all design courses, however, are equal in thedegree to which they are project-based. This led us to question whether overt training increativity could yield even greater improvements in creativity than are already gained in a skills-based design course.A
improvements inCreativity Index scores compared to the controls. However, the statistical significance of thesefindings are not strong, presumably due to the small sample size. Therefore, the research willcontinue in subsequent years. In addition, evaluation of the design teams’ concepts byexperienced engineering design faculty indicated that the teams that participated in the creativityexercises exhibited greater innovation in their design process versus the control. Finally, studentsreported that the exercises are fun and help them expand their way of thinking to considerunexpected solutions to a diverse array of challenges.1. IntroductionThe capstone design experience is common in Accreditation Board for Engineering andTechnology (ABET) accredited
Paper ID #25272Critical Approaches to CSR as a Strategy to Broaden Engineering Students’Views of StakeholdersDr. Jessica Mary Smith, Colorado School of Mines Jessica M. Smith is Associate Professor in the Engineering, Design & Society Division at the Colorado School of Mines and Co-Director of Humanitarian Engineering. She is an anthropologist with two major research areas: 1) the sociocultural dynamics of extractive and energy industries, with a focus on corpo- rate social responsibility, social justice, labor, and gender and 2) engineering education, with a focus on socioeconomic class and social responsibility
Experiences within EngineeringAbstractThis theory paper continues an ongoing conversation about the use of critical theories to examinerace in engineering. Critical race theory was popularized in the 1980s for its use in legal studies[1] – and a decade later in education. Although three decades have passed since this movementof race research ignited, the engineering profession still lacks diversity. Whites are still themajority within engineering, which in turn culturally defines the field. In this setting, onepotential response from Blacks is that they hide their Black identity to blend into the dominantWhite workplace culture. To study this situation, we offer an extension to the work of WendyFaulkner and her concept of in/authenticity that women
, orcommunication [1].The introduction of this paper covers the necessary framework for engineering critical thinkingincluding intellectual traits necessary for understanding the subject and stages of the criticalthinking development, along with a literature review on its applications in engineering education.Multiple cases are used in presentation of analyzing engineering design including ego-centricand user-centric design examples, analyzing engineering documents including engineeringresearch work, and ethics.This paper focuses on applications of critical thinking in manufacturing engineering education ata midwestern institution. A series of undergraduate courses including Rapid Prototyping andReverse Engineering, Safety and Methods Engineering, and
Brass, St. Paul Academy and Summit School Director of Instructional Technology, St Paul Academy and Summit School K12 Collaboration Liaison, Center for Engineering Education, St. Thomas University c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Cross Cutting Concepts in an Informal Engineering Setting (Fundamental)AbstractThe participation gap between men and women in the E - Engineering component of STEMsectors is persistent. This gap may be traced back to several complex issues including perceivedcultural concerns in engineering and young women self-selecting out of engineering career pathsearly in the middle school years [1]. Informal education settings may allow for a countermeasureto the
recently discussions in theTechnological Literacy Division of the American Society for Engineering Education have ledto the complementary promotion of the idea of engineering literacy. Technology consideredto be the product that results from the process of engineering. Unfortunately, there is littleagreement on what concepts and practices should be taught, or to whom they should betaught, or indeed the definitions themselves. Hence the symposium that is the subject of thiscommentary [1]. Cui Bono engineering and technological literacy?Krawitz’s wrote in response to the anchoring article that part of “ ‘liberal education’ beyondthe student’s major is delivered through the General Education portion of the curriculum, aseries of elective courses with