-workshop survey; eleven handouts during the workshop that were either completed individually, in dyads,or in small groups; and a follow-up survey in the fall semester of 2018.Data AnalysisA thematic analysis [17] was conducted by categorizing each quote based on emergent themes within thehigher-level categories of student assets and challenges, corresponding to the two prompts on the handout.Thematic analysis is an iterative analysis process that includes reading and rereading participantresponses, developing categories to capture the key component(s) of the responses, and then combining,collapsing, and/or renaming categories based on examinations of the other responses [17]. In addition,each response was coded for workshop location (Texas or
).EverydayCognition:ItsDevelopmentinSocial Context,Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress. Secules,S.,A.Gupta,A.Elby,E.Tanu,SupportingtheNarrativeAgencyofa MarginalizedEngineeringStudent,JournalofEngineeringEducation107(2),1-33, 2018 Turner,D.W.,III(2010).Qualitativeinterviewdesign:Apracticalguidefornovice investigators.TheQualitativeReport,15(3),754-760 U.S.CentersforDiseaseControl(2016).YouthRisksBehaviorSurvey. Woods,D.R.(1994).Problem-BasedLearning:HowtoGaintheMostinPBL, Waterdown,Ontario:D.R.WoodsPublishing. 17
initiatives, teacher and faculty professional development programs, and S-STEM programs.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 several engineering education research projects, including one on
Engineering Strategic Goal of Becoming a National Model of Inclusivity and Collaboration. In The Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity annual conference. Washington, DC.Bothwell, M., Furman, K., Driskill, Q.-L., Warner, R., Shaw, S., & Ozkan-Haller, T. (2018b). Empowering faculty and administrators to re-imagine a socially just institution through use of critical pedagogies. In Annual Conference of the Collaborative Network for Engineering and Computing Diversity. Washington, DC.Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives, and… tensions with professional identity? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339–346.Bucciarelli, L. L
a faculty devel- opment and leadership program to train and recruit diverse PhD students who wish to pursue academic positions in engineering or applied science after graduation. Dr. Sandekian earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at CU Boulder in 1992 and 1994, respectively. She went on to earn a Specialist in Education (Ed. S.) degree in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Higher Education and Student Affairs Leadership in December 2017, both from the University of Northern Colorado. She is a Founding Leader of the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) Virtual Community of Practice (VCP) for LGBTQ+ Inclusion in Engineering and a facilitator of
Conference, Indianapolis, IN. https://peer. asee. org/20142, 2014.[6] W. C. Lee and K. J. Cross, "Help me help you: Building a support network for minority engineering students," age, vol. 23, p. 1, 2013.[7] J. P. Bean and B. S. Metzner, "A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition," Review of educational Research, vol. 55, pp. 485-540, 1985.[8] V. Tinto, "Constructing Educational Communities: Increasing Retention in Challenging Circumstances," Community College Journal, vol. 64, pp. 26-29, 1994.[9] W. C. Lee Jr, "Providing co-curricular support: A multi-case study of engineering student support centers," Virginia Tech, 2015.[10] W.C. Lee, L. Moyer, A. Godwin, and D. Knight,”Instrument Development: Measuring
of classes (see the below section regarding s tudent and faculty reflections). These new courses will be offered s tarting in 2019, and will serve CIA minors and discipline specific majors as well: ART 376 The Art of Mixed Reality: Conceptual creation, storytelling, interface design in 3D virtual and augmented realms, visual styles and use of metaphors. A theorybased view of mixed reality (MR) worlds, including coding and software, the making of 3D assets, technical challenges and constraints. The students will develop, research, write and propose their own idea for a MR project. ART 470 Conceptual Art and Storyboarding for
, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Comput Educ. 2014;78:227-236.16. Kim MK, Kim SM, Khera O, Getman J. The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. Internet High Educ. 2014;22:37-50.17. McLaughlin JE, Roth MT, Glatt DM, et al. The flipped classroom: a course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Acad Med. 2014;89(2):236- 243.18. Piaget J, Elkind D. Six Psychological Studies. Vol 462. Vintage Books; 1968.19. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111(23):8410-8415.20. Topping K, Ehly S
Management, Reliability for System of Systems, and Systems Simulation. He is a topic leader in systems thinking, including systems theory and complex systems, for the Society for Engineering and Management Systems (SEMS). Prior to joining the doctoral program at ODU, he worked as a systems analyst and operations officer for five years. He is a past proceedings chair of the American Society for Engineering Management and is currently a member of the Academy of Management and Institute of Industrial Engineers. He holds a BS in Business, an MA in Operations Management, and PhD in Engineering Management from Old Dominion University.Mr. Parker Jones, Mississippi State University BS Industrial EngineeringEmily S. Wall
students had never heard of these goals but were alleager to incorporate the sustainable development applications into their proposed design projects.Each student was asked to conduct research on the UN Goals and then write a brief essay onwhich goal(s) they wanted to incorporate into their proposed design project. Each group selectedgoals that were most applicable to their design project which can be found on Table 2. Of the 17UN Goals the engineering students selected eight as illustrated in Figure 2. • Goal 5: Gender Equality • Goal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation • Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy • Goal 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure • Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities • Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and
-engineering-programs-2017-2018/#outcomes[4] M. Eodice, A.E. Geller, and N. Lerner, The Meaningful Writing Project. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.Press, 2017.[5] S. Pearlman and D. Carrillo, The Critical Thinking Initiative. www.thecriticalthinkinginitiative.org(2017).[6] B. Wood and A. Ganago, Using Arduino in Engineering Education: Motivating Students to Growfrom a Hobbyist to a Professional. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah. June2018.[7] Binary check sheet rubric, ABET Symposium, Baltimore, MD, 2017.[8] Wiggins, G. and J. McTighe, Understanding by Design (Expanded Second Edition). Alexandria, VA,USA, Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD).[9] Siegel, C. Putting the Pieces Together: Linking Learning
”, International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 273-288, 2003.[5] Chua, K.J., Yang, W.M., and Leo, H.L., “Enhanced and conventional project based learning in anengineering design module”, International Journal of Technology and Design Education. Vol. 24, Issue4, pp. 437-458, November 2004.[Sixty S. Redkar, “Teaching Advanced Vehicle Dynamics Using a Project Based Learning (PBL)Approach”, Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research; Vol. 13, Iss. 3, pp. 17-29, 2012. [7] E. Sokic and M. Ahic-Djokic, "Simple Computer Vision System for Chess Playing RobotManipulator as a Project-based Learning Example", IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processingand Information Technology 2008. pp. 75-79, 2008.[8] Krystian Radlak, Marcin Fojcik
from the pole, the ratio between the “height of the person” (L) to the“height of the pole” (h) is the same as the “distance from the person to the far edge of theshadow” (s-x) to the “distance from the pole to the edge of the shadow” (s):𝐿 𝑠−𝑥 = 𝑠ℎor ℎ𝑠 = ℎ−𝐿 𝑥Clearly,𝑑𝑠 ℎ =𝑑𝑥 ℎ−𝐿Also, since the walking speed of the person is 𝑑𝑥 𝑣= 𝑑𝑡we can find the change in the shadow with respect to time using the Chain Rule:𝑑𝑠 𝑑𝑠 𝑑𝑥 ℎ = 𝑑𝑥 𝑑𝑡 = ℎ−𝐿 𝑣𝑑𝑡Pendulum period (Refer to Figure 9) Figure 9: Finding pendulum period The
fulfilling.References[1] A. R. Bielefeldt and N. E. Canney, “Working engineers’ satisfaction with helping people and society through their jobs,” Eur. J. Eng. Educ., pp. 1–15, May 2018.[2] L. A. P. Daloz and S. D. Parks, “Mentoring Big Questions and Worthy Dreams for Young Adults,” Adult Learn., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 20–22, Jan. 2003.[3] J. W. Weiss, M. F. Skelley, J. C. Haughey, and D. (Tim) Hall, “Calling, New Careers And Spirituality A Reflective Perspective For Organizational Leaders And Professionals,” in Spiritual Intelligence at Work: Meaning, Metaphor, and Morals, M. L. Pava and P. Primeaux, Eds. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2003, pp. 175–201.[4] J. Neafsey, A Sacred Voice Is Calling: Personal Vocation and Social Conscience
non-business majors. The authors are continuing to improve this wireless watermonitoring system to meet the various needs of the water analysis applications.AcknowledgementsThis work was supported by Dr. Hur’s Texas A&M start-up research fund.References[1] U. Borchers, J. Gray, K. C. Thompson, “Water Contamination Emergencies: Monitoring,Understanding and Acting,” Royal Society of Chemistry, 2011.[2] R. E. Paull, “Effect of temperature and relative humidity on fresh commodity quality.”Postharvest biology and technology 15.3, pp. 263-277, 1999[3] Texas A&M Engineering, “NSF I-CORPS” Available: https://engineering.tamu.edu/student-life/eep/nsf-i-corps.html[4] S. G. Blank, B. Dorf, “The startup owner's manual: The step-by-step guide for
positively correlated with the round 1 and round 2 (stronger correlation)scores and they are even stronger correlated with the number of improvements from round 1(individual score) to round 2 (team score). This may indicate that team-based activities in theclassroom are important. Further analysis would be needed to study the separate effect of round 1performance and team-based improvement.Figure 1: shows a heatmap of Dataset 3’s activity scores, df scores (round 2 minus round 1) andExam 1 Score, in addition to the constructed feature (Number of df score above zero/ Number ofdf). Data is sorted in ascending order of unit 1 exam score. Most activities result in improvedscores after the team discussions, compared to individual work. However, Unit 1
).Future workThe course development support offered by the UFIT Center of Instructional Technology andTraining has the following phases: Design and Development, Implementation, and Evaluate andRevise. We are currently in the design and development phase and will do the implementationsoon. In the future, the ID and I will conduct surveys with students and review the coursefeedback to find other short-term and long-term opportunities to improve the online students’learning experience. References[1] J. A. Barker, Paradigms : the business of discovering the future. HarperBusiness, 1993.[2] S. Coyner and P. McCann, “Advantages and challenges of teaching in an electronic environment: The accommodate
further analysis needs to be done to be sure that students are makingimprovements in their teaming skills, and not just reporting an improvement. In addition to acloser look at assessing team performance, the formation of the teams can also be examined.Both the safe partner and the changing of teams after the first project could be analyzed todiscover if there are benefits to these teaming procedures.References[1] E. Seat and S. M. Lord, “Enabling Effective Engineering Teams: A Program for TeachingInteraction Skills,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 385-390, 1999.[2] H. A. Witkin and D. R. Goodenough, “Field Dependence and Interpersonal Behavior,”Psychological Bulletin, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 661-689, 1977.[3] L. J. Shuman, M
students’ pathways into and through engineering, so we candesign better experiences.Two recent studies that provide a foundation for this work are the studies by Chen, Brawner,Ohland, and Orr [3] and Reid, Hertenstein, Fennell, Spingola, and Reeping [4]. In these studies,researchers compare first-year engineering across institutions to create initial knowledge regardingdifferences across various universities and engineering programs. In the first study, Chen et al. [3]used the Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development(MIDFIELD) to create a taxonomy of approaches to matriculation in engineering. Chen et al.’s [3]research gives insight into the administrative perspective on first-year studentsexperiences
Practices for Team-Based Assistive Design CoursesDue to the increasing number of studies highlighting the benefits assistive technology and otherreal-world biomedical application courses, more of these course types have begun to emerge. Asa result, there is a need for best practices and standardization of such courses. Goldberg andPearlman discuss best practices for team-based assistive technology design courses in a surveypaper. They identify and encourage the use of eight best practices: 1. Identifying a client through a reliable clinical partner; 2. Allowing for transparency between the instructors, the client, and the team(s); 3. Establishing multi-disciplinary teams; 4. Using a process-oriented vs. solution-oriented product
. SIAM review, 167–256, 2003.[3] T. Finin, Social networking on the semantic web. J. Learning organization, 418-435, 2005.[4] N. Lin, Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action, Cambridge University Press,New York, NY, 2001.[5] R. Burt, R, Social Capital: Theory and Research. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA,2001.[6] M. Kilduff, and W. Tsai, Social Networks and Organizations, Sage Publications, London,2003.[7] N. Moolenaar, A. Daly and P. Sleegers, “Ties with potential: social network structure andinnovation in Dutch elementary schools,” European Association for Research in Learning andInstruction (EARLI), Amsterdam, August 25-29, 2009[8] S. Moore, Finders and Keepers: Helping New Teachers Survive and Thrive in Our Schools
Engineers: the Problem and Its Solution,” in Aerospace Meeting and Exhibit , 1995. [3] J. Colwell, “Professional Skills for the New Economy : Their Place in Graduate Education in Engineering and Engineering Technology,” in Annual Conference & Exposition American Society for Engineering Education , 2010. [4] National Academy of Engineering, U. S., The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in The New Century . Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2004. [5] National Academy of Engineering, U. S., Educating The Engineer Of 2020: Adapting
, 2005.[8] I. De Los Rios-Carmenado, F. Rodriguez Lopez, and C. Perez Garcia, “PromotingProfessional Project Management Skills in Engineering Higher Education: Project-BasedLearning (PBL) Strategy,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol 31(1B), pp. 184-198, 2015.[9] K. Bougot-Robin, J. Paget, S.C. Atkins, and J.B. Edel, “Optimization and Design of anAbsorbance Spectrometer Controlled Using a Raspberry Pi To Improve Analytical Skills,”Journal of Chemical Education, pp. 1232-1240, Mar. 2016.[10] T.D. Giorgio and S.P. Brophy, “Challenge-Based Learning in Biomedical Engineering: ALegacy Cycle for Biotechnology,” Proceedings of the American Society for EngineeringEducation Annual Conference & Exposition, 2001.[11] J. Yao and S
Advanced Manufacturing Center, 2014, “New Paltz Celebrates Opening of MakerBot Innovation Center” [Online]. Available: http://www.newpaltz.edu/3d/makerbot.html.[4] Wilczynski, V., 2015, “Academic Makerspaces and Engineering Design,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–18.[5] Barrett, T. W., Pizzico, M. C., Levy, B., and Nagel, R. L., 2015, “A Review of University Maker Spaces A Review of University Maker Spaces Introduction,” 122nd ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., pp. 1–16.[6] Bashyam, S., Kuhn, J., and Seepersad, C. C., 2015, “A 3D Printing Vending Machine and Its Impact on the Democratization of 3D Printing on a College Campus,” Proceedings of the ASME 2015 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers
. Italso varied with time within institutions.This research can only show the required course pathway variations among institutions with FYEmatriculation models. To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of each of the coursepathways, further investigations can be conducted using student data. Reid, et al. [8] introduces ataxonomy which classifies introductory to engineering courses (classified as general engineeringin this paper). Moreover, future studies can use taxonomies like this to investigate FYE pathwaysbased on their course content and not only the course titles. V. REFERENCES[1] M. K. Orr, C. E. Brawner, S. M. Lord, M. W. Ohland, R. A. Layton, and R. A. Long, "Engineering
appropriate furniture. The objects were limited to 2’ x 1’ in size. ● Puzzles – each team had to contribute an easy and a hard puzzle, of which only one was selected to be used in the escape room. One of the committees (explained below) decided on which puzzles from each group would be used for the escape room ● 3D printed object – each team had to 3D print a small piece(s) that could be used in their puzzle or fabricated objectA jigsaw method was utilized to further split the class into escape room committees. Each teamcontributed one student to each committee. The purpose of the committees was to help connectthe escape room pieces together and included the following: ● Narrative –responsible for writing the story behind the escape
semester, themajority of students in EDSGN 100 are introduced to engineering design through an 8-week longdesign challenge of the instructor’s choosing. During this challenge, instructors lead studentsthrough the problem definition, customer needs identification, concept generation, conceptselection, prototyping, and iteration phases crucial to engineering design. In the course’s currentform, these steps are further augmented by the inclusion of six educational modules (“World ClassEngineer,” “Professional Communication,” “Innovation Process,” “Making,” “Seeing the BigPicture,” and “Grand Challenges”). However, as the modules were created after the majority ofinstructors had established their preferred design project(s) for the first 8 weeks, the
incarnations of the course, more emphasis has been placed on the team-based design projects, as evidenced by 50% of the course grade being contributed by team work.Table 1. Common grading scheme adopted for all EDSGN 100 sections. Assessment of individual proficiency (50%) Assessment of team work (50%) 20%: In-class Assessments Introductory Design Project(s) to support 25%: 15%: CAE Activities and Assessments learning of design process 5%: Making Activities Client-sponsored Design Project to 25%: 10%: General Assignments
need both during and after their education.By incorporating modern technologies (in this case Arduino and 3D printing) these projects canbe a strong introduction of how students will be able to use their technical skills to overcomechallenges in the future.Acknowledgements We’d like to thank the Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence at PennState for funding the equipment of the project. We’d also like to express our gratitude to all theinstructors for helping to run the project in Fall 2017, 2018, and Spring 2019 and our dedicatedmultimedia specialist for photography and videography.References[1] S. A. Ambrose, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching. (1st;1; ed.) 2010.[2] W. J. McKeachie, M. D. Svinicki
and P. McPherson, “What do employers want in terms of employee knowledge of technical standards and the process of standardization?,” in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2010.[4] A. S. Khan, A. Karim, and J. A. McClain, “The State of the Use of Standards in Engineering and Technology Education,” in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2013.[5] D. Katusic, P. Skocir, M. Kusek, G. Jezic, C. Ratti, and I. Bojic, “Hands-On Education about Standardization: Is That What Industry Expects?,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 133–144, May 2017.[6] M. G. Ivanovich, “Why can’t Johnny engineer? Infuse engineering education with reality.,” HPAC Engineering, vol. 73, no. 4, p. 7, 2001.[7] C.-G