relatedguidance.Advising is particularly important for engineering students. The results of a study performedon 113 undergraduates who left Engineering in 2004, 2007 and 2008 show that the top threefactors are: poor teaching and advising, the difficulty of the engineering discipline, and a lackof “belonging” within engineering [5].Our project framework is based on Lean Manufacturing principles [6]. Originally derivedfrom the Toyota Production System. Lean is a philosophy that aims to improve the efficiencyof a system by eliminating waste and continuous improvement [7]. While the origins of Leanhail from the manufacturing industry, service industries, such as healthcare, have adoptedLean and realized much success [8] [9].The main goal of this study is to enhance
learning, and how tobetter infuse 21st century skills into the classroom. As a result, new teaching strategies arenecessary so that faculty can have deeper understanding of students and can develop moreconfidence in working with today’s students. Such new strategies will help the transformationand adoption of high impact educational technology, and deepen faculty’s passion for teachingand the process of learning. Collaborations between faculty and industrial partners can be an efficient approach toimprove engineering technology education [16-20]. Such collaborations may includecollaborative lab delivery, student research mentorship, senior design project supervision, etc.Such collaborations can not only get faculty familiar with resources
. Classroom Demonstrations 3. Lightboard Videos 4. Mastering Engineering 5. Leveling the Playing FieldWhiteboard – Reducing PowerPointWhether to use PowerPoint or not is always a debate among Physics/Engineering instructors. Theviews on this topic are polarized. The camp which uses PowerPoint presentations advocatesorganization, clarity, and precision. On the other hand, the instructors who advocate the use ofwhiteboard take pride in modification of class, spontaneity, personalization, and pace. This paperencourages a mix of both methods.For example, a problem question was projected on the whiteboard and students were also giventhe problem question on a handout. This ensured that students had the correct problem and thatthere was no time
tech- nology grants (IBM $250,000, HP $45,000) that advance STEM education at QCC. Professor Mangra has experience, which includes integration testing WAN services providing voice, video and data services. He worked on TCP/IP, ATM, Frame Relay, DSL and Wireless technology. He has presented papers at the ASEE conferences. He mentored students on a project that demonstrates VOIP and firewall deployment system using an industry-standard security appliance protocol. The students presented there project at the QCC Honors conference. c American Society for Engineering Education, 20192019 ASEE Mid-Atlantic Fall Conference Engineering Diversity at Queensborough Community
conclusions; and an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge as needed, usingappropriate learning strategies. From the student’s perspective, participating in the developmentof this project allowed them to contextualize the design process in real time and develop theircritical thinking abilities. As opposed to theoretical engineering design projects that are based onan assembly of equations that can be ordered for a correct answer, this project encouraged moredeliberate independent scientific investigation which developed analytic skills, use of the entireengineering design process, and self-sustaining tools of personal activism. The realization by thestudents exemplifies the recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in lifelong
(50%), insufficient evidence (0%),or no attempt (0%); where the level of achievement of a LO was based on the number ofapplicable pieces of evidence sufficiently demonstrated in student work (see Table 1). Suchrubrics were used to assess student work on 12 problem sets, three midterm exams, and fiveproject milestones. Grading of problem sets and project milestones was completedpredominantly through the course learning management system, Blackboard LearnTM. Studentscould access their overall grade through Blackboard’s gradebook and their individual LOassessments and written feedback by drilling into the rubrics associated with assignments onBlackboard. Grading of exams was done both on students’ written exam papers which werereturned to
Graduate Research Assistant on the VT PEERS project studying middle school students regularly engaging in engineering activities. Drawing on previous experiences as a mathematics and engineering teacher, her current re- search interests include studying the disconnect between home and school, with a specific emphasis on prekindergarten students. She will continue to pursue these research interests in the coming years with the support of the NSF Graduate Research Fellowships Program. In addition, she dedicates her spare time to exhibiting at the Virginia Tech Science Festival and hosting several sessions for the Kindergarden-to- college (K2C) Initiative.Ms. Ashley R. Taylor, Virginia Tech Ashley Taylor is a doctoral
; but produced less than half thedegrees awarded to UC students. The UC are producing 2.5 times more degrees with half of thenumber of students enrolled [1].Research QuestionThe multiple phases of the research and critical lens used in the analysis provided a morecomplete understanding of the research question. The characteristics of the participants of thestudy allowed for the research question to be examined to understand the intersection of the firstgeneration status and gender. The hope is that understanding how women experienceundergraduate engineering programs at public state universities, the broadest impact onparticipation can be made. The goal of this project is to look at various stages of a woman’seducational journey in engineering
Systems Institute (CSI) at UWM. His research interests are renewable energy interface, energy storage, and microgrids. He has served as the primary investigator on several federal and industry funded research projects. Dr. Nasiri has published numerous technical journal and conference papers on related topics. He also seven patent disclosures. He is a co-author of the book ”Uninterruptible Power Supplies and Active Filters,” CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Dr. Nasiri is currently an Editor of IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Paper Review Chair for IEEE Trans- actions on Industry Applications, an Editor of Power Components and Systems, and Associate Editor of the International Journal of Power Electronics. He was the general
Engineering, NY, USA. In this role she supports and studies use of robotics in K-12 STEM education. Her other research interests include robotics, mechanical design, and biomechanics.Dr. Sheila Borges Rajguru, NYU’s Tandon School of Engineering Dr. Sheila Borges Rajguru is the Assistant Director of the Center for K-12 STEM Education, NYU Tan- don School of Engineering. As the Center’s STEAM educator and researcher she works with engineers and faculty to provide professional development to K-12 STEM teachers with a focus on social justice. She is currently Co-Principal Investigator on two NSF-grants that provide robotics/mechatronics PD to science, math, and technology teachers. In addition, she is the projects director of the
firm, and the director of Missouri’s Dam and Reservoir Safety Program. Since 1993, he has been at the University of Evansville, serving as department chair for the past 21 years. He continues to work as a consultant on projects involving the design and construction of new dams, modifications to existing dams, and the investigation of dam failures.Dr. Matthew Swenty P.E., Virginia Military Institute Matthew (Matt) Swenty obtained his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Civil Engineering from Missouri S&T and then worked as a bridge designer at the Missouri Department of Transportation. He returned to school to obtain his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Virginia Tech followed by research work at the Turner- Fairbank
, 2]. Training students to develop design thinking and skills will allow them to enterprofessional practice ready to participate in the challenge of infrastructure re-design. Indeed,ABET requires that students have “an ability to apply engineering design to producesolutions…” upon graduation [3]. Perhaps the most effective way to guide students indeveloping design skills is through engagement in real-world projects. Furthermore, providingauthentic design experiences in a supportive educational environment that encourages successcan build self-efficacy (one’s beliefs in their ability to achieve specific tasks), which in turn fuelsmotivation to succeed as an engineer [4]. Promoting engineering self-efficacy is a promisingstrategy for retaining
project). The next section of this paperprovides a description of the indirect assessment of the course which includes both studentinterview and end-of-term survey data. Some observations and the future direction of thecourse are then presented, which include plans to flip this course for the 2019 offering. Lastlythe paper ends with some concluding remarks.Motivation for Course in Power Distribution Engineering and SmartGridsThough both transmission and distribution power systems are essential for safely and reliablydelivering electric power from central generation stations to consumers, industry and academiahave traditionally concentrated on advancing transmission technologies. However, the recentexplosion of distributed energy resources (DER
develop entrepreneurially-minded engineers, EEPs oftenleverage student-centered teaching practices (e.g., project-based learning, group discussion, pitchcompetitions, mentorship, and experiential learning) to instill entrepreneurship practices such asopportunity identification, customer discovery, validation and pivoting [6], [7].The growth of EEPs has also fueled research in the area. Researchers have explored a variety ofEEP aspects such as their impact on student career choices, attitudes, and retention [8]–[10];assessed learning outcomes [11]; and have presented different models for EEPs [12].Cumulatively, these studies have provided empirical support for the benefits of entrepreneurshipeducation in the professional development of
; engineering design decisions are consequential for the design and how it performsupon implementation. To use a spoon, the person may need to like the color; and the material ofthe blade must be strong enough for an endurance task. Because design decisions areconsequential, undergraduate engineering programs have a responsibility to prepare students asdecision makers.Capstone design courses allow undergraduate engineering students to experience open-endeddesign projects before starting their professional careers. As such, capstone serves as anopportunity to develop students’ ability to make decisions in an ill-structured setting. Typically,explicit instruction related to decision making includes an introduction to rationalistic tools, suchas decision
to rise.A number of existent research studies focused on exploring the learning outcomes ofengineering students after short-term international learning experiences. Such short-term experiences increased partially owing to the intense global competition and theimportance for engineering students to develop global competence [6] [7]. For instance,Bender (2009) interviewed 32 engineering students who participated in internationalresearch projects and found that these students have developed writing skills, problem-solving skills, independent skills and self-confidence [8]. Jesiek et al (2012) used theUniversal-Diverse Orientation instrument and measured international engineeringstudents’ openness to and appreciation of cultural diversity. Their
and served as chair of LED. When theTechnological Literacy Constituency Committee was formed in 2006, most of the officers of thenew group were also members of LED.In alignment with the new committee, there is a marked increase in numbers of papersmentioning “technological literacy” in 2005 and 2006. As interest in technological literacy grewwithin ASEE and, perhaps more significantly, in the National Academy of Engineering and theNational Science Foundation, the projects and goals of the two groups diverged, though theywere never in competition or estranged from each other. Their interests began to overlap moreextensively again when the constituent committee became the Technological and EngineeringLiteracy/Philosophy of Engineering (TELPhE
University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Dr. Catherine Mobley, Clemson University Catherine Mobley, Ph.D., is a Professor of Sociology at Clemson University. She has over 30 years experience in project and program evaluation and has worked for a variety of consulting firms, non-profit agencies, and government organizations, including the Rand Corporation, the American Association of Retired Persons, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. Since 2004, she been a member of the NSF-funded MIDFIELD research project on engineering education; she has served as a Co-PI on three research projects, including one
cooperative, project-based integrative and interdisciplinary learning. Although aproposed AB program in engineering was neither successful nor sustained, this institutionalsensibility is still reflected in WPI practices at the course level (e.g. [13]) as well as larger-scaleinitiatives.Since the late-1960s moment at which boundary-transgressing programs like the WPI Plan andLafayette College’s AB in Engineering (which later became a program in Engineering Studies)curriculum were launched, disciplinary boundaries have remained strong, sometimes even beingfortified on campuses. Integrative activities flourished only on the margins of traditionaldisciplines, rarely offered much institutional nourishment or light (e.g. [7]). Even at HarveyMudd, the
to amplify current efforts at HSIs? Given thediversity of the Latinx student population, this paper also explores differences in the perceptions ofeducators from two different geographical regions of the United States. Further, as educationalresponsibilities and passions can vary with instructor role (e.g., tenured, tenure-track, lecturers,professional faculty), this study examines the differences in perspectives across instructor role. Byunderstanding how engineering educators at HSIs describe their students, discrepancies can be identifiedwhich could lead to opportunities for affecting educational change, resulting in an improved educationalexperience at HSIs and other institutions educating Latinx engineers.MethodologyResearch project
to learn from accomplished profes- sors. Periodically, she works for UW-Madison as a Visiting Instructor. Her previous research explored biofilms and biological production of fuel chemicals at the Center for Biofilm Engineering.Dr. Susannah C. Davis, Oregon State University Susannah C. Davis is a postdoctoral research associate in the School of Chemical, Biological and Envi- ronmental Engineering at Oregon State University. She received her Ph.D. and M.Ed. from the University of Washington, and her B.A. from Smith College. She is currently working on the NSF-funded REvolu- tionizing engineering and computer science Departments (RED) project at OSU. Her research focuses on organizational learning and change
physical science in two different high schools before joining the faculty at CSU in 2004. At Cleveland State University, teaching and partnerships are the focus of Dr. Jackson’s efforts. Dr. Jackson has extensive experience in curriculum redesign within the teacher education programs and in STEM education. She is currently serving as Program Coordinator for Adolescent/Young Adult (AYA) and K-12 Foreign Language teacher licensure programs and teaches and supervises students in the AYA program for mathematics and science teachers. Dr. Jackson also is a co-principal investigator for several grants related to STEM education, teacher preparation, project-based instruction and computer science education. Dr. Jackson serves as
; Astronautics from Purdue University, West Lafayette in 1989. In 2004, he joined the Virginia Commonwealth University as a Professor of Mechanical Engineering. He has taught previously at Purdue University campus in Indianapolis (IUPUI). He has taught several courses in design, mechanics of materials, optimization, and directed many interdisciplinary projects related to design. Dr. Pidaparti’s research interests are in the broad areas of multi-disciplinary design, computational mechanics, nanotechnology, and related topics. Dr. Pidaparti has published over 250 technical papers in refereed journals and conference proceedings. Dr. Pidaparti received a Research Initiation Award from the National Science Foundation and the Young
engineer.IntroductionEmployee training supports the knowledge base of an individual or a collective agency andensures that staff are equipped with the information needed to complete a project or activity. Asupdates in technology, standards, and policy drive changes in engineering practice, it becomesvital that employees have access to timely and meaningful training opportunities. This training,which categorically falls under the broad umbrella of workforce development or continuingeducation, includes topics that range from discipline-specific content to those focusing onorganizational dynamics, and can be presented in a wide variety of formats such as in-personpresentations, hardcopy materials for self-study, or as online short courses and seminars. Thesetraining
instructional delivery with traditional one-on-one classroominstruction. Whereas the online content provides students with information in a manner that isflexible in time, place, and pace, the classroom element provides them with an opportunity to getinstructor guidance, collaborate with peers, practice applying concepts, and exploring topics ingreater detail. The online and classroom portions are blended through their integrated andsynergistic nature.This paper summarizes the results of a project in which a “blended learning” model was used fortwo different required courses (taught by two different faculty) within the Constructiondepartment. One course was a sophomore level “Introduction to Structures” course and the otherwas a senior level course in
concepts, especially process improvement methods, it With the growing demand of Lean and Six Sigma becomes evident that active project-based learning is verytraining in both higher education and industry, hands-on effective. It allows students to apply theoretical knowledgesimulation games have been widely used as an effective in solving real-world problems [2]. Using collaborativeteaching tool to demonstrate Lean concepts. The interactive activities and physical laboratory simulations, students
at Reynolds Community College in Richmond, Virginia in 2009 and moved to VCU in August 2016. Debra has served on the advisory board for Lighthouse for Computer Science (LH4CS). The goal of the Lighthouse project is to improve computer science diversity through faculty professional development. In addition, she is a member of the Advisory Council for the Deep Run High School’s Center for Informa- tion Technology in Glen Allen, Virginia, where she provides program support and assists in curriculum development for their technology-based preparatory program for future computer scientists.Dr. Mandayam Thirunarayanan, Florida International University Mandayam Osuri Thirunarayanan is an associate professor in the School of
Paper ID #24856The Role of the Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge in ASCE’s Raise theBar EffortHorst Brandes, University of Hawaii Horst Brandes is Professor of Geotechnical Engineering at the University of Hawaii (UH), where he has been a faculty member for the past 23 years. As a researcher, he has published nearly 100 scientific papers and conducted numerous research projects with funding in the millions of Dollars. He is the senior geotechnical engineering faculty member at UH. In addition to being a faculty member, he has been engaged in engineering practice for the past 25 years. In 2004, he founded Applied
Georgia Tech. Prior to his current appointments, he served as a Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education, via the National Academy of Engineering, as well as an Assistant Professor of Materials Engineering at the California Polytechnic State University.Megan F. Gambs, Boise State University Megan Gambs is the Project Manager for the Institute for STEM & Diversity Initiatives at Boise State University. She works towards improving access and success for those historically marginalized in STEM through programs with and opportunities for various stakeholder groups (e.g. students, teachers, and faculty). Her experience serving as a middle school science teacher in Nampa, Idaho, inform her work
results inthis paper.ResultsNegative perceptions of makerspace cultureUnderstanding women engineering students’ experiences and perceptions of makerspaces couldhelp us better understand how to improve makerspaces. While the participants had a wide rangeof perceptions, these negative themes point to critical concerns in makerspaces.One salient negative theme that participants experienced was that male students would oftendoubt their competency or attempt to dominate their project. While these women may interjectand attempt to assert their knowledge, the men would disregard them and sometimes even takeover their work.For instance, Betty, a fourth-year mechanical engineering student, described multiple instancesin which different male makers