sequence for the BIOE Department at the University of Washington. Taylor currently pursues educational research and continuous improvement activities, with the ultimate goal of optimizing bioengineering curriculum design and student learning outcomes.Dr. Stephanie Pulford, Center for Engineering Learning and Teaching (CELT) Dr. Stephanie Pulford is an instructional consultant within University of Washington’s Center for Engi- neering Teaching & Learning, where she coordinates the Engineering Writing & Communication Devel- opment Program. Dr. Pulford’s professional background in engineering includes a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, an M.S. in Engineering Mechanics, and a B.S. in Aerospace Engineering as well as
-semester projects. Third, HGDshould provide an environment where student managers can manage their peers and find ways toresolve unforeseen problems. Fourth, we hope that innovative methods used in HGD might attractmore students interested in computer science, art, and entrepreneurism to Michigan Tech.A significant body of research suggests that integrating gaming programming and project-basedlearning into computer science curricula can capture student interest in computer science. For asummary of institutions which have attempted to integrate these ideas into curricula, see.1 Forexample, some2 have found that teams of students working collaboratively on game projects canpositively impact students’ attitudes about computer science, programming
Paper ID #6085Preferential Learning of Students in a Post-Secondary Introductory Engi-neering Graphics Course: A Preliminary Study Focused on Students At-RiskDr. Jeremy V Ernst, Virginia Tech Dr. Jeremy V. Ernst is an assistant professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning at Virginia Tech. He currently teaches graduate courses in STEM education foundations and contemporary issues in Integrative STEM Education. Dr. Ernst specializes in research focused on dynamic intervention means for STEM education students categorized as at-risk of dropping out of school. He also has curriculum research and development
theinter-relatedness of ideas across a broad range of modal engagements and realize how conceptsencountered in one form (e.g., an equation) relate to those same concepts encountered elsewhere(e.g., in a 3D device).Yet K-12 students can struggle to see the interrelatedness across these modal engagements thatare often apparent to curriculum developers and instructors. There is some evidence that studentsdo not readily make connections across different modal engagements. For example, in pre-college engineering classes many students struggle to integrate previously encountered geometryconcepts in activities such as computer-aided design (CAD) or measurement activities15 .Analyses of standardized tests also show that many students who take pre-college
College ofEngineering, an institution which promised integrated project work in all four years of itscurriculum.3 Before and since, and in many places besides Olin, promising engineering studentshave been enticed to attend a variety of innovative technical education programs that promisereal-world experience, training in widely applicable communications skills, and an impeccablefoundation in the principles of design and professional standards of practice.For example, WPI placed project-based learning at the core of its academic program in the early1970’s when it redesigned its graduation requirements to include two major projects.4 Oneproject undertaken within the student’s major field of study is usually completed during thesenior year. Another
institutionalized their undergraduate engineering curricula, and extensively shared their results with the engineering education community. He co-created the Integrated, First-Year Curriculum in Science, Engineering and Mathematics at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, which was recognized in 1997 with a Hesburgh Award Certificate of Excellence. He has authored or co-authored over 70 papers on engineering education in areas ranging from curricular change to faculty development. He is collaborating on NSF-supported projects for (i) renewal of the mechanics of materials course, (ii) improving preparation of students for Calculus I, (iii) systemic application of concept inventories. He is currently an ABET Program Evaluator and a
STEM education through research on curriculum development, teacher professional development, and student learning in integrated STEM environments. Dr. Alemdar currently serves as PI and co-PI for research on various NSF funded projects that focuses on engineering education, teacher networks and STEM learning environments. Her expertise includes program evaluation, social network analysis, mixed methods, and advanced quantitative methods. Dr. Alemdar is passionate advocate for equitable and inclusive STEM education. She actively engages with educators, students, and communities to promote the importance of STEM disciplines and education research in preparing the next generation for the challenges of the future. She
AC 2012-3917: IMPROVING ENGINEERING EDUCATION WITH EN-HANCED CALIBRATED PEER REVIEW ASSESSMENT OF A COLLAB-ORATIVE RESEARCH PROJECTDr. Patricia Carlson, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Patricia A. Carlson teaches at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. She is the author of over seventy publications and presentation. She has used her experience in educational technology on two large-scale Lilly Endowment grants and on two National Science Foundation-funded research projects. In addition to teaching, she is the Director of the PRISM Project, an outreach program that helps Indiana teachers of middle school science, mathematics, and technology to integrate new information technology applications into their
appropriatecontent? What teaching methods and curriculum models are preferable? Which works best:required course, ethics across-the-curriculum, integration of ethics and science, technology andsociety, or integration of the liberal arts into the engineering curriculum? Which outcomeassessment methods are most suitable?According to a “Survey of Ethics-Related Instruction in U.S. Engineering Programs”4, it wasfound that only 27 percent of ABET-accredited institutions listed an ethics related courserequirement, even though an increasing number of philosophers, engineers, and ethicists focustheir research and teaching on engineering ethics. What complicates the problem is that differentfaculty have provided varying definitions for what “understanding ethical
in their experiential learning. It isthe goal for the proposal to make these projects an essential component of the culture of service ofour department, and call for the integration of alumni, communities, and industry to join the effort.The initiative has been in progress for three years (2019-21) as a proof-of concept stage. It hasdemonstrated its potential to reach the intended goals. It is now looking for developing into aschool/college wide initiative.Curricular structureThe backbone of the Chemical Engineering curriculum at the University of Pittsburgh is asequence of six Pillar courses, from sophomore to senior years: Foundations of ChemicalEngineering, Thermodynamics Transport Phenomena, Reactive Process Engineering, ProcessControl
anddisseminating lessons derived from writing studies that allow instructors to break out ofdysfunctional, labor-intensive traditional practices, example: Yoritomo, Turnipseed, Cooper,Elliott, Gallagher, Popovics, Prior, and Ziles).“Embedding Writing in Experiential Learning” (Corneal, Morrow, Volz, Saterbak, Conrad,Pfeiffer, Lamb, and Kitch) addresses means of achieving all three of the interrelated goals andprovides a good overview of the diversity of approaches used to integrate technical writing intoexperiential learning of various forms (co-op experiences, design courses, collaboration withpractitioners, and throughout an engineering curriculum). A common theme in all of theseinterventions is improving student motivation and the efficacy of writing
not only themodules they were building, but, more importantly, the interfaces among these modules.Moreover, we feel that multidisciplinary teams and prototyping create an atmosphere thatencourages entrepreneurial thinking†. The large body of knowledge that students must masterwithin their chosen areas of study often results in limited exposure to other disciplines.Involvement with a multidisciplinary team introduces students to the critical problems that theircolleagues are attempting to solve as a new product is developed and introduced into themarketplace. Furthermore, prototyping can quickly validate good ideas, suggest improvements,identify problems related to the integration of various subsystems, and be used to gauge possible
the effective amount of lecture time, resulting in an increased chance that the instructoris not capable of fully covering the material in the original course syllabus. In the two case studycourses, this impact was negligible because a significant amount of fundamental conceptspresented were synthesized from other courses in the curriculum. SE 1 provided an introduction(roadmap) to concepts students would learn in future courses, while SE 103 synthesized topicslearned in previous courses. Instead of classes in which lectures are primarily used to restate thetextbook and students are taught procedures to solve a limited set of problem types, these twocourses aim to get the students to understand and apply concepts to general problems and
scripts can bedistributed via an online course management system, or even via email or text. One option is toconduct a course in a computer lab, though in the author’s experience sufficient numbers ofstudents bring laptops or tablets to class that working in a lab isn’t necessary if students team upfor activities. Students can also use their phones by launching the live scripts in the MATLABMobile environment.When integrating the virtual activities into class time, it is important to structure the class so thatthe activities help the students achieve the desired outcomes. For example, the author has foundit helpful to provide the students a very direct question that they can try to answer as a result ofthe activity, rather than asking something
equipstudents with competencies to perform particular tasks once they join the workforce [2], andmaking sure that the engineering curriculum delivers the outcomes that the company needs is oneof its goals. Oftentimes, the development of core knowledge, such as science and mathematics,comes first in an engineering program. The next step is discipline-specific coursework, whichconcludes with a design project [3] It is essential to impart foundational knowledge and abilitiesto engineering students, especially at the undergraduate level, and new engineers should have aset of skills pertinent to their future professions [4]. Employers nowadays are finding itchallenging to identify and hire engineering graduates who can "hit the ground running” [5]–[7].Based
, ideally multidisciplinary in nature, must be project based andinclude formal design, implementation and test processes.” (emphasis added)Faculty searched for a technology that would allow both EET and MET students to contributeequally to the success of the project, and decided upon additive manufacturing. Students havebeen exposed extensively through formal course material covering 3D printing technology andwould be familiar with the operation of 3D printers in general. Therefore, it was reasoned afamiliarity with the project goal of designing and constructing a self-replicating 3D printer wouldgive students more confidence in tackling the difficult task of managing an extended project overboth the design and manufacture phases, and mastering
students pick thetopics of the project recommended by the faculty, industry representatives, or chosen by thestudents based on their experience during co-op cycles. This capstone experience allows studentsto demonstrate their knowledge and skills at a professional level. The course sequence isfinalized by the completion of a working prototype and a presentation of the project to the SeniorDesign Project Committee, AET students and faculty, and general audience during the thirdweek of May.Introduction The mission of the Applied Engineering Technology program is to provide contemporary students with an academic foundation and practical education in engineering technology through an outstanding curriculum and applied research
” with CSR in Geological Engineering. All professors agreed that CSR is an important topic to teach in undergraduate curriculum, thoughsuggested methods for teaching these topics vary. Four overarching terms were identified in our initialinterviews: integrated, separate, implicit, and explicit, which from here will be referred to in its entirety asthe ISIE classification (Figure 2). By classifying pedagogy in these terms, it helps us to understandoverarching themes in teaching styles and how easily identifiable CSR topics are for students, as well ashow in-depth into CSR topics the techniques go. “Implicit” in this case indicates more subtle methods ofmentioning CSR, not using the term directly, and not making it the centrally focused
., Kruschwitz, N., Laur, J., & Schley, S. (2008). The necessary revolution: How individuals and organizations are working together to create a sustainable world. New York: Doubleday14. Ramsey, J. (n.d.). An integrated science and technology undergraduate curriculum. Unpublished manuscript. College of Integrated Science and Technology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA.15. Fluellen, Jr., J. (2011, November 18-20). Preparing 21st Century minds: Using brain research to enhance cognitive skills for the future. Creating a nation of innovators: A brief report of the Learning & Brain Conference, Boston.16. Daly, S., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J., Seifert, C. & Gonzalez. (2012). Design heuristics in engineering concept
were funded as curriculumdevelopment projects in 1998 (e.g., Enhanced Engineering Education Experience DUE-8854555and Integrated First Year Engineering Curriculum DUE-8953553), with the first of the eight fullfledged engineering coalitions funded in 1999 as multi-institutional experiments in innovation inengineering education. By 1991, an award was made to Richard Felder of North Carolina StateUniversity for a longitudinal study of the effects of innovative teaching (DUE-9150407) and in1993 prestigious NSF Young Investigator awards were given to engineers Cynthia Atman of theUniversity of Washington (DRL-9358516) and Martin Ramirez of Johns Hopkins University(DRL-9358518). Atman’s research examined how first-year engineering students
possible as it is possible to learn the business side “[…] moreeasily and without sort of formal education.” (I09M, Pos. 13).5. Discussion and ImplicationsPrior studies show different approaches to implementing and assessing the impact of PBLmechatronics education [35–38]. However, they mainly focus on the teaching approach itself orevaluate the short-term effects on students.Based on our analyses, integrating the PBL approach in this mechatronics course sequence hascreated a technically intense learning experience valuable to future entrepreneurs. Students learnabout the theory, apply it to an open problem, and master the mechatronics skill set. Students andteams support each other, and the teaching team encourages a collaborative environment
-120.8. Coyle EJ, Jamieson LH, Oakes WC. Integrating engineering education and community service: Themes for the future of engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education. 2006;95(1):7-11.9. VanderSteen J. Humanitarian Engineering in the Engineering Curriculum. Kingston, Canada: Civil Engineering, Queen's University 2008.10. Mehta K, Morais DB, Zhao Y, Brannon ML, Zappe S. Milking the Rhino - Innovative Solutions Showcase: Promoting Ethics Education, User-Centered Design and Social Entrepreneurship in the Global Context. Paper presented at: ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition; 26-29 June, 2011; Vancover, BC.11. Baillie C. Engineers within a local and global society. Synthesis Lectures on Engineering
accreditationrequirements include a need for graduates to demonstrate an ability to compete in the globalmarket, the changing dynamics of globalization is compelling institutions to explore and provideopportunities for graduates to compete globally.Major differences There are a few significant differences in the program content. Firstly, and the most significantdifference is the duration of the programs. Whereas the Penn State, and indeed all baccalaureatedegree engineering programs in the United States, takes four years, the UNILAG programs takefive years to complete. Secondly, the UNILAG program includes one semester of field practicalexperience as an integral component of the program. Including the summer holidays, thestudents have to complete three semesters
decision-making. This paperexamines how integrating the development of these professional skills into core engineeringsubjects—such as Thermodynamics, Fluid Mechanics, and Electrical Circuits—can foster a morecomprehensive and holistic student education. Through the use of problem-based learning andreferencing real-world applications, the approach aims to enhance both technical knowledge andessential soft skills. The paper also explores alternative assessment methods that extend beyondtraditional exams to evaluate competencies crucial for professional success. By aligningengineering curricula with industry expectations, and supporting faculty development in this area,the study offers a framework for curriculum design that strengthens both
time for testing, feedback from users, andreflection.The spring 2011 “Sustainable Energy Technology” course was an instance of the indirect model.Two teams of students (7 of the 30 students enrolled) worked on projects that had been definedbefore the start of class and in this case the faculty member in charge acted as proxy for thecommunity partner. The projects (a building scale energy use analysis and a district-wide datacollection, aggregation, and analysis) had community based components and aligned with thecourse goal of students completing a design project that integrated a sustainable energytechnology with existing infrastructure (only the students in these community related projectswere surveyed.) Both projects were data rich and
developing curriculums that are accepted across international borders. Bymaking engineering programs more flexible, has the engineering profession opened the door tocreating degree programs that can be completed in less than four years?One idea that has been implemented in various formats and locations is a three-year degreeprogram. With the increasing demand to justify education content, cost, and success this seemslike an appealing option to many, particularly those outside the engineering profession.However, the question remains whether the content of a three-year program can meetaccreditation expectations and match the rigor expected by the public and industry. Europeansasked themselves the same question twenty years ago, and interestingly, many
engineering curriculum: They exist side-by-side, institutionally parallel as opposed to convergent. Therefore, an element of bait-and-switchremains, but the outlet of creative, synthetic, hands-on design in an intimate, supportive learningenvironment is both present and institutionally legitimated as part of students’ formalizededucational experience. This arrangement challenges the logic of exclusion prevalent within theengineering-only programming by overlaying a logic of engagement on top of the standardfundamentals-first engineering curriculum. Page 26.616.13Since PDI operates outside of Rensselaer’s core engineering curricula, it provides only a
Manufacturing Education in the UK, in: 23rd Annu. Int.Solid Free. Fabr. Symp., Laboratory for Freeform Fabrication and University of Texas at Austin, Austin,USA, 2012: pp. 1–13.[5] J.H. Bøhn, Integrating rapid prototyping into the engineering curriculum ‐ a case study, RapidPrototyp. J. 3 (1997) 32–37. doi:10.1108/13552549710169264.[6] G. Celani, Digital Fabrication Laboratories: Pedagogy and Impacts on Architectural Education,Nexus Netw. J. 14 (2012) 469–482. doi:10.1007/s00004‐012‐0120‐x.[7] R.E. Stamper, D.L. Dekker, Utilizing rapid prototyping to enhance undergraduateengineering education, in: 30th Annu. Front. Educ. Conf., IEEE, Kansas City, USA, 2000:pp. 1–4. doi:10.1109/FIE.2000.896570.[8] K. Stier, R. Brown, Integrating Rapid Prototyping
arenot limited to any region or specific curriculum. 2. Course contentsThe course material is divided into two sections as follows:Part I-An Introduction to Basic Python SkillsIn this course, students are expected to already know the basics of college algebra, trigonometry,and statistics. This section: 1. Describes how Python is applied in different disciplines of engineering and a standard problem-solving procedure is proposed. 2. Shows how to install Python from available platforms (i.e. Spyder IDE, Jupyter Notebook, and online platforms). 3. Introduces the commonly used libraries of Python in engineering. This section also details the wide variety of built-in functions that are available in each of these libraries. 4
Campbell University’s School of Engineering is in thedevelopment of engineering identity. As part of the first- unique position of developing a new engineering programyear experience, methods employed to foster community within a liberal arts context. In addition to providing high-and identity development included four main avenues quality engineering coursework, the faculty are workingalong with three cross-cutting themes. The four main together to provide consistent messaging and intentionalavenues for development were the first-year engineering departmental norms and practices across an integrated(FYE) design course sequence, an FYE seminar, engineering curriculum. In the 2016