interviews taking place in the years following.For example, it was found that of the original 20 graduate students interviewed, only five weremaster’s degree candidates, which is not representative of the larger population in whichmaster’s students make up over 60% of the engineering and textiles graduate students. Toaddress this, five more master’s students were interviewed in the spring of 2012. An additionalthree PhD students offered to speak to us at that time, so they were interviewed as well. Deeperanalysis of the faculty interviews revealed early-career faculty as users that the library might beable to better support, and so additional interviews of faculty in this category were conducted inthe spring of 2013 to acquire more data from this
past several decades, there has been an increasing emphasis on the importance of engineerspossessing important professional skills, including global readiness or awareness. In 2004, theNational Academy of Engineering (NAE) described the Engineer of 2020 as being proficient in“interdisciplinary teams [with] globally diverse team members” (p. 55).1 As the NAE stated,“While certain basics of engineering will not change, the global economy and the way engineerswill work will reflect an ongoing evolution that began to gain momentum a decade ago.” (p. 4).Engineering graduates will be called to solve increasingly global problems and to work in teamsthat contain members who are either from international locations or are globally distributed.Across the
Paper ID #12161Electronic Notebooks to Document the Engineering Design Process: FromPlatform to ImpactDr. Rachel Louis Kajfez, Ohio State University Dr. Rachel Louis Kajfez is an Assistant Professor of Practice in the Engineering Education Innovation Center and the Department of Civil, Environmental, and Geodetic Engineering at The Ohio State Univer- sity. She earned her B.S. and M.S. degrees in Civil Engineering from Ohio State and earned her Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Virginia Tech. Her research interests focus on the intersection between motivation and identity of undergraduate and graduate students, first-year
because the majority of today’s engineering graduates do not have the broadbackground necessary to understand, take charge of and drive large-scale projects to completionin an economic fashion” (5). To the end of correcting these perceived deficiencies, Gordon hasfunded a number of engineering leadership degree programs in universities. One of them is atNortheastern University (NEU) in Boston, MA. Key elements of the degree program at NEUinclude experiential learning; distinguished speakers from industry to discuss and modelleadership; mentoring from the program, an industry partner, and the technical faculty; cross-cohort learning (6). A similarly ambitious revision of engineering education has been on-going atthe Massachusetts Institute of
women and underrepresented minorities. He received his M.S. in Industrial & Systems Engineering from Virginia Tech and his B.S. in Industrial Engineering from Clemson University.Dr. Holly M Matusovich, Virginia Tech Dr. Matusovich is an Assistant Professor and Assistant Department Head for Graduate Programs in Vir- ginia Tech’s Department of Engineering Education. She has her doctorate in Engineering Education and her strengths include qualitative and mixed methods research study design and implementation. She is/was PI/Co-PI on 8 funded research projects including a CAREER grant. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty. Her research expertise includes using
Education in Engineering (ILead) at the University of Toronto. Her research interests include engineering leadership, engineering ethics education, critical theory, teacher leadership and social justice teacher unionism.Dr. Robin Sacks, University of Toronto Dr. Sacks is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering at the University of Toronto teaching leadership and positive psychology at both the graduate and undergraduate levels. Robin also serves as the Director of Research for the Engineering Leadership Project at the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering which aims to identify how engineers lead in the workplace
students to the very important reality of what expectedreturns are realistic and what risks are likely to accompany those returns. It also introduces asecond very important reality in economic decision-making—neither maximizing expectedreturns nor minimizing risks may be the best approach.The next step is presenting the model of risk and return from a portfolio based on twosecurities—bonds and stocks. This clearly shows the value of diversification, and the theory asrepresented in the underlying equations. This simple diagram is easy to present and understand,and an easy way to say why your investments should not be in one type of security—or evenworse in one stock, such as your employer’s.When time permits we find that this is a good place to
occurs during interpretive research, we offerthe following reflections regarding our backgrounds, “conceptual baggage”13 and insights relatedto this research.Julie’s career vision is to be a national catalyst for increasing the diversity of students inengineering, and to help all students—particularly those who are underrepresented— achievetheir academic, professional and personal goals. She is a faculty member at a predominantlyWhite institution, where she has taught large-enrollment freshman and sophomore levelengineering courses. In her previous position at a diverse institution, she was the foundingwomen-in-engineering program director and director of recruitment and retention. Her studentaffairs and teaching experience, combined with her
paper describes the survey results.Engineering students and faculty members in the audience were asked about theirperceptions of the educational value of the competition for both the competitors and theaudience members. They were also asked about their perceptions of the personalcharacteristics of the competitors. As this research project was funded through anInstructional Enhancement Grant, the goal was to examine the perceived educationalvalue of Idol. This examination aims to help identify ways learning and teaching are –and can be further – enhanced through Idol.Overall, the results of the survey pointed to an overwhelmingly positive response to thepresentation competition and the educational value it provides. The engineering studentsand
also teaches courses in Computer Engineering for the School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Sys- tems Engineering at Arizona State University Page 26.259.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Assessment of Communication, Teamwork, and Engineering Motivation in Inter-Disciplinary Projects Implemented in an Introduction to Engineering CourseIntroductionInter-disciplinary project teams are a fact of engineering careers. Inter-disciplinary thought andaction are required to solve many of today’s technological and social challenges
Paper ID #11853Using an Instrument Blueprint to Support the Rigorous Development of NewSurveys and Assessments in Engineering EducationMs. Jessica Menold Menold, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Jessica Menold is a second year graduate student interested in entrepreneurship, the design process, and innovativeness of engineering graduates and professionals. She is currently working as a student mentor in the Lion Launch Pad program, where she works to support student entrepreneurs. Jessica is currently conducting her graduate research with Dr. Kathryn Jablokow on a project devoted to the development of a
what they deeply care about, because, according to Beth Noveck, “we’re learning withstudents that, building off their interests and the things they care about, to then learn skills usingthat subject matter has a much more powerful effect than trying to force them to be interested insomething else.”1 Page 26.791.7In addition, there is an attitudinal shift especially in American students who are now thinkingmore about the philosophical aspects of their professional lives. From the perspective of religiousscholar Varun Soni, the exploration of social problems is now inherently a personal endeavor forstudents. Therefore, inspiring students
participation and degreecompletion.”2Studying socioeconomic inequalities in education presents unique challenges in terms ofdefinition and measurement. The U.S. Department of Education’s definition of socioeconomicstatus (SES) as an individual or family’s relative economic and social ranking is influential, andmeasurements encompass a numerical scale of family income and levels of parents’ educationand type of occupation, and student self-reports, all of which present their own limitations.2-3 Forexample, nine out of ten Americans identify themselves as members of the middle class,although the federal poverty rate hovers around 15 percent. This phenomenon is partiallytraceable to the pervasive popular assumption that class is not a salient force in
their first two years of college1. Therefore, it is particularly important to support studentsduring this critical period in their education, and help them build the skills necessary to ensuretheir continued success in engineering.To help combat this problem, the University of Portland introduced a retention programspecifically to assist 1st and 2nd year students who are behind in their degrees, and who areconsidered at risk of leaving engineering. During the year-long program, students work with acounselor to explore tactics for academic success, and to discuss educational planning(particularly with regards to getting on track to graduate in four years). For many of thesestudents, the perceived inability to graduate in four years, and the
: Page 26.1246.8 Major: Electrical Engineering GPA: 3.9 Degree Aspiration: Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from a prestigious institution Career Aspiration: Tenure-track faculty at a top school Joe is a member of a 6-person project team developing new concepts for a mechanical subsystem on an automotive engine. His discipline is needed for developing the engine test stand and data acquisition system for the performance monitoring sensor network. Joe and his teammates report to a Faculty Project Advisor and communicate each week with a Liaison Engineer at the company that is supporting the design project. Joe’s project is one of many 2-semester projects
climate consists of influences that require outcomes-based programaccreditation, anticipated shortfalls in graduation rates, changing engineering studentdemographics and attributes, changes in engineering practices in developed countries,advances in instructional technology and cognitive sciences, and a movement towards thescholarship of teaching and learning1. These forces place a large emphasis on continuedfaculty professional development, and a diffusion of research-based practices into theclassroom as the engineering education community is increasingly recognizing theimportance of proactively helping engineering educators advance their teachingeffectiveness2. Despite this, faculty members are expected to learn how to do everythingtheir job
progress. Each CoP was assigned a mentor to helpthem implement their proposed innovations. These mentors are called Education InnovationFellows (EIFs).In response to the struggles of some CoPs to form, the messaging of SIIP has evolved to invokethe simple message of “teach like we do research.” This simple message carries several importantmessages to maintain faculty buy-in. Like research, faculty governance is respected, givingfaculty jurisdiction over how their courses are designed. Like research, improving teaching is anincremental process, in which data and peer review drive decision making and knowledgegeneration. Like research, teaching is a career-long endeavor rather than an activity engaged inonce per semester. Like research, teaching
and spokespeople for science7. In return,these teachers often experience a higher status than some of their counterparts. Affiliation tosubject matter is critical to a science teacher’s formation of their professional identity20, and thisneeds to be taken into consideration when training teachers or faculty members for STSE.Although engineering is absent from the discussion of STSE in the literature, the themes arehighly relevant to engineering education, particularly given calls for engineering curricula thatare relevant to the lives and careers of students and connected to the needs and issues of thebroader community, and education that includes the use of experiential activities;interdisciplinary perspectives; focus on problem-solving
awareness(including “an ability to use what you know about different cultures, social values, or politicalsystems in engineering solutions) and interdisciplinary skills. However, in their analysiscontextual awareness clustered with design skills, while interdisciplinary skills clustered withreflective behavior practice, and recognizing disciplinary perspectives. A small pilot study at theUniversity of Canterbury among students majoring in civil engineering and natural resourcesengineering in fall 2013 found correlations between sustainable engineering motivation andconcern for others (Bielefeldt unpublished data).The research questions explored in this study were: (1) to what extent are incomingenvironmental engineering students motivated by
Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Food Science from Cornell University and her Ph.D. in Food Process En- gineering from the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Purdue University. She is a member of Purdue’s Teaching Academy. Since 1999, she has been a faculty member within the First- Year Engineering Program, teaching and guiding the design of one of the required first-year engineering courses that engages students in open-ended problem solving and design. Her research focuses on the development, implementation, and assessment of modeling and design activities with authentic engineer- ing contexts. She is currently a member of the educational team for the
Engineering and Sciences Mentor Breakout Group Meeting Diversity and Inclusion Programs 10 -Making Good Decisions Exploring Majors-Aerospace and Mentoring Day 11 Mechanical Engineering and Industrial -Personality Styles and Systems Engineering Mentor Breakout Group Meeting Lean and Six Sigma 12 -Rewards Career Services and Internship Panel Alumni Panel of Industry Professionals 13 Discussion with Mentors Engineering Ethics Video Career Services 14 -Ethics Worksheet 15 Class Surveys and Wrap-Up Class Surveys and Wrap UpMentors meet for two hours the week
previously felt encouraged topursue STEM. Summer of Innovation (SoI) was designed to give students an opportunity toengage in OST learning at an early age and during a critical period in the education cycle:summer. While professionals in STEM may attribute their decision to pursue STEM careers toan out-of-school experience, many formal and informal educators do not feel they have the skillsand knowledge to successfully engage youth in programs to positively impact STEM learning.In 2009, President Obama announced the “Educate to Innovate” campaign to foster a renewedcommitment to strengthen Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) education. InJanuary 2010, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) launched theSummer of
backgrounds. It is hoped that these students will then rise to the highesteducational standards, pursue studies and careers in mathematics, science, and engineering fields, andmake a difference in the world by creating opportunities to further advance science and technology intheir countries and communities and to promote sustainable development.This collaboration initiated in 2009, following a request from the Director of COSOLA. In the summer of2009, two members of the faculty of TEE, Dr. Ron Terry and Dr. Steve Shumway, visited the DR andspent three days training the teachers and observing the conditions. They presented several classes intechnology and engineering to teachers and students. Despite language limitations, their work
that male students are more likely to openly express their bias. A sizable group of 36% of respondents indicated that they have personally experienced some formof bias, whether from other students or faculty (although less than 6% indicated stronglyagree).As shown in Table 13, a high level of confidence of succeeding in a STEM career wasalready found by the second year. However, senior year students in the sample populationdemonstrated a strong shift (60%) to the strongly agree confidence level.Table 13Self-reports of respondents in their confidence to succeed in STEM Sophomores (n=43) Juniors (n=58) Seniors (n=50) % % %Agree
the effect of structured team experiences and use of a peer evaluation system on team skills and team-member effectiveness. Prior research has found that completing peer evaluations familiarizes students with team skills9,10 and improves new teammates’ satisfaction with those team members on a future team.1Study 7 will explore the effect of five feedback alternatives on team performance, Page 26.1209.4 satisfaction, team cohesion, team efficacy and team conflict: (1) self and peer evaluation data collected but no feedback given, (2) feedback by the peer evaluation system, (3) personal coaching by instructional staff, and (4
outside the classroom setting in which facultymembers are confronted with freedom of speech issues. For instance, a student asks a professorin class about his opinion of the dean’s plan to reorganize the college or department and the impactthis might have on the student’s career or graduation plans. Or perhaps, a professor serves on auniversity budget committee. Can this professor publish articles and engage in public debate usingthe information gained through his involvement as a member of the committee?The federal courts are currently split over the application of the First Amendment to speech byprofessors employed at public universities. In 2006 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Garcetti v.Ceballos1 that government employees may be disciplined
Paper ID #13586Qualitative Analysis of Boundary Spanning Implications within Interviews ofEngagement StakeholdersDr. David A. Delaine, Universidade de S˜ao Paulo and IFEES David A. Delaine has a Ph.D. in electrical engineering from Drexel University, in Philadelphia, USA. He currently serves as an executive member of the International Federation of Engineering Education Societies (IFEES), as Vice President for Student Engagement, Diversity, and Inclusion. IFEES aims to strengthen engineering education practices around the world. He has recently completed his tenure as a Fulbright Scholar and is currently performing
withina team.7Team members come from a wide range of disciplines. Students from each of TaylorUniversity’s engineering majors, which include Engineering Physics, Computer Engineering,Environmental Engineering, and Systems Engineering, participate in the same senior capstonecourse. Juniors and underclassman engineering students are also involved in the project,working on smaller subsystems or tasks, in order to mitigate risk presented by student turnoverupon graduation. Students in majors including Mathematics, Physics, Business, Accounting,Elementary Education, and Computer Science also participate voluntarily in the seniorengineering project under the leadership of the faculty and engineering students. For example,an undergraduate mathematician
experiences to help their graduates excel in their future workenvironment” [1]. Despite this need, only few students are able to or willing to have a studyabroad experience. The 2013 Open Doors report from the Institute for International Educationshows that nationally only 3.9% of engineering students studied abroad during theirundergraduate career [2]. In addition, despite the growing awareness of the benefits of studyabroad by students, the challenges preventing students from studying abroad are numerous andcomplex [2]. According to the IIE Generation Study Abroad White Paper Series, the primarychallenges for many U.S. students can be grouped into to three overarching categories: cost,curriculum and culture [2] .This paper contributes to the body
strategies that provideglobal perspectives and international experiences to help their graduates excel in their futurework environment” [1]. Despite this need, only few students are able to or willing to have a studyabroad experience. The 2013 Open Doors report from the Institute for International Educationshows that nationally only 3.9% of engineering students studied abroad during theirundergraduate career [2]. In addition, despite the growing awareness of the benefits of studyabroad by students, the challenges preventing students from studying abroad are numerous andcomplex [2]. According to the IIE Generation Study Abroad White Paper Series, the primarychallenges for many U.S. students can be grouped into to three overarching categories: cost