offeropportunities for student engineers to approximate engineering work environments, wherecollaboration is not only typical but necessary, producing written reports that communicate theresults of their projects [1]. These projects are often sponsored by an industry partner, providingstudents an audience outside of a school setting and a chance to contribute to solving a real-world problem that can prepare them for the workplace [2, 3]. Ideally, team projects allowstudents to develop skills that will be transferable to a workplace setting, where individuals mustwork and write with others within an organization [1, 4].These projects, however, may present challenges for women and other underrepresentedstudents. For one, students are frequently asked to
/computer based jobs within Chicago andNorthwest Indiana, region 1. Providing highly specialized digital manufacturing “train thetrainer” style professional development will aid in creating a fluid pipeline of entry-leveltechnicians to fill the large number of projected future opportunities.”Figure 1: BLS employment projection from 2014 to 2024 in manufacturing sector. (BLS, 2014)As seen in Figure 1 (BLS, 2014), the employment projections from 2014 to 2024 show a declinein conventional manufacturing jobs accompanied by marked growth in digital- and computer-driven manufacturing jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS, 2014) has projected a 7%decrease in the traditional manufacturing workforce (814,100 jobs) from 2014 to 2024.Meanwhile, the U.S
correctsafety procedures in the virtual lab, often through trial and error, and are far less likely to repeat thoseerrors in future use of a real scanning electron microscope.1.0 IntroductionNanotechnology is the science, engineering, and technology that deals with various structures ofmatter that have dimensions on the order of a billionth of a meter. Nanotechnology is the abilityto observe, manipulate, measure, and manufacture things at the nanoscale, which is about 1 to100 nanometers. While the word nanotechnology is new and was introduced in the late 1970s,the existence of functional devices and structures of nanometer dimensions is not new, andactually such structures have existed on earth as long as life itself [1].The idea behind nanoscience and
their 2005 paper Feisel and Rosa outlined fundamental objectives for engineering laboratories.These objectives include: proficiency in the use of instrumentation, the ability to compare theoryand real world behavior, proficiency in developing experiments, data analysis abilities, designabilities, the ability to learn from failure, creativity in developing solutions, the ability to chooseand use appropriate engineering tools, the ability to consider safety issues in experimentation,proficiency in technical communication, teamwork ability, the ability to perform researchethically, and the ability to gather information and use it to make justified engineeringdecisions.[1] In order for a laboratory experience to satisfy these objectives
ExplorationAbstractThroughout the last half-century, there has been a dramatic increase and interest in spaceexploration across the globe. Scientific literacy may play a critical role in determining publicopinion as well as public support to continuing funding space exploration activities. Increasingthe scientific literacy of the current generation of millennial students is of paramount importancefor many reasons. One very basic, yet critically important reason is that today’s millennialgeneration of students will soon become tomorrow’s generation of decision-makers. Motivatedby a 2009 study conducted by Cook, et al. with 155 undergraduate students at SyracuseUniversity [1], through a pilot study this paper will focus on the survey instrument andmethodologies used to
them in a novel context while working as part of a team.This type of project engages students in a more active learning environment, focused on theintegration of prior knowledge to solve a complex engineering problem [1]. This allows studentsto develop deeper understanding in specific fields, a skill that is necessary to develop expertise inengineering [2]. Students work together in teams, preparing them for the collaboration necessaryin future employment. This also promotes cooperative learning, which has been shown toproduce better learning outcomes [3].Within fluids education, hands-on learning experiences are typically reserved for laboratorydemonstrations using large, expensive, or inaccessible equipment. While valuable for givingstudents
Education, 2018 Weekly Programs in a CS 1 Class: Experiences with Auto-Graded Many-Small Programs (MSP)AbstractWe describe an experiment in changing a CS 1 introductory programming course from thetraditional one large programming assignment per week to seven small assignments per week:“many-small programs” (MSPs). The change was enabled by a program auto-grader that allowedeasy creation of each new assignment in only about 30 minutes, and that gave studentsimmediate score feedback. Students could earn up to 10 points per assignment, and we defined50 out of 70 possible points as full program credit for the week (no extra credit). With that setup,we allowed collaboration. The change was made for one of three class sections
Engineering Education.Dr. Matt Gordon P.E., University of Denver Dr. Matt Gordon is Professor and Chair of the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering. His research areas include numerical and experimental plasma physics, chemical and physical vapor depo- sition, electronic packaging, and bio-medical engineering. He has supervised to completion 26 MSME students and 5 PhD students. Publications include 1 book chapter, 32 journal publications, 47 refereed conference proceedings, 29 non-refereed publications, and 27 non-refereed presentations. He is respon- sible for funds as PI or Co-PI from 52 separate proposals totaling almost $6,500,000. Courses taught include undergraduate finite elements, thermodynamics
Master’s degree or 30 additional credits of coursework (M/30) should berequired prior to professional licensure. This effort has been called “raise the bar”, and anentire book summarizes the rationale [1].The raise the bar initiative traces its roots to the Civil Engineering Education Conferencein 1995, and formally began in 1998 when the ASCE issued Policy Statement 465 todescribe their vision for the Academic Prerequisites for Licensure and Practice [2]. Thus,the vision of raise the bar is intimately tied to how to best prepare individuals to becompetent and ethical professionally licensed engineers (PEs). Organizations outside theASCE began formal involvement in 2000, when the National Council of Examiners forEngineering and Surveying (NCEES
, and received a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers from President Obama in 2017. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 What Have We “Learned” from Maker Education Research? A Learning Sciences-Based Review of ASEE Literature on the Maker MovementIntroductionThis purpose of this paper is three-fold: first, to highlight and synthesize established connectionsbetween Maker Education research and the Learning Sciences; second, to employ systematicliterature review methods to “describe the state of knowledge or practice” [1] regarding Makerresearch within the Engineering Education community; third, to understand how this body
education are still preliminary. Therefore, furtherstudy on engineering ethics textbooks would be conducted to find more similarities anddifferences in order to better explore the educational contents of engineering ethics educationunder globalization.Keywords: engineering ethics, educational contents, textbooks, text analysis, keywordsextraction, comparative studyIntroductionEngineering Ethics came into American universities as a subject in the late 1970s, and waswidely set up in engineering colleges in different forms [1]. Chinese scholars and teachersbegan to pay attention to it in the late 1990s [2]. As an emerging subject, engineering ethicsplays an important role in guiding, standardizing and exploiting engineeringactivities/construction
first medicaldevice attack will certainly occur in the future.Medical equipment is defined as devices that have been cleared by the FDA that are intended tobe used for diagnostic, therapeutic, or monitoring care provided to a patient by a health careorganization [1]. Examples of medical devices include patient monitors, imaging equipmentsuch as CT scanners, and anesthesia machines. Almost all medical devices are directlyassociated with the patient in some way.Healthcare Technology Management (HTM) is the name for the profession that supports the safeand effective use of medical technology in the clinical setting. Only a few academic programsoffer training for healthcare engineering technicians and technologists, with most offered at
continue to develop through their experience aswell? In order to be contributing members of a field, graduate students need to learn and developin areas beyond just the core technical competencies of their field. Opportunities for achievingthis development exist throughout their graduate studies, but students do not always recognize orunderstand how to use these opportunities. To productively steer student development, someresponsibility falls on the student’s academic advisor to guide and support the student growthprocesses. Traditionally, when considering the relationship between student and advisor,researchers have almost exclusively focused on examining the development of the student[1][2][3][4] or assessing the student’s satisfaction with
workplace. This need has been acknowledged for decades[1], [2], and numerous articles discuss ways of addressing writing, such as improved assignmenttypes and assessment rubrics [3]-[5]. However, most engineering faculty continue to believe thatgrammar skills are the responsibility of English departments or writing centers. As a previousASEE paper put it, issues related to sentence structure, grammar, and syntax are part of the "rule-based" component of writing that others can address: "Students usually have access to goodtutoring services and they should be encouraged to use them" [5].In this paper, we argue that civil engineering programs do a disservice to students if they viewgrammar only as rules that others should teach. Using the example of
which to choose. The Accreditation Board for Engineeringand Technology (ABET) identifies it as a learning outcome for accreditation. [1] Revised ABETstandards for accreditation continue to include engineers’ ethical and professionalresponsibilities. [2]However, first year engineering students may not yet have the necessary knowledge orexperience to deal with the often ambiguous or partially known nature of problems involvingethical judgement in an objective manner. One way to build this experience is to introduceengineering ethics in the first year, with case study descriptions and prompts for ethical decisionssupported by available evidence. Our evidence was obtained from related reference materialsalong with students’ interpretations of a
three key features: a specializedknowledge base, self-regulation, and a commitment to public service— [1-3] elements that havebeen historically codified into a set of ethical guidelines [1, 4, 5]. While these guidelines—Professional Codes of Ethics—may help engineers appreciate what not to do [4, 5], they areinsufficiently specific to guide novice engineers through ethically ambiguous situations. As early20th century artefacts, they also tend to reproduce structural inequities embedded in the history ofthe profession, and thus fail to reflect the experiences of historically underrepresented groups ofengineers [6-14]. The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board’s (CEAB) pairing of ethics andequity [15] demands that we look beyond the codes to
students participating in a pedagogy course to build their skills forhelping peers learn. Previous work has studied the impact of LA programs on traditional studentlearning outcomes in STEM subjects,[1] and researchers have begun to explore what motivatesengineering TAs,[2] but few studies have focused on how relationships are formed betweenassistants, professors, and students. We are conducting research to explore multiple stakeholders’perspectives on both the TA and LA approaches for instructional assistants in undergraduateengineering courses. In this work-in-progress paper we report our preliminary findings for thefollowing research questions: RQ1. What do three engineering education stakeholder groups – professors, assistants
., Latina women vs.Black women) or the category of ‘Asian’ to look at the differences between Asian countries (e.g.,China vs. Japan vs. India) can demonstrate meaningful distinctions between subgroups. In thisway, disaggregation is a useful tool to look at the intersections of identities or demographicgroups. Intersectionality is the concept that multiple minority identities intersect with each otherto multiply identity-focused experiences, which may be a direct result of structural or culturalinequalities [1]. For example, differences in race/ethnicity, gender and sexual identity -- orcombinations of the three -- change the experiences and perceptions of students (see Figure 1).For example, a Latina lesbian has meaningfully different experiences
Aerospace Engineering from North Carolina State University.Ms. Katie Brown, c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 WIP: Characterizing Conceptual Change about Moments in a Statics CourseStatics is a critical course for engineering students. Although it builds on topics generallycovered in high school or undergraduate-level physics, for many students it is their first formalinstruction to engineering mechanics and thus lays the foundation for future study ofengineering. Student conceptual understanding of statics content continues to be an area ofconcern for educators (e.g., [1]-[5]). Not surprisingly, common errors and conceptual difficultiesfor students in statics
provides evidence of student learning experiences andoutcome qualities to examine whether the goals of curricular renewal have beenachieved. Figure 1 illustrates the curricular framework, pedagogical process, studentlearning process, and evaluation technique. The curriculum renewal described in thisstudy is part of a capstone reorganization for the Electronic Engineering Department(EE), which has categorized undergraduate-level courses into the cornerstone,keystone, and capstone. Professors from SE and Educational Psychology formed across-disciplinary team which decided that the renewal process abides by the“Progress Principle” [1]. The Progress Principle stresses on the shaping of a positivestudy life. Not only does it make students feel happy
instructors of higher level courses having to repeatedly review concepts taught in lowerlevel courses. As a result, little time is left for tackling advanced learning outcomes. In order tomitigate this problem the authors would like to first 1) identify areas of threshold concepts in asmany geomatics engineering courses as possible, then 2) develop extra tools or methods toaddress these threshold concepts, and eventually 3) observe any positive changes orimprovements in students’ learning and knowledge retention. The authors are currently primarilyfocusing on the first task of the project, namely identifying the threshold concepts in geomaticsengineering. This is the descriptive or ‘what is’ portion of the teaching and learning project. Thenext two
executionAccording to Bringle and Hatcher [1], service-learning is defined as a “course-based, creditbearing educational experience in which students (a) participate in an organized service activitythat meets identified community needs, and (b) reflect on the service activity in such a way as togain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and anenhanced sense of personal values and civic responsibility” (p. 112).” Service-learning has beenproven to benefit students in many ways. More specifically, service learning has been found toenhance students’ collaboration skills [2], civic engagement, interpersonal skills [3], [4], andtheir ability to apply knowledge to problem-solving [5].Our service-learning course was
and the design process of undergraduate students in project-based courses. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 WIP: High-Achieving Students’ Perceptions of and Approaches to Problem Solving in Introductory Engineering Science CoursesThis work-in-progress paper is grounded in the understanding that undergraduate students’approach to solving assigned engineering problems – a component of their engineeringepistemology – influences the substance and quality of what they learn in the moment and in thefuture [1], [2]. Engineering students need meaningful strategies for approaching multiple types ofproblems in order to develop the knowledge and reasoning necessary for success in
have intuitions even beforeformal instruction and exposure to formal notation but has not examined engineering contextsthat require students to reason about systems primarily through mathematical models and onthose model’s notational conventions.Our theory-building study fills gaps in the visual representations literature by 1) extendinganalysis of the effect of representational context to problem-solving contexts where students co-create the display (e.g., sketching), 2) identifying how representational context and domainknowledge interact when the representation is the primary way in which students learn about aconcept, and 3) identifying categories of features in engineering representations that studentshave trouble accessing.We seek to
, ii) allow students toexplore content at their own pace, thereby accommodating the diversity of students’ high-schoolpreparation. Our study aims to compare and contrast student experience, satisfaction andperformance between a blended and traditional model of instruction through data from surveysand grades. The blended format was piloted during Fall 2016 for half of the course content in afew sections [1]. In Fall 2017, the course was offered in a fully blended mode for the first time.2. Course Design for Fall 2017 The course was offered in either blended or traditional format, based on instructor preference.In the traditional format students attended three hours a week of lecture. In the blended formataccess to online modules replaced
: Teaching engineering students how the brain works to encourage positive learning dispositions and behaviorsIntroductionStudent attrition is a major concern of engineering programs. Only 49.7% of students who beganin engineering in 2007 attained an engineering degree within 5 years [1]. Although some of theother students eventually earned engineering degrees, most departed engineering altogether.Students leave engineering for many reasons, including diminished interest [2], poor teachingand advising [3], and lack of confidence in mathematics and science skills [4]. In contrast, whenstudents adopt a mastery goal orientation, that is, a focus on learning and developing mastery,they experience positive outcomes including persistence, self
initiatives in different contexts and settings.Cultural engineering student organizations such as the National Society of Black Engineers(NSBE) are a type of co-curricular initiative that provides support for students from traditionallyunderserved populations. Recent studies of local NSBE Chapters at predominantly whiteinstitutions (PWIs) show that Black engineering students who participate in such chaptersachieve more equitable outcomes (e.g., graduation rates that meet or exceed the percentages ofthe total engineering cohort at their institution)[1], [2]. However, further investigation is neededto provide empirical insights into how and why these kinds of outcomes occur.To study an engineering student organization focused on increasing the number
), for innovative educational outreach that has in- spired high school students and college level women to study engineering, the Stony Brook University Hispanic Heritage Month (HHM) Latino Faculty Recognition Award (2009), and the Chair of Excellence by the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid-Banco de Santander (Spain) (2012). c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Women in Science and Engineering: A Framework for an Honors Undergraduate Curriculum (Work in Progress)IntroductionRecent reform efforts have focused on the disproportionate representation of women inengineering and the physical sciences, since retention rates of women have lagged behind thoseof male students [1
identifying information was asked for or stored. The provided survey link was thesame for all invitations and the link was sent to all students at West Virginia University Instituteof Technology. The IRB approval acknowledgement is on file at West Virginia University. Datacollection took place during the Spring 2018 semester and was completed by 38 female studentsand 30 male students.The survey collected data that focused on the following: (1) areas that students feel they strugglewith, (2) issues they are have completing classwork (particularly in STEM courses), (3) theirbackground prior to enrolling at WVU Tech, and (4) experiences with their major. Additionally,data was collected for student opinions’ on student organizations and student services
. in Information Management from Arizona State University, and a Ph.D. in Educational Policy and Planning from The University of Texas at Austin. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Women on the Community College Pathway Towards a Baccalaureate Degree in Engineering or Computer Science in TexasIntroductionThe community college pathway towards an engineering or computer science (ECS)baccalaureate degree has the potential to increase the diversity of the ECS fields. Approximately15% of two-year college students declare a major in ECS, and the majority of those who transferare successful at completing their ECS degrees [1]. However, while more women than mentransfer from two