,the investigators of this project also provided each group with the project milestones and finalproject deliverables. The outcome for the first meeting was for each group to brainstorm ideasfor their exhibit and to develop an initial concept idea. The second meeting was to present theoverall project concept. The third meeting was to review the preliminary CAD for the project.The fourth and final meeting was to review all of the components of the project. The authorsconsidered each of these meetings as a milestone towards the execution of the project, and eachmilestone was accompanied by a design review, which will be discussed below. Details abouteach meeting, activities and outcomes are described in Table 1.Table 1Collaborative Meeting
disciplinary, cultural, political,and economic boundaries. Every day, engineers are confronted with complex challenges thatrange from personal to municipal to national needs.1 The ability for future engineers to work inmultidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary environments will be an essentialcompetency.2 Furthermore, with greater emphasis being placed on understanding social,economic and environmental impacts of engineered solutions, another essential competency isthe cognitive flexibility to think about the whole system at different levels of fidelity and indifferent time scales.3,4 Undergraduate education must train students to not only solveengineering challenges that transcend disciplinary boundaries, but also communicate
. Historical development and current trends in quality arealso presented. The textbook Fundamentals of Quality Control and Improvement by AmittavaMitra is used. Specific topics covered and book sections used are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1 Course Topics Total Quality System Chapter 1 Quality Advocates Chapter 2 Quality Philosophies Quality Management Practices Chapter 3 Quality Function Deployment Quality Management Standards & Tool Basic Axioms of Probability Chapter 4.1-4.4 Probability
during the final project in the Design Thinking course. For thisstudy, only the team member contribution scores for the final design journal and final teampresentation were collected from the surveys. CATME surveys yield numerical data based on thevarious levels of interaction between team members on a scale of 1 to 5 where high qualityinteractions receive a score of 5, intermediate interactions receive a 3 and poor interactionsreceive a 1. The CATME interface asks students to rate themselves and their peers by selectingone of five behavioral descriptions per metric pre-selected by the instructor. These five standardcategories in brief are: 1.Contributing to the Team’s Work, 2.Interacting with Teammates, 3.Keeping the Team
- of students participating in a multinationalcollaborative project. The comparison is between their motivation before and after theirparticipation in the academic activity, there is no comparison between participation and no-participation since the project was part of a course for all participants. The following objectiveswere established: 1. Determine the level of interest of US students participating in the collaborative multinational design project, before they enter and after they finish their participation 2. Determine the perception of value of US students participating in the collaborative multinational design project, before they enter and after they finish their participation 3. Determine if there was change in
course of the semester as well as tocompare results from the on-campus and distance groups. Previous studies by Cavalli et al.1 in arequired junior level materials science course (also taught to both on-campus and distancesections) indicated distance students, who are often working professionals, tended tounderestimate their mastery of the material as represented by posttest performance. In contrast,on-campus students tended to overestimate their understanding of the course topics. Distancestudents attributed a higher value to recorded lectures and homework assignments with regardsto aiding their understanding and on-campus students valued in-class discussions. Thecomposites course studied in the present work would fall later in the curriculum
mindset and hence through longitudinalstudies measure the potential impact of curriculum and co-curricular activities on changingmindset. This paper compares and contrasts two relatively new tools for assessment ofentrepreneurial mindset: (1) Entrepreneurial Mindset Profile (EMP), which has origins back to2010 at Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, Florida, and (2) Entrepreneurial Profile 10 Index(EP10), by Gallup with underpinnings in 2009. Both are web-based surveys.For this research, 70 undergraduate students majoring in math, science, or engineering completedboth instruments. Forty students were enrolled in an Introduction to Entrepreneurship course,with the remainder enrolled in an Introduction to Engineering Management course. Theinstruments
-minute PowerPoint presentation withinteractive elements to engage the students. The instructor handout (Figure 1) covers briefinformation on the background, organization and timeline for delivering the module, instructionsfor administering assessments, supplies needed for the presentation, and suggestions for effectivedelivery. Introduction to Biogeotechnical Engineering Instructor Handout Background This instructional module is developed to motivate and educate freshman civil engineering students to learn about, become interested in, and consider careers in, biogeotechnical engineering. The module is meant to be a teacher-led, in class, customizable lecture for a 50 to 90-minute-long
research needs withinengineering education. We provide a comprehensive definition of complex systems educational research(Hilpert & Marchand, under review; Jacobson et al., 2016) and an overview of methods specific to theapproach (Hollenstein, 2013; Koopsman & Stavalomsis, 2016; Strogatz, 1994). After this, we delineate aresearch-based framework that can be used to develop and conduct complex systems research andevaluation. We identify two areas within the field of engineering education where complex systemsresearch can be useful: 1) educational research focused on student interaction and cognition and 2)assessment and evaluation of collaboratives such as grant funded projects and communication/publication networks. We discuss existing
enrollment. It will open new horizons and expand the breadth offaculty and student involvement in research and development.1. BackgroundIn this paper, we will describe how we gradually attempted to achieve our goal. We developedthis teaching module, which incorporates well-selected signal processing, bioinformatics,biomedical imaging, signal processing, and instrumentation topics, which make extensive use ofMATLAB, Simulink, Python, Bio-perl, and LabVIEW tools. This teaching module includes adetailed description of associated core lab exercises, student responses, and recommendations.This low-cost program consists of a series of theory modules coupled with a hands-on laboratorycomponent using readily available test equipment and graphical
programming but the overlap between mathematicalthinking and engineering thinking.1 In this paper, we investigate computational thinking andpractices in Kindergarten classrooms with children approximately four to five years old. Theseearly ages are when children are able to recognize patterns and engage in early computationalthinking.2,3One of the essential questions on computational thinking in K-12 education is, “what doeslearning to think computationally looks like in the classroom, among young learners?” 4 A part ofthis question is being able to observe and identify when children are practicing computationalthinking, computationally. One recommendation when studying computational thinking is thecollection of multiple sources of information.5
terminology of thermodynamics first. However, not understanding the terminology firstwould not prevent the user from experiencing the modules and potentially developing somedegree of understanding.The interface of each module was designed to be relatively simple. The user could relativelyeasily identify the key parameters and manipulate the available inputs without needing separateinstructions or directions. A student-user could quickly begin interacting with the module andvisually experience how changing inputs to the system dynamically changes the outputs.A module on density was the first one provided to the students. It was introduced approximatelyhalfway through the semester. Figure 1 depicts the density module interface. The user canchange the
and Professor at Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan. He has been an invited keynote speaker for national and international conferences. He has been a Program Evaluator for ABET Electrical/Computer Engineering, Computer Science and Engineering programs in the US and for international programs. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 COMPUTING in CIRCUITS and SYSTEMSAbstract. Many engineering and computing programs offer an introductory course on electriccircuits analysis. Typically this is a three (3) credit hours lecture course, in some schoolsaccompanied by a 1 credit laboratory section. In our school the first circuit course is offeredwithout a laboratory
opportunities, scheduling, universityfaculty involvement and commitment, success factors, and K-12 outreach and recruitingoutcomes.IntroductionDual credit programs, in which students take high school courses for both high school andcollege credit, have been in existence for over 30 years and continue to grow. According to theCenter for Education and Data Research, more than two million students participate annually indual-credit programs, and these programs have become the second most popular collegepreparatory program nationally, after Advanced Placement. (Cowan & Goldhaber, p. 425)[1]Purdue University realizes the importance of early contact and collaborative relationships withhigh schools in an effort to attract and retain future students to our
in engineering or other STEM fields, either leaving theprogram or dropping out of college entirely, leave during their first-year.1–3 Previous studieshave shown that students who leave engineering are often in good academic standing and thatthere are many important non-cognitive characteristics of students who decide to leaveengineering.4–7 Attitude and self-confidence have been reported as two of the many factorsimportant for understanding and predicting engineering student retention.1,8,9 Longitudinalstudies that investigated how student confidence changes throughout their time in engineeringprograms have shown that student confidence is lowest during their first year6,10 and is loweramong female engineering students.11,12 Student
can be quite complex,the general concepts behind them are quite simple and can be understood by first yearengineering students. A schematic of the steam engine model proposed is shown below. Figure 1: Proposed FLIPCurriculum ImplementationVarious curricula were evaluated to compile a list of common courses contained in a mechanicalengineering curriculum. This section will show how the fundamental learning object will beimplemented into all of these common courses. Each course outline will contain a brief coursedescription and the object implementation strategy. Table 1: Common Mechanical Engineering Courses University of Nebraska
projectsaffected how they design now. Other questions focused specifically on the main takeaways fromthe first-year course and how they learned them.Responses were iteratively open coded to identify emergent themes. All six subjects identified aone-week project done in the first week of class as 1) a key part of the class and 2) the place inthe class where they learned that an engineer must engage in problem formulation activities. Allsubjects also discussed the term-long projects, but only one connected the term-long project toproblem formulation. The one-week project is described along with key characteristics that ledto its heavy influence on student learning about problem formulation.IntroductionA one-week project drove the more than doubling of
do notsuggest a causal connection; rather, our conclusion is that participation in the social network is aform of engagement with the class comparable to traditional measures of engagement such ashomework effort and outcome.IntroductionSocial media is, for all practical purposes, ubiquitous among students in higher education. ThePew Research Center estimates that as of 2014, 89% of all Americans aged 18-29 use socialmedia.1 Although it is less dominant than it once was, Facebook remains the most popular socialmedia site, used by over 90% of social media users. The Pew center data also shows thatFacebook users exhibit engagement levels higher than users of other social media sites, with70% of users visiting the site at least once each day
Managementcontains several articles describing both experimental and alternative approaches to constructionresearch that can serve as useful reference material. Table 1 lists the range of methodologies andapproaches described. While this list is by no means exhaustive it does show the breadth ofresearch tools with which graduate students should be exposed in their education.In addition to an introduction to multiple methodologies, students need to understand thelimitations inherent in each. Because validation of research results is necessary in order to obtaintrue meaning or application of the research, learning differing methods of validation is alsoimportant in preparation for the execution of scholarly work21. For example multiple cycles oftesting may be
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 1 Content Analysis of Middle School Students’ Argumentation in Engineering (Fundamental)In recent decades, argumentation has emerged as a major trend in K-12 science education.1, 2 Itsproponents assert that argument-driven science education fosters conceptual understandings ofthe nature of science and can increase students’ proficiencies with core scientific practices.3,4With the advent of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS),5 middle school students areexpected not only to engage in argumentation about the natural world, but also to construct
this paper wedescribe the design of the new general engineering curriculum at the University of San Diego.The argument for an engineering curriculum with a broad foundation that includes the liberal artsis not novel. Just after the creation of the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 1955, theEngineers’ Council for Professional Development commissioned a study to investigate howengineering education could keep pace with rapid developments in science and technology. Theresult of this study was the influential Grinter report1, among whose recommendations includedan emphasis on the importance of integrating liberal arts into engineering education. While thereport argued for balance between the technical and liberal arts, few current
College next year will initiate an engineeringgraduate program with an emphasis on renewable energy and sustainability. ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) criteria, in concert with theUniversity mission, require engineering programs to produce “graduates who pursue life-longlearning through continuing education and/or advanced degrees in engineering or related fields.ABET criteria also require that graduates be able “to design a system, component, or process tomeet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political,ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.” (ABET 2014).1 In accordance with ABET, the ASCE Body of Knowledge initiative and
communicationinvolves more than simply getting one's own points across clearly; it also requires the ability toempathically listen and create spaces that foster honesty. This paper explores four conversationand participation architectures that provide engineering education students and practitioners withaffordances for holding challenging and awkward conversations.Conversation and collaboration skills are an important facet of engineering student development.ABET student outcomes criteria (d) and (g) emphasize the ability to function onmultidisciplinary teams and the ability to communicate effectively, respectively [1]. We arguethat, in an increasingly complex and transdisciplinary world full of "wicked problems" [2],engineering students need to develop a high
. The chemistry grade and personal statement are assigned 50 and 150 points respectively.Student personal statements are reviewed by three faculty and are subjectively assigned ratings.Table 1 lists the weights assigned to admission requirements. Applicants are ranked according toadmission scores and an appropriate number of students are admitted in the EE program. Table 1: Admission score weights Subject Score Weight Calculus GPA 450 45% Physics GPA 200 20% Chemistry GPA 50 5% Overall GPA
teach students the aesthetics and critical thinking with creativity. In thisstudy, we merged two design-based courses modules into the original course curriculum topromote the creativity of students in the field of material engineering. The course module (I)“User-Centered Design-Problem Definition” was offered based on the product and useroriented design aspects. The other course module “Experiential Manufacturing and MaterialAesthetics” was proceeded through project-based learning activities. The two course modules were combined into relevant course, Project Laboratory (1) &(2), on the spring semester (2016) as an elective course to undergraduate students. Studentsshould submit their research portfolios and final report of the program
complemented by a workshop hosted by GeneralElectric (GE) at Qatar Science and Technology Park, where students received a hands-on trainingsession on regular maintenance work carried out on aircraft engines.IntroductionThe jet engine is a marvelous piece of engineering that encompasses many fundamentalengineering principles. Model jet engines have been used in laboratory setting to enhance students’learning experience (1). The primary objective of this project was to help the students understandthe challenges and requirements to design an experiment. The students were asked to work on twodifferent aspects of the jet engine: Its performance characterization and its vibration analysis. Asthe semester progressed, they were able to gain in-depth knowledge
ferroelectric materials. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Creating a Psychological Profile of Successful First-Year Engineering StudentsIntroductionThis Complete Evidence-Based Research paper considers the effect of the characteristics of first-year engineering students and their persistence and retention.Although the number of students earning bachelor’s degrees in science and engineering has risensteadily in the past decade, institutions of higher education are facing shifts in enrollmentpatterns, with an increasing number of students pursuing on-line education [1]. As revenues formany four-year colleges and universities become increasingly dependent on
perception of higheracademic rigor, and lack of support services at the new institution could contribute to transfershock.Transfer Students in the Electrical and Computer Engineering at Seattle UniversityAmong the 539 students who were admitted to our program and confirmed their desire to studyat Seattle University between the years of 2000 and 2016, 340 or 63.1% were transfer studentsfrom community colleges and other 4-year institutions. Table 1 below shows the trends over theyears. The percentage of transfers among students admitted to our program varies from 45% to78%.Table 1. Percentage of transfers among students who were admitted to the Electrical andComputer Engineering Department and expressed their desire to study at Seattle University
through, for example, iterative revision, peer response and reflection, to be continually ready to learn to learn how and to teach each otherRather quickly it became clear that to be able to realize these needs, we needed to create a newMAE communications curriculum and design a research program for assessment. This newcurriculum and the adjoining research program is known as the MAE/ECP EngineeringCommunications Initiative.There are three key components to the initiative: 1. Creating a pilot partner course, ENGRC 2250, Communication for Mechanical Engineering Design at the sophomore level to be taught in conjunction with MAE 2250, Mechanical Synthesis. 2. Coordinating and supporting through teaching partnerships communication
general themes developed fromthese visits and subsequent discussions: 1. prototyping (including 3-D scanning and printing) 2. virtual reality 3. computer programming/circuit buildingIn the summer of 2016, the Lichtenberger Engineering Library took a small computer classroomand a storage room and turned them into a 575-square foot makerspace called the CreativeSpace. The library’s newly renovated room includes tinkering stations with access to differenttechnologies and tools and areas for collaborative work, featuring whiteboards and quadmonitors. This room is a place for students, faculty, and staff to turn their ideas into reality and toget hands-on experience.In addition, the Tool Library, located inside the engineering library, was