steps of constantcomparative analysis.This review suggests the existence of at least 31 factors that can potentially impact the successfulimplementation of RBIS in the classroom. Hence, they could be barriers or drivers toinstructional change in higher education. These 31 factors were classified and organized into sixcategories: 1) culture, 2) change management, 3) institutional support, 4) pedagogical knowledgeand skills, 5) students´ experience, and 6) faculty motivation.BackgroundSeveral reports on engineering education make the call to change pedagogical approaches inengineering by increasingly embedding research on learning into teaching practices [1-3]. Thistype of change, that involves a transformation in instructional practices and
, diversity, and inclusion in Additive Manufacturing.IntroductionAdditive manufacturing (AM) is a set of processes by which physical objects are made from digitalfiles generated by computer-aided design software. The term encompasses seven differenttechnologies, as per ASTM nomenclature [1], powder bed fusion, material jetting, directed energydeposition, binder jetting, vat photo polymerization, material extrusion and sheet lamination.These technologies use a variety of feedstock materials such as polymers, metals, ceramics, andconcrete by systematically depositing layer upon layer to create a near net shape of the final partrequired. As opposed to traditional machining techniques like CNC, milling, machining, in AM,material is added instead of
. Gainen and Willemsen [1] assert that calculus provides thefoundation for future engineering courses. Without a good foundation in calculus, engineeringmajors will have difficulty in applying the knowledge in their junior or senior level courses.Many aspects of engineering require an application of calculus such as: design of storm drainand open channel systems; calculation of forces in complex configurations of structuralelements; analysis of beams (i.e., shear forces, bending moment, deflection, stress distribution);analysis of structure relating to seismic design; design of a pump based on flow rate and head;calculations of bearing capacity, lateral earth pressure, and shear strength of soil; computation ofearthquake induced slope
study is not to necessarily recommend one tool, butto bring important information into one place to make it easier for instructors to compare andselect the tool that will work for them, their students, and their course.Background Assessment and feedback are important parts of the learning process. However,providing individualized feedback to students can be very time consuming for faculty andteaching assistants. Therefore it is important to provide authentic assessments and feedback thatsupport learning [1] while balancing the time required by course staff. New computer-basedtools have been developed to assist instructors with grading and feedback beyond the traditionalmultiple-choice Scantron based test. Learning management
in the industry. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019TEAM MENTAL MODELS IN ENGINEERING DESIGN CONTEXTS 1 A systematized literature review of the characteristics of team mental models in engineering design contexts AbstractDesign tasks are characterized by high levels of complexity and uncertainty. Accordingly, inengineering design practices, engineers communicate, share, and integrate their differentviewpoints and orientations to develop a deeper understanding of the problem space and tobroaden the solution space. In this context, engineering design is usually taught
experiences of these womenin the engineering workplace. This systematized literature review synthesizes research on theexperiences of women within the non-academic, engineering workplace. This review examinesfemale engineers from an international perspective and is not limited to female engineers in theUnited States. Using scholarly articles, this review seeks to answer the following questions: 1)What types of experiences do women in the engineering workforce encounter in the workplace?2) How do these experiences influence women to leave or persist in the engineering workforce?In addition to answering the following questions, this review also seeks to identify any areaswhere further research is warranted. Using qualitative methods and analysis, three
engineeringinstructors often form teams in the classrooms. However, many factors can affect theeffectiveness of teamwork. One factor that could affect the result of teaming is the diversityin teams. Although team diversity could increase creativity and innovation in teams, if notmanaged well, it could also have negative consequences for teams. Of the various forms ofdiversity, race and gender have received the most attention in the literature, likely becausethey provide visual cues to teammates. In this study, we conducted a systematized literaturereview related to the race and gender in teamwork. To do this systematized literature reviewwe followed the procedure suggested by Borrego, Foster, and Froyd [1]. We searched fourdifferent databases including
lessons learned and the potential foruptake in other courses and institutions.I. IntroductionWhile the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) has identified effectivecommunication as a critical competency and writing skills are widely recognized as beingimportant for practicing engineers and scientists [1], strategies for developing thosecommunication skills in engineering students have been rather limited. Engineering facultytypically feel more certain of their ability to convey technical material than to teach (or respondto) student writing. At the level of an individual course, one common model is for technicalfaculty to collaborate on assignment design and response with co-teachers who specialize inwriting or communication
challenge and is common to nearly all Unit OperationsLaboratory courses – in a recent survey, 69 out of 70 programs reported that their Unit Opsstudents work in teams [1]. This means that Unit Ops courses must have a strategy for placingstudents into teams, which by itself is a difficult problem and an active area of research.Instructors have several options for assigning teams. One is team self-selection (allowing studentsto choose their own groups), which requires minimal effort on the part of the instructor. However,there are several drawbacks associated with self-selection, including bad student experiences,team homogeneity, clique behavior, and negative effects on students’ perception of many aspectsof the course. These are well-summarized by
-based learning featuring prominently. It is common for Olinstudents to be enrolled in at least one course every semester in which they are expected orrequired to make something – from mechanical toys and autonomous robots to circuits andsoftware and the machine shop and the library strive to make tools available for students to usewith as low a barrier to entry as possible while still preserving a culture of professionalism andrespect for tools.Previous Guidelines at Olin CollegeOlin College students practice engineering design early through a variety of project-basedexperiences, and all students are enrolled in an “introductory experience”. This helps preparestudents for these design experiences, as all 1st year students (approximately 100
pipeline and graduationrates. The process has also deepened our understanding of the needs of students in terms ofhow to better align student career aspirations with industry workforce needs. Theeffectiveness of the collaborative model could be replicated among other institutionsinterested in promoting engineering degrees among Hispanic and low income students.INTRODUCTIONPowerful indicators suggest that there may be more than 1 million new jobs in STEM fieldsby the year 2026, and, as a group, they will grow twice as fast as the average for alloccupations in the economy, according to recent projections by the Department of Labor,Bureau of Labor Statistics [1]. Equally powerful indicators suggest that Hispanics are one ofthe fastest growing
unique contributions and novel approaches to solving today's complex challengesand those of the future. Common areas of concern have been the ability to modernize mid-sizedfactories that lack funds to advance aging technology. The digital age has provided cost effectivealternatives to increase productivity and allow customization of products6-8. All companies needto be better positioned to integrate these new technologies into their manufacturing and businesspractices in order to remain competitive in the global economy. In particular, enabling technologiesand research advances in future manufacturing will be discussed. Figure 1. New horizons for next generation manufacturing workshop flyer
-strand research program focused on (1) authentic assessment, often aided by interactive technology, and (2) design learning, in which she studies engineers designing devices, scientists designing investigations, teachers designing learning experiences and students designing to learn.Dr. Jamie Gomez, University of New Mexico Jamie Gomez, Ph.D., is a Senior Lecturer III in the department of Chemical & Biological Engineering (CBE) at the University of New Mexico. She is a co- principal investigator for the following National Science Foundation (NSF) funded projects: Professional Formation of Engineers: Research Initiation in Engineering Formation (PFE: RIEF) - Using Digital Badging and Design Challenge Modules to
are presented first. Next a history ofABET’s accreditation policies and practices, and a limited account of present-day accreditationprocedures as practiced is presented to provide vital evidence related to ABET’s evolvinggovernance model. Preliminary conclusions from the data set are then presented, with openquestions suggested by the analysis to date.Theory and MethodThe interpretive findings of this paper draw from the larger project, which was organized as anexploratory qualitative study of engineering education governance built around the use ofgrounded theory methods [1-3]. The study is built on semi-structured interviews with a multi-site, multi-scale design. The interview protocol was derived from the project’s seven coreresearch
school is a small Historically Black College and University (HBCU) which offersengineering programs in civil engineering, electrical engineering, industrial engineering andtransportation systems. We serve a very diverse student population of about 1,300 undergraduatestudents in the School of Engineering (SOE) along with 135 graduate students pursuing master’sand doctoral programs. The engineering programs are supported by 35 full time faculty andabout 30 adjunct instructors. All four engineering programs are currently preparing for ABETreaccreditation in Fall 2019. Three programs are to be reviewed under the EngineeringAccreditation Commission (EAC); Civil, Electrical and Industrial Engineering [1] and oneprogram under the Applied and Natural
to explain whydeterministic systems are able to change in unpredictable ways, while complex systems theory seeks toexplain how the often numerous actors within a system interact with one another to engender change(Wolf-Branigin, 2013). According to Wolf-Branigin (2013) and Heylighen (2008), complex systems shareat least three characteristics: 1. The system is self-organizing: Through interacting with one another, the actors within a system spontaneously (i.e., without direction from a centralized authority) arrange themselves to create a global system structure. In terms of organizational change, this means that change within an organization cannot be generated by a central authority, but rather must be championed and
literature on the subject is disproportionateto the perceived size of the problem, an attempt to collate and summarize it was made. Ofparticular interest were works that provided specific methods shown to prevent or discourage thebehaviors. Some of these were implemented by the program starting in the spring of 2018, andpreliminary findings are presented.Literature ReviewDefining cheating and examples of behavior that constitutes academic dishonesty.In general terms, cheating is defined as being dishonest or deceitful. Table 1 provides examplesof behaviors that are considered academic cheating. Such behaviors include copying fromanother student during a test or quiz, taking an exam for another student, and paying someoneelse to take an exam or to
, affirms, and values the worth of individuals, families, and communities and protects and preserves the dignity of each. (2015)Diversity needs to remain an educational—not just administrational—goal to enrich theeducational experience of students and increase the cultural competence of the academiccommunity. Among the standards listed by the ACRL are: 1) Cultural awareness of self andothers; 2) Cross-cultural knowledge and skills; 3) Organizational and professional values; 4)Development of collections, programs, and services; 5) Service delivery; 6) Language diversity;7) Workforce diversity; 8) Organizational dynamics; 9) Cross-cultural leadership; 10)Professional education and continuous learning; and 11) Research. These standards
well as identifying barriers thatmay disproportionately affect Black men or women.BackgroundThe need to diversify engineeringIn recent decades, the emphasis on increasing the number of engineering graduates has beencoupled with greater concern about the lack of diversity in engineering fields. Research hasidentified the benefits of identity diversity (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status,etc.) in engineering education, including more innovative groups [1], greater engagement inactive thinking processes, growth in intellectual engagement and motivation, and an increase inacademic skills [2, 3]. A variety of educational policies and programs have been initiated toboost participation and increase graduation rates of under
looking incompetent, to avoid a lowscore, etc. Students can be high in all three, low in all three, or have a mix of motivations. Thereis a strong literature on achievement orientation in higher education, though it typically is notspecific to the engineering context; most studies suggest that students with a high learningorientation are more likely to persist in a difficult context and more likely to take on a task with alower degree of expectancy of success. It also seems that men are more likely to hold highperformance orientations than women [1-4].In the academic orientation literature, achievement orientation is hypothesized to affect howstudents select academic tasks in a rather neutral-of-context process: Students with high
Knowledge, and todiscuss specifically the incorporation of the affective domain in assessing attainment of the BOKoutcomes and how one might demonstrate attainment.ASCE has been engaged in defining and refining a body of knowledge for civil engineers fornearly 20 years in support of its Policy Statement 465 - Academic Prerequisites for Licensureand Professional Practice [1]. The Society published the first Civil Engineering Body ofKnowledge (CEBOK) in 2004. In that document, a distinguished group of educators andpractitioners, who formed the Body of Knowledge Committee, outlined the general knowledgeall civil engineers should possess for entry into the professional practice of civil engineering.The document defined 15 distinct outcomes that would
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019Actions and Approaches of Teachers Communicating Computational Thinking and Engineering Design to First Grade Students (RTP)Introduction As engineering design and computational thinking (CT) concepts are included inclassrooms, veteran teachers have to develop new pedagogical content knowledge for theseunfamiliar topics as elementary teachers often have little background or preparation in theseareas [1], [2]. There are a number of professional development (PD) programs targetingengineering [2], [3], however research in this area often examines what teachers can and will dowhen integrating engineering and CT into their classroom practice in the semester or yearfollowing the PD [2
research has shown clear benefits to student-centered and active learning [1].Providing students the opportunity to talk through challenging concepts, as opposed to passivelylistening to lecture, provides measurable benefits in terms of understanding and retention ofinformation [2]. There is often resistance, however, at both the faculty and student level, toincorporate active leaning in undergraduate STEM courses [3]. Classroom space, availability ofresources, and scheduling logistics can make active learning challenging. At the University ofSouthern California, MASC 310: Materials Behavior and Processing is a high-enrollment coursethat introduces engineering students from a range of backgrounds to the basics of materialsscience. The course is
reflect not onlyon the instructional design of their courses but also on opportunities for self-improvement. Second,it will aid department heads in identifying areas in which to focus faculty development efforts. AtUniversidad Icesi, these results have led to changes in the School of Engineering at both the schooland departmental levels. Finally, a proposal for a preliminary plan for faculty development ispresented. Presentation method: traditional lecture.BACKGROUND AND SUPPORTING LITERATUREConcepts about active learningThere exists extensive literature dedicated to the concept of active learning (AL). Some authorshave described AL based on its characteristics [1] while others have made more specificdefinitions, describing it alternately as a
Society for Engineering Education, 2019Adaptable and Agile - Programs to Meet Emerging Workforce NeedsBackgroundMuch has been written regarding the shifting nature of the workforce and the skills needed tocontribute to the workforce of the future. Common themes include increased technologyadoption, data analytics, changing distribution and value chains, and changes in patterns of work[1] and [2]. Much has also been written on the need for colleges and universities to adapt tochanging demographics and evolving needs of business and industry [3] and [4].The traditional engineering disciplines have served the workforce well and have alloweduniversities to provide known pathways to students seeking engineering degrees. While therecontinues to be a
foundationalknowledge. Table 1 summarizes feedback provided by the advisory board for professional skills andprogram delivery.The advisory board consisting of nine professionals with various industry, government, non-profit, andbusiness backgrounds was supportive of the structure of PMT. They advised the connection between theworkplace, and prospective students can be strengthened by: • Using workplace, not academic, terms and vocabulary to define essential concepts • Present curriculum to mirror systems flow in industry, business, and government. • Take advantage of cohort and module training when possible to reflect professional development • Limit the scope of “specialty area” to only those for which there is faculty expertise • Utilize case
Computer Engineering, 2Department of Mechanical and 1 Aerospace Engineering, 3Pegasus Digital Learning Innovation Lab} University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816-2362AbstractGiven increasing enrollments within STEM curricula, it is sought to overcome challenges ofconventional lecture-only delivery in high-enrollment courses. Mixed-mode delivery, which isalso known as Blended Delivery, utilizes a combination of online and traditional face-to-facemethods. Herein, a novel eight-step phased instructional flow with several targeted adaptations isused to accommodate the mixed-mode delivery of STEM curricula. It is formalized as the STEMBlended Delivery Protocol (STEM-BDP) with a special emphasis on the
course is populated predominantlyby senior-level undergraduate students. When the revised project was introduced in the Spring2018 semester, there were 40 undergraduate students and 3 graduate students in the course.The course consists of a broad overview of primarily the thermal-fluids aspects of internalcombustion engines. A weekly outline of topics covered is shown in Table 1. The course beginswith a general overview of engines and engine terminology to bring the students to a commonbasic knowledge and vocabulary. General performance measures, such as mean effectivepressure, volumetric efficiency, and fuel conversion efficiency, are then explored. Followingthis, the course considers engines from a big-picture viewpoint, looking at ideal
evolved since 2009 and this paper will discuss anew approach to using UGTAs throughout a large scale, multi-disciplinary, multiple campusengineering program. This approach was created from the foundation of the KernEntrepreneurship Education Network (KEEN) entrepreneurial mindset focusing on the 3 C’s;curiosity, connections, and creating value [1]. While many programs utilize UGTAs inengineering or other curriculums, few have done so at an entire college scale spanning both on-campus and online courses or focused on the growth and mentorship of the UGTAs themselves.The goal of the Fulton UGTA program is to provide UGTAs with the motivation to create newvalue in the classroom that wouldn’t otherwise be available and promote the