, do students get a job inindustry right away? Do they go straight to graduate school? Do they consider returning tograduate school if they work in industry? Additional post-graduation tracking is implemented tosupplement the results of the follow-up survey.IntroductionSince its inception, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has supported undergraduateresearch. Initially, support for undergraduates participating in research projects was provided aspart of a research grant award. In 1959, NSF began offering the Undergraduate ResearchParticipation Program, which provided summer support “for undergraduate students to work withfaculty on specially designed research projects.”1 In some cases, support extended into theacademic year. The program
: (1) The experience is more likely to lead to improvedclassroom instruction if teachers are exposed to and have hands-on experience with currentresearch and technology, so that their students can learn concepts within a current context, (2)Teachers are more likely to be enthusiastic about teaching a subject if they have made somecontribution to the advancement of that subject, and (3) Teachers are more likely to feel asustained impact of the experience if a professional network is developed that extends beyond thelength of the experience. In addition, we believe, in the context of a summer RET institute, thatlearning gains among teacher-participants will be maximized if the participants work within thesame focus area – one that has
knowledge and skill outcomes, (b) domain-specific efficacy in relation to situated learning,and (c) student engagement (deep vs. surface learning) and team dynamics. In this paper, quantitative andqualitative data collected over the past three years was analyzed collectively, triangulated, and related torelevant research and theories. This process allowed us to work toward: (1) providing a more generalizabledescription of our overall findings, (2) gaining a greater understanding of the underlying classroom and coursefactors and their impact on the development of domain-specific efficacy among minority students, and (3)developing a set of guidelines to effectively incorporate participatory design based on the situated learningframework. The
applications of iris recognition include airport security, for recognizingpassengers, employees and flight crews and especially for matching an individual againsta watch list [1]. The second is for recognition in a coal mine where face and fingerprintmodalities may not provide adequate image quality due to the working conditions [1]. Inthis case, iris recognition can supplement the face and fingerprint modalities. Otherapplications of iris recognition include physical access control, internet security,forensics, electronic commerce, the transportation industry and automobile ignition andunlocking as an anti-theft measure.The advantages of iris recognition are [1][2][3]: • Permanence: The unique features of the iris are formed by 10 months of age
undergraduate engineering students atfour universities, as summarized in Figure 1 and described in more detail below. Morespecifically, a QUAN QUAL approach will be used for the first study phase, followed byrepeat QUAN survey measures during mid-point and Phase 2 data collection, as well aslongitudinal or exit interviews (QUAL) conducted during Phase 2. This mixed-methods approachis “premised on the idea that the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in combinationprovides a better understanding of research problems than either approach alone.”7 Suchapproaches typically include multiple and complementary sources of evidence throughout theprocess, thereby respecting and even leveraging contrasting research paradigms or “worldviews.”Study
knowledge to practice for civil engineering students tolearn flood modeling as part of water resources engineering education which uses recentlydeveloped interactive 3D simulation. The suitability of interactive 3D models for such difficultsituations is supported by the research literature (e.g., Lee et al. 2007 [1]). Further, the usefulnessof these modules in learning was evaluated using a systematic study at three universities by aneducation expert.Flood Modeling and its importanceFlood modeling is considered to be the most important task by US Army Corps and FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA) for designing remedial alternatives, floodplaindelineation for flood insurance FEMA (2001) [2] rate maps and flood mitigation works. In mostcivil
, Russel Korte5 1 University of Minnesota & Purdue University, ksmith@umn.edu 2 American Society for Engineering Education, r.chavela@asee.org 3 Arizona State University, Ann.McKenna@asu.edu 4 Tufts University, Chris.Swan@tufts.edu 5 Colorado State University, Russ.Korte@colostate.eduAbstractThe Innovation Corps for Learning (I-Corps™ L) is an initiative of the National Science Foundation(NSF) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) in
(1) identify aspects of engineering culture that present barriers to LGBTQ equality, (2)build knowledge and skills to disrupt discrimination and promote LGBTQ equality in engineer-ing departments on college campuses and (3) to identify best practices for promoting LGBTQequality in engineering.Safe Zone Workshops create a visible network of LGBTQ-affirming faculty who contribute tocreating a positive and inclusive climate in engineering departments. A Virtual Community ofPractice (VCP) works together to support individual members to take action to advance LGBTQequality in their departments. Over 270 engineering educators have attended the 20 Safe ZoneWorkshops offered at the ASEE Annual Conference in the last two years. Evaluation results in
project using Sentaurus Process simulation software from Synopsiswas assigned. It was confirmed that the user-friendly environment of the software allowed thestudent to obtain a hands-on exposure to the integrated-circuit fabrication process developmentwithout any of the complex logistics and safety issues that would be involved in offering ahands-on experimental experience with real hardware. Seventeen students including 16undergraduates and 1 graduate took this course during the fall 2014 semester. Page 26.71.4A new computational project and new computational labs were developed for the ECE 4293-01/6293-01, Nano-electronics course. The Medici
qualitative, or “interpretive”,approaches. The need for and timeliness of this work rests on the following three observations ofthe emerging, interdisciplinary field of engineering education research: The field of engineering education is embracing an ever broader range of interpretive methods of inquiry [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6].This epistemological and methodological diversity has stimulated a debate around what constitutes rigorous research, that is, acceptable ways of conducting and assessing research [2; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11]. At the same time, a crucial body of qualitative work is emerging through the increased adoption of qualitative methods [4; 6; 12] and recent NSF funding efforts, particularly in the
University, a state-of-the-art facility for education and research in the areas of automation, control, and automated system integration. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Teaching Practices of Engineering Technology FacultyA 2012 report by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) notesthat for the U.S. to maintain its historical preeminence in science and technology, about onemillion more science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) professionals will be neededthat U.S. colleges and universities will produce over the next decade (assuming the current rate ismaintained)1. One reason for this shortage is that less than 40% of students who enter
helps to promote deeperlearning.IntroductionWith the wide adoption of project-based learning (PBL) in engineering programs, many researchstudies were conducted to evaluate its effectiveness in engineering education [1-3]. Someresearch results showed that PBL is not only effective to deepen students’ understanding ofengineering principles, but also helps them to develop abilities to apply those principles inengineering design practices [3]. In the meantime, many engineering educators have sharedsuccessful stories of using PBL to improve student learning in their practices [4-8]. Evidentially,PBL has shown a strong promise as an effective teaching pedagogy in engineering education.Naturally, a follow-up question is how to develop an effective
that same objective were included onsubsequent quizzes, as described in more detail under Method and as depicted graphically inTable 1. Hence, the experimental condition allowed for a within-subjects comparison of massedversus spaced objectives (i.e., would individuals demonstrate greater mastery of objectives thatwere spaced for those individuals, compared to those that were massed?). We were additionallycapable of assessing the effect of spacing between-subjects by contrasting mastery of spacedobjectives in the experimental condition with massed objectives in the control condition (i.e.,would the students for whom some objectives were spaced demonstrate greater mastery of thoseobjectives than the students for whom those same objectives were
. IntroductionAdapting Tested Spatial Skills Curriculum to On-Line Format for Community CollegeInstruction: A Critical Link to Retain Technology Students (HRD# 1407123) was funded by theNational Science Foundation (NSF) in July of 2014. The goal of SKIITS (Spatial SkillsInstruction Impacts Technology Students) is to develop an online, fully transportable course thatcommunity colleges can use as a resource to offer spatial skills training to their students costeffectively and with a nominal investment of institutional resources. The course is based onresearch and materials funded by NSF that have successfully been used in face-to-faceinstruction in four-year Universities.SKIITS focuses on three research questions:1. Can effective materials developed through
poster will present the current findings of the investigationinto the nature of the feedback provided by the coach to the student teams, and the relationship ofthat feedback to the strategies students apply as they engage in the task, the models they develop,and their knowledge integration of material from previous courses. Specifically, the researchquestions for this stage of the study are: 1. What are the different types of feedback coaches provide and what characteristics distinguish the different types of feedback? 2. What is the relationship between coach feedback and the development of the experimental models and strategies students apply as they work to complete the assigned task?FeedbackFeedback is an essential tool used by
system that encourages the adoption of research-basedinstructional practices. Based on prior studies, the project seeks to achieve the followingoutcomes:1. Practicing faculty will implement new research-based instructional practices in their post- secondary education.2. The number of participating faculty using research-based instructional practices in their post- secondary engineering classrooms will increase through participation in the annotated video peer feedback system.3. The use of each unique research-based instructional practice will increase as participating faculty both review and are reviewed by different peers each semester.4. Students of peer-reviewed participating faculty will be more satisfied with instruction.5
future research careers.BackgroundNational surveys in 2011 and 2012 showed a continuous decline in the number of U.S. studentswho move on to attend graduate school [1]. In addition, there is a shortage of highly educatedskilled workers in the manufacturing sector [2]. With increased pressure for accountability inundergraduate education from stakeholders such as parents and state legislators, higher educationinstitutions are investigating avenues to improve the quality of education. Prior studies byBrownell and Swaner [3], Crowe and Brakke [4], Laursen [5], Lopatto[6], Taraban and Blanton[7], Russell et al [8], and Zydney et al [9] suggest that undergraduate research holds some of theanswers to increasing student learning, retention, graduation
beappropriately teamed with the pedagogical experts in order to deliver a deep scientific endeavorfor the students while also allowing for appropriate pedagogical development, implementation,and assessment. Through this partnership two sequential nanotechnology-based projects weredeveloped: (1) a quantum-dot solar cell (QDSC) model-eliciting activity (MEA) and (2) a QDSCdesign project.This paper discusses the NSF grant that drove the goals of this collaboration, the FYE course thatpresented a framework for project development, the development process for both projects, theprojects implemented in the FYE course, and some initial results of the implementation.NSF Grant InformationOne of the primary goals of our NSF Nanotechnology Undergraduate Education
, and family structure. Our program has demonstrated past success in addressingissues important to the field and accreditation boards, such as functioning on multidisciplinaryteams, understanding ethical responsibilities, developing a sense of the global and societalcontext of STEM work, and supporting the idea of life-long learning.1-4In the eight years since the program was founded, it has grown and developed considerably.Structural changes throughout these years include adding distance students in an off-campusprogram 280 miles away, broadening the program to include multiple science majors, funding ahalf-time graduate assistant, and staffing changes in the faculty mentors. Program improvementshave included annual retreats for scholars
timeline was reviewed to develop the CI. The purpose of theworkshop was to: 1) identify key concepts and important misconceptions in the domain of numerical methods, 2) review steps required to develop a valid and reliable concept inventory, 3) write reliable and valid items for each concept, and 4) decide how to collect and analyze pilot data to measure effectiveness of inventory items (questions and distractors).The discussion in the workshop involved the definition of a concept, why we should measureconceptual understanding and how it can be measured. A few sample numerical methodsconcepts were brainstormed. The framework of developing the CI using the assessmenttriangle16 was discussed and this would form the basis of the
classroom,thus freeing class time for students to focus on high cognitive load tasks such as design.1, 2In the flipped classroom, faculty commit to use multimedia technology to deliver time-shiftedcontent via audio podcasts, screencasts, and other forms of rich media. To prepare for a flippedclassroom, students complete “homework” that involves watching videos or listening to audiopodcasts. During class time, teachers lead students to discover, apply, and then explain importantconcepts to each other. This active learning classroom model is consistent with best practices inengineering education.3-6K-12 STEM teachers have been early adopters of the flipped classroom. More recently,university STEM faculty have adopted this method, particularly in
and societal decisions abouttechnology.”28 Macroethics can include issues such as sustainability, poverty andunderdevelopment, security and peace, social justice, bioethics, nanoscience, and socialresponsibility.5,17,28An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility by students is required foraccreditation of engineering degrees in the U.S.1 and globally. The New Zealand and UKaccreditation requirements have a greater emphasis on macroethical issues, such as a stand-alonerequirement for sustainability.20,32 Engineering disciplines have similarities and differences intheir ethical requirements. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) is trying to increasethe ethical capabilities of students via the ABET civil engineering
of the sensor moddule, which includes com mmonly useddsensors such s as RTDDs, thermistorrs, thermoco ouples, opticcal sensors (ooptical interrrupter andreflector)), and proxim mity sensors. Figures 1 and a 2 show tthe Portable PLC Kit witth the basic andsensor modules. m nd Photo of Portable Figure 1. Diagram an P PL LC Kit Layouut (Basic Moodule). Figure F 2. Dia agram and Photo P of Porrtable PLC K Kit Layout (w
,female, first year students who show an early interest in majoring in engineering and computerscience (ECS). Female students who show an initial extrinsic interest in these majors can bedriven away far too easily by their experiences. SPARK has two primary goals: (1) create anenvironment where belonging to a like-minded cohort nurtures a strong sense of self, and (2)deliver high quality, high impact practices that engender female students’ success and retentionin ECS.Guided by Albert Bandura and Frank Pajares’ research on self-efficacy in theory and practice,the SPARK project sheds light on self-efficacy and confidence as predictive of persistence forfemale students in ECS. Additionally, the effect of SPARK students’ spatial visualization
graduation rate is very low (it wasa troubling 33% in Fall 2009). A disproportionately large number of minority students andtransfer students who come from low-income households exacerbate the problem of retentionand graduation rates. Therefore, ASCENT is designed to: 1. address the problem of slow progress towards graduation among talented yet low-income students in MATH and CS, 2. enhance existing bonds and build new ones between LU and CC in the area, and 3. enhance upper-level experience in MATH and CS by building strong diverse studentcohorts, easing the transition of transfer students to upper-level work. The project targets upper class students and transfer students for the following reasons: 1. two-year graduation
. This leads to increased content retention andimproves student motivation to excel in the course. This paper will discuss the work beingconducted at Montana State University in developing and deploying adaptive learning modulesat a diverse set of universities to collect data on how different student groups use and areimpacted by the materials.1. Background1.1 Using E-Learning Environments for the Delivery of Engineering Course ContentThere has been a considerable amount of research into the effectiveness of using e-learningenvironments for the delivery of engineering coursework over the past two decades. The authorsof [1], [2] and [3] present an analysis of the potential benefits of web-based engineeringeducation highlighting that e-learning
mistakenbeliefs about writing in civil engineering. These beliefs corresponded to some of the mostineffective characteristics of the student writing and were in direct conflict with the practices ofthe engineering practitioners. The beliefs were common even among graduating seniors who hadtaken technical writing courses and written numerous papers in their engineering courses. Thethree myths are the following: 1. You can make your writing more professional by using long sentences and fancy words. 2. Writing is a matter of “impersonal style,” completely separate from engineering. 3. Rules of English grammar and punctuation don’t matter for civil engineering practice.With these ideas widespread and persistent, we decided to take a direct approach
education and meet the challenges faced by the poor stateof infrastructure in the United States, our university joined the University of WisconsinPlatteville, the US Military Academy at West Point, and several other institutions on the projectfunded by the National Science Foundation. This collaboration has also resulted in thedevelopment of an infrastructure education community of practice,[1] the Center forInfrastructure Transformation and Education (CIT-E). In Spring 2015, Our University isoffering a freshman level course titled “Introduction to Infrastructure” that will be required forall students in the Civil and Environmental Engineering program. In addition to the primarygoals to enhance and improve the education and development of future
Paper ID #13229The Wright State Model for Engineering Mathematics Education: Longitu-dinal Impact on Initially Underprepared StudentsProf. Nathan W. Klingbeil, Wright State University Nathan Klingbeil is a Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Dean of the College of Engineering and Computer Science at Wright State University. He is the lead PI for Wright State’s National Model for Engineering Mathematics Education, which has been supported by both NSF STEP Type 1 and CCLI Phase 3 awards. He has received numerous awards for his work in engineering education, and was named the 2005 Ohio Professor of the Year by the Carnegie
practice.IntroductionThe participation of women and underrepresented minorities in engineering has been“disturbingly slow” [1]. To address the chronic issues of underrepresentation in engineeringeducation, a small but growing body of research has attempted to move away from a deficitperspective and has examined social and cultural explanations for engineering persistence amongwomen, racial/ethnic minorities, first-generation college students, and other underrepresentedgroups. Frameworks emphasizing social and cultural capital; as well as the unique forms ofcapital possessed by students from marginalized groups (e.g., cultural wealth); offer alternateperspectives to focus on how underrepresented students navigate and persist in engineering.As part of a federally