instruments (HPLC, UV,TOC,GC, KF—etc.) and also monitoring drug shelf life through both accelerated and shelf life stability programs. After which started at GlaxoSmithKline Beecham Egypt in which i was a laboratory senior analyst an- alyzing all dosage forms as finished products dealing with all laboratory instruments with very good experience on HPLC and GC in addition of GLP and GMP knowledge, SOP writing and audits carry out internally then i was promoted to a section head of validation and quality assurance for the pharmaceuti- cal industry for both Lactam and non-Lactam areas in which i was responsible for sterile and non-sterile areas qualification, validation and periodic verification dealing with process
of technology in the classroom provides an opportunity for studentsto interact more efficiently with information and peers in a learning environment. The interactiveteaching methods discussed in this paper relate to active, inductive, and problem based learning(PBL). Active learning is most generally defined as any instructional method of engagingstudents for the entire duration of the teaching contact time6. In addition to traditional homeworkand examination, active learning allows students to participate in collaborative activities thatpositively influence student attitudes and study habits for course material6. Inductive learningencompasses interactive instruction techniques including inquiry learning, PBL, project-basedlearning, case
the projects. Throughout my graduate studies I have worked with undergraduate engineering and business students, high school students, high school teachers, community college students and many more to aid in develop- ment of a well-rounded professionals. Mentorship is an integral part of the engineer I want to be, through giving back to my peers and fostering a community where we encourage each other to reach their full potential, I know that I am positively impacting my community. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Paper ID #18171Catherine M. McEntee, North Carolina State University
questions, brainstorm solutions, or suggestnew ideas. These collaboration meetings are designed to form an informal collegiateenvironment between all involved. The relationship formed between peers and faculty has beenshown to be a critical factor for undergraduate students.9 During the first few weeks, the separateteams rarely meet outside of scheduled activities, but this begins to change between weeks 3 – 5.The collaboration meetings encourage the development of rapport between the participants andbetween the participants and the faculty mentors.An additional 30 minutes were reserved each week for professional development. Professionaldevelopment included: developing a research career, accelerating ideas to market, efficientposter designed for
, information technology architecture/engineering, and collaboration systems research. In September 2015, she joined Science Foundation Arizona (SFAz) to lead the Girls in STEM initiative and translate her passion for STEM into opportunities that will attract, inspire and retain more girls in STEM to make it the new norm. She has also architected SFAz’s enhanced Community College STEM Pathways Guide that has received the national STEMx seal of approval for STEM tools. She integrated the STEM Pathways Guide with the KickStarter processes for improving competitive proposal writing of Community College Hispanic Serving Institutions. Throughout her career, Ms. Pickering has written robotics software, diagnostic expert
Paper ID #21397Panel discussion on the History of the Women in Engineering Division: Re-flections from Past Chairs of the DivisionDr. Beena Sukumaran, Rowan University Beena Sukumaran has been on the faculty at Rowan University since 1998 and is currently Professor and Chair of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Under her leadership, the Civil and Environmental Engi- neering Program has seen considerable growth in student and faculty numbers. Her area of expertise is in micro-geomechanics and has published over 100 peer reviewed conference and journal papers including several papers on engineering education and the
. The joint case study grade is worth 10% of the final grade for ENGR 321. Each student writes a 700 word essay about the assigned topic and a 300 word essay about how the sophomore class can realistically contribute to solving the problem. Both essays require citations: at least five citations for the 700 word essay and at least one citation for the 300 word essay. Each group gives a five minute presentation, and then the entire class discusses the problem. When the joint case study debuted in Spring, 2018, class of 2020 sophomores investigated these elements of Hurricane Maria: how individuals have coped, political representation, electrical infrastructure, island finances, effect of climate change on hurricanes, and response
, 2].In engineering education research, belongingness is often investigated through the experiences ofwomen in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors and careers [6, 7].Tonso found that “Women belonged only in the social arenas of Greek societies, not asengineers” [8, p. 365]. Women were excluded from the social activities in engineering availableto their male peers and thus had decreased perceptions of belonging. In a survey of 288undergraduate engineering students, Cech and colleagues [9] found that students, especiallywomen, who developed confidence in their fit with the engineering profession were more likelyto persist in engineering. Other studies have also shown that creating an alignment betweenwomen’s
, internet search, other college applications, etc.)? What struggles, barriers, or hardships Transportation issues, financial issues, working a job did you encounter that had an impact after school or on weekends, family duties or on your academic performance in responsibilities, extracurricular activities (sports, high school? band, etc.), societal expectations, legal issues, lack of stable home situation, lack of access to technology, other What helped you achieve success in siblings, friends, peers, extracurricular activities high school? (sports
. engineering The program has helped me feel more confident about my ability to do computer programming. The program has helped me feel more confident about my ability to record and analyze data. The program has helped me understand options for further education in science and engineering. The program has helped me understand options for future careers in science and engineering. Perceptions of the Please write three words or short phrases that best describe your program experience in the program. Which aspects of the program did you
theyengage with business and community facilitators to discuss how they will apply their learningtoward being effective principled leaders as they transition to the next phase of their lives [6].”Annually in the fall, senior students take part in a leadership day where they attend a workshop,often at local companies and interface with working professionals to work through a variety ofwork place issues and ethic case studies. These workshops include discussion of peer andsupervisor interactions, ethical treatment of customers and clients, individual ethical behavior inthe work place, and reporting of suspicious or fraudulent behavior.Engineering students participate in a two semester senior year design capstone experience, ethicsis again addressed in
Assistant in the Product Design & Development Lab at Texas Tech University. He has published multiple peer-reviewed publications and conference proceedings addressing the topics of Communication in Design, Creativity and Innovation, and Engineering Education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Exploring the Relationship among Gender Composition, Activity Structure, and Brainstorming Novelty AbstractIdeation is a critical stage in the engineering design process and has substantial impacts ondownstream decision making. As a result, a better understanding of the factors that positivelycontribute to
two of those scholars to participate in proposal writing activities. Further,several REU scholars have started graduate programs in materials science and engineeringnationwide, with two scholars starting their research at OSU and another scholar applying to ourgraduate program for Fall 2020. One of the significant impacts of this program was in groomingundergraduate engineering and science students to pursue interdisciplinary research with astrong-base in materials science and engineering. We believe that this is critical for developing aworkforce to address global grand challenges in energy, aerospace, medicine, environmentalsustainability and maintain technological leadership position of developed and developingcountries in the 21st
experiments, results, and problems encountered; 2) students had the opportunity toreceive feedback on their work from other faculty mentors in the program (not just their ownassigned mentor) in a collegial, low-pressure setting and to observe how scientific dialogueoccurs in practice; and 3) students had the opportunity to learn about what their peers in theprogram are working on, with the goal of giving them a better appreciation for the breadth ofresearch in the field. An additional goal of the check-ins was for the crosstalk that occurredbetween mentors (and students) in these group meetings also helped students to see commonthreads between the various research approaches and scales among the different projects.At the conclusion of the 10-week REU
started totake more leadership roles in the program, created their own student organization recognized byuniversity, organized and hosted leadership and professional development activities, organicallydeveloped peer-tutoring during daily study hour in the designated room, and teamed up with variousscience and technology events oriented towards regional public school districts.Eventually, data talks! Figure 3.1 shows from the S-STEM project reporting site shows the impact ofthe project. During the first four years of the project, we awarded a scholarship to 68 eligible andqualified students, with 55 of them graduated by Spring 2019. Among the 16 scholars in theprogram, six of them graduated in Dec. 2019 and the remaining will graduate in May 2020
students’ GitHub repositories and instantly autogrades their project checkpoints. This does not just let students get instant feedback about their progress, but also allows them to resubmit as often as they like before the deadline, which in turn incentivizes them to start early. 12. Constant feedback collection – The instructor introduced in the Spring semester a link that students can always access to provide their feedback anonymously about anything concerning the course. It consisted of a Qualtrics survey that has on box where they can write whatever they want and submit it. The instructor check their feedback once or twice per week and tried to address their concerns as much as possible
, engineers, ambassadors, or role models)directing affirming comments towards students or explicitly telling them they could be engineers[11], or in more subtle ways, like peers seeking one’s help with engineering.Gendered Engineering Identity Development. Though this paper primarily utilizes Godwin andcolleagues’ [8] work to conceptualize our emergent findings, other researchers have createdframeworks to focus on specific populations of students. Capobianco and colleagues et al. [2]focus on the formation of engineering identity in female students, identifying girls’ sense ofacademic identity, school identity, occupational identity, and engineering aspirations as shapingtheir engineering identities, with academic identity and engineering aspirations
for them. Even if they don’t get feedback from employers, there are peer advisors, faculty, staff, and alumni who are happy to work with them to provide input and support throughout their search.Theme 2: Finding the Right OptionsMany students reported that they chose Mechanical Engineering because of the breadth ofopportunities that it presented, then struggled to identify the opportunities that would be mostrelevant or most interesting to them. That issue was compounded by both the hidden job market(i.e.: small companies often don’t post and promote positions in the same way large companiesdo) and the lack of specificity in job postings, with second and third-year engineering studentsoften not having the base of knowledge yet to
Education Forum (WEEF) – Cartagena, Colombia) 2013 UMET-Puerto Workshop: Writing for Dr. Kevin Omland, Dr. Rico Publication Renetta Tull, Nandadevi Cortes (UMBC) 2014 UMBC Panel: Global Pathways to Representatives from The Careers Fulbright Program, the U.S. Department of State, and Instituto Tecnológico y de
Your Intended Major?Engineering, Biomedical Engineering, Industrialand System Engineering, Computer Engineering 10%& Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, ElecEOther Engineering Major NOT Listed Above, or 10%Other Major that is Not Engineering. The last two Bi mEoptions allowed participants to write-in responses. 10% 60% Ma eE ChemEOne participant selected Electrical Engineering 10%(labeled in Figure 3 as ElecE), 1 participant MechEselected Biomedical Engineering (labeled inFigure 3 as BiomE), 1 participant selectedMechanical
arespectful term for “interested parties.” Jennifer Tauli Corpuz, from the Kankana-ey Igorot People of MountainProvince in the Philippines, and Stanley Kimaren ole Riamit, an Indigenous peoples’ leader from the PastoralistsMaasai Community in southern Kenya, write a blog on how they are rights holders of their land, not stakeholdersthat need to negotiate their priorities [12], therefore making “stakeholders” a colonial and violent word forindigenous peoples. This change in language has also been adopted by the Center for Disease Control, IndigenousCorporate Training, and Lake Superior State University [13]–[15].the topic of satellite-mega constellations, which are groups of satellites that operate together tocover a vast span of the planet. We also
-specific needs as they worked the project (as ofthis writing, a third and fourth cohort, each consisting of 7 states, are engaging in the CMP).States vary in data capacity and in policy structure (see Tab. 1). For example, most of the cohort1 states have a decentralized model where curricular and course decisions are made at the districtor school level with little influence from the state. In cohort 2, most of the states operate within atop-down approach where curriculum and graduation requirements are set at the state level.Table 1: State data capacity at baselineState features (at baseline) Cohort 1 Cohort 2 (n=6
context.This work uses this operationalization of interest with the understanding that both interest andidentity are not static, rather participants write and rewrite their personal narrative of who theywere, are, and want to be as they evaluate their changing interests [29], [30], [33], [37]. Weextend the current understanding of interest to move beyond the “strength” of an overallengineering interest to include a more nuanced, disciplinary approach. Primary interest refers tothe initial engineering major that engineering students declared when they started their program.When considering how interests change, this establishes a starting focus for participants.Additional disciplinary interest is used to delineate interests that are beyond students
CollectionStudents’ Pre and Post SurveysOn the first day of the engineering camp, the students completed a pre-survey that includeddemographic information and the STEM-CIS (Career Interest Survey) based on the work of Kier,Blanchard, Osborne, & Albert [9]. The STEM-CIS consisted of 44 questions that took the formof a 5-point Likert scale from ‘Strongly Agree’ to ‘Strongly Disagree’. The 44 questions weredivided up into four sets of 11 questions based on the four areas of STEM. An example questionwas “I am interested in careers that involve engineering”.Based on the work of Talton and Simpson [10], four more questions were in the pre-survey in theform of a 5-point Likert scale that looked into peer perceptions of science. An example questionwas, “My best
toosmall to be SL. Thus, the use of SL as aneducational tool, especially in higher education,is to both to teach and to serve in equal measure. Figure 1. Conceptual diagram explaining theConsidering a broad sampling of SL in STEM uniqueness of service-learning (SL).education as provided in peer-reviewed literature, SL has shown beneficial outcomes particularly withregard to the types of learning objectives that have generally been more challenging to achieve in traditionalengineering coursework. These objectives include instruction in ethical responsibility, engineeringsolutions in a global context, and contemporary issues5. SL has documented effectiveness for instructionin related ideas including effective learning of sustainability6, broadened
included in the communitypartnerships with two main foci: middle school robotics leagues and a community makerspace.Two surveys (Pre and Post course) helped to identify initial impressions and changes in students’(1) understanding of community partner’s geographic location, (2) impressions of location, (3)propensity to frequent a business in that location, and (4) knowledge of actual persons residing inthe community. Students were asked to write reflections after S-L site visits which acted asassessments of their growth in understanding of course concepts. The reflections were also usefulto see the students’ perception of professional growth and their perception of the community andtheir impact on it.Initial surveys indicated that news and word of
: Offers a structured methodology for organizing a class with emphasis on constructing an outline, board notes, and out-of-class activities.6,7 (See Fig. 2)VI Writing: Covers fundamentals of making written presentations using the chalk board, vu-graphs, and Powerpoint slides.8VII Speaking: Illustrates effective use of the voice and demonstrates how to stimulate positive emotion using drama, music, humor, and spontaneity in the classroom.9VIII Questioning: Illustrates different student questioning techniques and discusses effective strategies for their use.10IX Teaching Assessment: Covers student, peer and self-assessments and separates myth from fact regarding their usefulness. Introduces
DepoliticizationA number of authors have argued for the value of understanding the discipline andprofession of engineering as a culture4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Cech,2 expressing this perspective,writes: Engineering, like other professions, is not just a collection of knowledge, skills, and practices grouped into a set of jobs. Professions have rich and historically- rooted cultures that are built into and around their knowledge, skills, and practices. Professional cultures are the sets of beliefs, myths, and rituals that give meaning to the intellectual content and practices of a profession. (p. 69)Cech goes on to argue that integral to engineering culture are its “cultural ideologies,”that is, “ways of understanding society and
question proved to be the leastcomprehensive, with 6 respondents (21%) indicating “other”. Two of these write-in options maybe added to the revised survey before national dissemination (do not assess; in-class discussions).No individuals in this survey were using an individual standardized assessment method; the lackof use of these instruments may point to the fact that many instructors may not be aware of theseinstruments, perhaps due to lack of formal training in ethics instruction. Alternatively, it mayreflect the difficulty of creating standardized instruments that measure students’ knowledgeand/or attitudes toward macroethical issues and/or a lack of faculty confidence in suchinstruments. These results related to assessment merit a deeper
global accreditation community has affirmedthe importance of educational breadth, in multiple agreements including the Washington Accord,the Sydney Accord, and the Dublin Accord.14 Engineering historian Bruce Seely has noted thecyclical nature of these calls. 15An ABET-funded study on the impact of EC 2000 by Lisa Lattuca and colleagues at the Centerfor the Study of Higher Education at Penn State16 found that 75% of the approximately 150chairs surveyed reported “some” or “significant” increases in emphasis on communication,teamwork, use of modern engineering tools, technical writing, lifelong learning, and engineeringdesign, without significantly impacting technical outcomes. More than half the faculty reportedsimilar gains in these areas in