maintaining positive student perceptions as measured withstudent course evaluations.IntroductionThe senior laboratory plays a vital role in preparing students for engineering practice. To thisend, they can include a wide array of learning objectives which often vary by discipline orprogram.1,2 The learning objectives are typically aligned to specific ABET guidelines that focuson the practice of engineering, including requirements for communication, teamwork, creativity,the synthesis of core engineering concepts applied to an open-ended project, incorporation ofeconomic considerations, and inclusion of relevant health, safety, and ethical issues.3 Industrialneeds have also shaped the development of laboratory courses in a variety of ways
., 1986, Two courses of expertise in H. Stevenson, J. Azuma & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan, New York, W. H. Freeman & Co., pp. 262-272. 6. Schwartz, D.L., Bransford, J.D., & Sears, D., 2005, Innovation and efficiency in learning and transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective, Mahwah, Erlbaum, pp. 1-51. 7. Rayne et al., 2006, “The development of adaptive expertise in biomedical engineering ethics,” Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 165-173. 8. Martin, T, Rivale, S. and Diller, K.R., 2007, “Comparison of student learning for challenge based and traditional instruction in Biomedical Engineering,” Annals of
on our observation of students and teams during the semester and on confidentialpeer evaluations that are completed by each student at the end of the semester. The peer evalua-tions allow each student to evaluate the work of his or her teammates and to comment on thefairness of the division of labor during collaborative work. With all of this mind, we shouldmention that for most students, the IAF is chosen to be unity.The grading policy described above is rather complex, and it relies heavily on the instructor’sawareness of the work ethic and “sociological health” of each of the teams. It should be men-tioned that as of the spring 1999 semester, we are only in the third semester of teaching Interac-tive Dynamics. Thus, it has not been taught
interdisciplinary study through integrating her previous work in mathematics andaccounting with marketing. She continues to search for ways to get both faculty and students out of their “functionalsilos.” Her other research interests include social responsibility in business, ethics, retail atmosphere, retailmanagement, and the use of technology to enhance learning.DARRELL W. DONAHUE Page 4.338.12Dr. Darrell W. Donahue has been at the University of Maine as an assistant professor for four years. He teaches avariety of classes including Food Process Design and Engineering, Statistical Process Control, and ComputerSimulation of Processes
significant improvements in DCI scores. Addressing student concerns about the broadcast method of delivery directly bydiscussing literature, the “The No Significant Difference Phenomenon” (reference 11),and grade results from previous semesters early in the class may be comforting tostudents. But, it does not help them maintain classroom discipline throughout thesemester. Similarly, an orientation to the importance of the study of dynamics over thefour millennia beginning with Hammurabi’s code and ending with contemporaryengineering failures caused by dynamic conditions from recent newspaper articles mayaddress the ABET program outcomes f (ethical responsibility), h (societal context), and j(contemporary issues)18, but does not engage
, minds-on”approach through in-class cooperative problem solving, experiments and demonstrations,computer exercises, and small-scale and semester-long projects.40 Also, Hamilton et al.describe the successes and challenges of starting an engineering college at the NationalMilitary Academy of Afghanistan.41 They highlight the use of face-to-face and distancementoring, cultural and ethical challenges, faculty development, providing resources andequipment, and ensuring the continuity and sustainability of programs. Finally, thereader may want to consult the article by Rugarcia et al. on methods to establish a culturefor a research university that maintains a strong engineering education emphasis. 42It must be noted that there are unique issues
) 31.6 (12) 68.4 (26) Ethics 49.0 (24) 51.0 (25) 12.5 (3) 87.5 (21) CAM 46.9 (23) 53.1 (26) 42.9 (9) 57.1 (12) Descrip. Geo. 54.2 (26) 45.8 (22) 30.8 (8) 69.2 (18) Desktop Pub. 28.6 (14) 71.4 (35) 71.4 (10) 28.6 (4) Website Dev. 31.9 (15) 68.1 (32) 68.8 (11) 31.3 (5) Animation 58.3 (28) 41.7 (20) 28.6 (8) 71.4 (20) Note: Maximum percentage for each subject was 100%. Note: % is percentage of responses, (n) is the total of responses for each category and question. Note: * indicates a
ups; ≠ knowledge and skills in the fundamentals of engineering practice; ≠ knowledge of selected professional-level skills commensurate with students’ future field and/or area of specialization; ≠ a strong oral and written communication skills; ≠ a focus on design issues involving life–cycle economics, environmental impact, sustainable development maintainability, applicable standards and ad hoc concerns; ≠ an awareness of business practices in the Region and elsewhere; ≠ an understanding of nontechnical forces that affect engineering decision-making; ≠ a perception of social, ethical, and political responsibilities; ≠ an awareness of the evolution of human civilization in general, with an emphasis on
solving problems within their field of study; 3. have the ability to gather and interpret relevant data (usually within their field of study)to inform judgments that include reflection on relevant social, scientific or ethical issues; 4. can communicate information, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist andnonspecialist audiences; 5. have developed those learning skills that are necessary for them to continue toundertake further study with a high degree of autonomy.” In 2005 the EU Commission introduced the EQF-LLL / European QualificationsFramework for Lifelong Learning, to provide a common reference to facilitate therecognition and the transferability of qualifications, based mainly on knowledge, skills and
AC 2010-371: USING A LIVING-BUILDING LABORATORY (BUILDING AS ALABORATORY) AS A THERMODYNAMICS PROJECT IN THE ENGINEERINGTECHNOLOGY CURRICULUMJason Durfee, Eastern Washington University JASON DURFEE received his BS and MS degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Brigham Young University. He holds a Professional Engineer certification. Prior to teaching at Eastern Washington University he was a military pilot, an engineering instructor at West Point and an airline pilot. His interests include aerospace, aviation, professional ethics and piano technology.Hani Saad, Eastern Washington University Dr. Saad received his high school education in Lebanon, his native country. He received his BS and MS degrees
discussed students’ tool use skills in the Engineering 112 class and during design class thefollowing semester in order to identify students who need additional instruction or furtherexplanation of how tool use and developing an effective design process are mutually dependent.VII. ConclusionWe are moving forward in our efforts to develop a design program that utilizes design and buildstrategies as well as cognitive processes to teach design. As the design sequence rolls out, weare teaching ethics and values, aesthetics, engineering communications and sustainability in fourcontexts (environmental, social / cultural, economic, and technical).Since the James Madison University School of Engineering is new (we have sophomores thisyear), our desire to
toexplore process optimization. These variables include the sheet resistivity of the conductiveoxide layers coating the glass slides, the thickness of the TiO2 layer, the concentration and soaktime for the dye agent, and the thickness of the carbon layer. Figure 3. Cross-section of TiO2 nanocrystalline solar cell.Course StructureA three-credit eleven-week (within Drexel’s quarter system) laboratory- and project-basedcourse was developed. Fifteen hours are devoted to laboratory work and fifteen hours to lectureson nano-processes that are the basis of the lab work, Six Sigma topics, ethics and sustainability,and nano entrepreneurship. Guest lecturers are planned for the classroom sessions
Computing II 77.8% Operating Systems 72.2% Data Structures 66.7% Algorithms 61.1% Programming Languages 50.0% Introduction to Software Engineering 33.3% Software Ethics 33.3% Computer Architecture 27.8% Computer Organization & Assembly Language 22.2% Database Systems 22.2
on par with that of a high school athletic coach. • In addition to their project work, students also receive some specialized HSE training which can include topics in applied workforce skills such as leadership, communication, entrepreneurship, and ethics, and does include basic engineering fundamentals such as the design process and project management. • Team members make formal presentations at undergraduate research expositions, and they conduct project-based interactive sessions at middle and elementary schools within their local school districts. Using these latter activities as a starting point, the Enterprise model is being introduced into K-8 education
entrepreneurship and innovation. Theserecruitment efforts have led to a recent increase of engineering and computer science studentsparticipating in the E-scholars program and the Business Plan Competition.The second major effort was a curricular review during 2011-2012 of the four ABET-accreditedundergraduate programs: mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, civil engineering, andcomputer science. The curricular review assumed that future leaders and innovators will need abroad technical foundation with opportunities to gain competency in design (disciplinary andmultidisciplinary), real-world problem-solving, communication, ethics and professionalism,global and multicultural understanding, innovation and entrepreneurship, teamwork, computing
potential long term impact.ConclusionThe STEM SLC students significantly performed better in the MATLAB class as the passing rateis 73% vs. 44% in the non-SLC. The fact that the students in the SLC met daily together in theirclasses created not only a bond of friendship, but of work ethic as well. They motivated eachother on a daily basis in addition to the faculty reminding them of their work daily. Thisimpacted their attendance, their participation, and the completion rate of the overall work.The association of all topics across all three classes made the classes more connected. Studentsdid not feel they had three segregated classes, but possibly saw it as one class only. The mini-projects, although specific to each faculty, connected the topics
withinrealistic constraints such as economic, X X X Xenvironmental, social, political, ethical,health and safety, manufacturability, andsustainability(d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary X X X X Xteams(e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solveengineering problems(f) an understanding of professional and X X X X Xethical responsibility(g) an ability to communicate effectively X X X X X(h) the broad education necessary tounderstand the impact of engineering
realistic constraints such aseconomic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, andsustainability” and (k) “an ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering toolsnecessary for engineering practice.”The Technology: Inexpensive 3D Printers using Fused Deposition Modeling The 3D-printing lab consists of two UP Plus 3D printers, two Replicator 2 printers, threeReplicator 2X 3D printers, and one Thing-O-Matic 3D printing kit (not used). The inexpensive3D printers use FDM rapid prototyping process where a small diameter nozzle deposits heatedplastic filament first onto the build surface and then in subsequent passes onto the previouslayers thus fusing the layers and creating plastic objects
engineering problem,but rather, an optimal or acceptable solution leading to a final design, presented as the bestpossible balance between technical as well as non-technical constraints. These non-technicalconstraints typically involve economics, politics, social and environmental issues, ethics, etc.And, while professional practitioners generally accept this understanding of design, students, byand large, tend to interpret the engineering design process as an unambiguous and clearly definedprocess supported by rigidly applied principles and processes of “the scientific method.”Undoubtedly, the start of any design course should be preceded by exposure to design thinkingand related processes. The paper reviews the role of design in engineering
development.AcknowledgementsThe authors wish to thank the students who have participated in this workshop and shared theirfeedback, which has helped the authors to learn in many ways. This research has receivedclearance by the Research Ethics Board of the University of Windsor, REB# 14-035.References[1] J. H. F. Meyer and R. Land, 2005, “Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning,” Higher Education, 49(3): 373–388.[2] F. Marton and R. Säljö, 1976, “On qualitative differences in learning: I—Outcome and process*,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1): 4–11.[3] J. B. Biggs and K. F. Collis, 1982, Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy (structure of
not offer this type of information to their undergraduate students. However, theAccreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) requires that graduates be able “todesign a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such aseconomic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, andsustainability.”5-8The topic of sustainability has become ubiquitous. It is part of corporate strategy, consumerchoice processes, university initiatives, engineering, and technology programs within thebusiness discipline. This moves toward more sustainable business practices and education is adirect result of an increasing awareness of the significant green manufacturing covers a
ethics skills and the ability to work with people of differentbackgrounds. Nair et al. (2009) reported that the results of the 2007 Monash UniversityEmployer Survey concluded that there is a need to have a clearer understanding of essentialgeneric and professional attributes of engineering graduates to ensure quality in higher education,and that colleges and universities need to collaborate more closely with industry to re-design orre-align its educational programs with the competencies required by the employers.On the other hand, in 2006, the results of a survey conducted by the Association of AmericanColleges and Universities (AAC&U) among employers, indicated general agreement thatcolleges and universities should place more emphasis in
undergraduate research assistants is both difficult and rewarding. Students come tothe project with different backgrounds, motivations and work ethics. While engaging inundergraduate research can be a powerful learning experience for students,1 expending resourcesto train undergraduates does not always translate to increased research output or academic creditfor faculty mentors.2–5This paper presents a three-stage, scaffolded approach to training undergraduate researchassistants, based on experiences and lessons learned in mentoring more than 50 undergraduatesin engineering research projects. This three-step methodology reduces faculty effort whilepreserving the learning experience for new undergraduate researchers, and helps faculty quicklyassess the
Dr. Cynthia Finelli is Director of the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching Engineering and research associate professor in the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan. She actively pursues research in engineering education and assists other faculty at U-M in their scholarly endeavors. Her current research interests include studying faculty motivation to change classroom practices, evalu- ating methods to improve teaching, and exploring ethical decision-making in undergraduate engineering Page 24.1120.1 students. Dr. Finelli leads a national initiative to create a taxonomy/keyword
theimportance of 172 characteristics based on the (then current) ABET 2000 Criterion 3 categories,which were also shown as averages on a 5-point scale. The summary of non-discipline-basedskills ranked as most important included data analysis proficiency, teamwork skills and Page 24.1146.11multidisciplinary communication, ability to identify problems and alternative solutions,professional and ethical issues, interpersonal skills (including written, verbal, presentation skills,and technical report writing) and computer, information, and technology literacy skills 8. Martinet al. (2005) studied recent graduates’ perceptions of how well they felt they
Paper ID #10863The CARE (Center for Academic Resources in Engineering) Program at Illi-noisProf. William H. Mischo, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign William Mischo is Head, Grainger Engineering Library Information Center and Professor, University Library at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign (UIUC). He has been a Principal Investigator on a number of digital library grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF), including the National Ethics Portal grant, several National Science Digital Library (NSDL) grants, and the Digital Library Initiative I grant. He has also received an Institute of Museum
) ResearchExperience for Undergraduates program under Award No. EEC‐1156747. Any opinions,findings, and conclusions and recommendations expressed in this material are those of the Page 24.1226.14authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.References 1. Sweeney, A., Vaidyanathan, P., & Seal, S. (2006). Undergraduate research and education in nanotechnology. International Journal of Engineering Education IJEE 22(1), 157-170. 2. Sweeney, A., Vaidyanathan, P., & Seal, S. (2003). The promises and perils of nanoscience and nanotechnology: Exploring emerging social and ethical issues. Bulletin of Science and Technology, An
appreciation for international engineering cultures; gain knowledge of, and sensitivity to, cultural norms; understand the differences in problem definitions and problem solving strategies that exist between cultures; and gain an appreciation for ethical responsibilities.Before proceeding with an overview of assessment and a frank evaluation of the efficacy of thePMFC, it is important to note that few of the core and experimental components detailed aboveare truly original in form. Workbooks, blogs, instructional videos, case studies and concept-based evaluation tools, for example, all have been utilized, with varying degrees of success, ineducational contexts7-9,13-28. As such, the true novelty of the PMFC largely stems from
states that “as a community of scholars, we seek to educate students to pursueboth knowledge and wisdom, and to aspire to ethical and moral leadership within their chosen Page 24.1243.5careers, their community, and the world.”9 Courses in the humanities are included in thecurriculum across major areas so that the student engineer is more fully aware of the socialresponsibilities and better able to consider non-technical factors in the engineering decisionmaking process. While the CoE seeks to educate strong leaders and citizens, it does not, atpresent, include global learning experiences as part of its core mission. However, diversity