. Academic engineers speak of their desire to teach, but also of the “appropriateness” oftheir careers for women, especially for married women. On the other hand, female PEs spoke ofchoosing industry to fulfill a desire to demonstrate engineering capabilities, as well as beingenticed by the financial benefits of industry. Overall, these women’s voices afford us theopportunity to begin to understand career decision making in a country where women are wellrepresented in engineering. This paper is part of a larger study which contributes to the literaturethat seeks to understand why women pursue and persist in engineering as a curricular and careerchoice.1. Introduction and MotivationAlthough the underrepresentation of women in engineering in the
own experiment during the class period toaccomplish this task. Most tubing was cut to provide a water column (driving force) between 1.5and 4 ft. Students collected water as it drained while recording the time, and the mass of waterwas determined with the scale. With this mass flow rate, students could analyze the system forthe unknown equivalent lengths. A week after the in-class work, a question based on thisexperiment was included in Exam 1. Further, a brief report was required of each group 12 daysafter the in-class activity, worth 5% of the course grade. A survey in the Fall term of 2017assessed students’ thoughts on this format versus a traditional lecture, and if they believe thishelped their understanding. Based on questions asked of
contrast in academic preparedness between the two groups.Students at both schools participated in an in-class design project using Energy3D(http://energy.concord.org/energy3d/), a CAD simulation environment25. Energy3D is developedby the Concord Consortium as “a computer-aided engineering tool for designing, analyzing, andconstructing green buildings and power stations that utilize renewable energy”. The user-friendlysoftware works in a way that allows students to see the effects of each design and specificationsthey choose to their overall design specifics. It offers a simple 3D graphical user interface fordrawing buildings, and evaluating their performance using cost and energy (solar and heat)simulations (see Figure 1, below).Over the course of
practices of experienced educators in wellestablished undergraduate engineering design courses. Our research seeks to answer questions about how instruction is adjusted throughout the duration of an engineering design course to help students sequence an array of engineering design activities into coherent engineering design practices. Our research adopts the informed design teaching and learning matrix as a lens for viewing design activities [1], [2]. This WIP paper is limited to exploring teaching strategies targeting a single focal engineering design pattern – troubleshooting – within a cornerstone engineering design course. Using interview data and classroom observations, we seek to provide rich descriptions of how teaching strategies
of PLC controlled manufacturing equipment.The paper outlines the design and construction of these low cost trainers. The trainers arepresented as independent of PLC vendors and may be constructed for less than $700 per stationwithout the PLC. A low cost PLC may be purchased for a hundred dollars or more to create afully capable trainer. An example of lecture materials and student work are presented.IntroductionProgrammable Logic Controllers (PLCs) are widely used in customized control systems and areused in most manufacturing facilities. Estimates for the current global controls market fallaround $10 Billion per year 1. Given that PLCs are one small component of the systems theycontrol, the automated equipment industry revenues are
havebeen released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use and repurposing byothers. OER include full courses, course materials, modules, textbooks, streaming videos, tests,software, and any other tools, materials, or techniques used to support access to knowledge.” [1].When compared to traditionally published content, OER can have several advantages. First andforemost to many students, OER are free to access digitally or available at a low cost if offeredas a physical copy. The College Board advises that students budget between $1220 and $1420 ayear for books and supplies during the 2017-2018 academic year [2], and the cost of collegetextbooks has been rising at a rate that far exceeds the rate of inflation for decades
with an engineering education doctoral student to design a series of active learningactivities for a mechanics of materials course. The goals of the activities were twofold: 1) toincrease the student peer-to-peer collaboration during lectures, and 2) to increase the students’conceptual understanding of difficult, yet foundational, topics. Preliminary results indicated thatthe students found the activities helpful to their learning and felt comfortable with the conceptstargeted. This work in progress manuscript briefly describes each of the active learning activitiesand illustrates the pedagogical benefits of interdepartmental collaboration.IntroductionIn Fall 2017, a new student-centered building opened on Purdue University’s campus that
related to distance learning has been reported [1]. Many schools are nowoffering engineering programs as a part of their distance education across the globe. Distanceeducation delivery methods began with broadcasting the courses on national TV and withsending video tapes and written study material to the students. These methods of deliveringdistance education have significantly changed and improved within the last decade as a result ofthe speed and the accessibility of the Internet. Students are now able to read, watch and performtheir assignment via web pages. Additionally, they may discuss their assignments, lecture notes,and other course related material with other students or with their instructor by joining an onlinediscussion forum or by
engineering graduates have the skills to be successful in the workplace (e.g., [1]-[2]).These courses act as a foundation on which build the rest of a student’ educational experienceand seek to, as recommended by the National Academy of Science, “introduce the “essence” ofengineering early in their undergraduate careers” [1, p. 2]. One widely adopted practice fromthese proposed changes is that of First-Year Engineering (FYE) courses, with nearly 60% ofengineering programs adopting a FYE course by 2013 [3]. Due to each institution’s uniquehistory, structures and needs, FYE programs across the country vary with regards to theircontent[4] and structure[3]. Additionally, there is some variation in timing of FYE courses, astransfer students are often
chose. Practical experience (how devicesare made/work) was chosen by 55.5% of managers as a weakness, in contrast to only 33% ofdepartment heads and 37.3% of early-career MEs [1-4].In the Engineering Science department of Loyola University Chicago (LUC), we are developinga four-semester design project to build a functional cardiograph, which will give our studentsthis practical experience. All engineering courses are taught using a minimal lecture style. Forevery 50 minute course period, the first ten to fifteen minutes are a mini-lecture to go over finepoints of the homework. The remaining course period time is devoted to active learning.BackgroundActive learning, which is generally defined as “any instructional method that engages studentsin
this presentation exercise is two-fold: 1) Seniors gain experience presenting their design to a non-technical audience (with only amath and science background) and 2) the Freshmen, by learning about the design processthrough peers in their major, obtain a perception of connectivity with the major and thedepartment. The connection may help Freshmen envision where they will be by senior year andstrengthen their identity as engineers. This work in progress presents these approaches alongwith survey data from each cohort and additional insight from the instructors. Initial results fromthe second and third year students indicate they enjoyed the approach, recognize the applicabilityof their current coursework within the context of a larger design
that emphasizes student discovery. Scholars are selectedannually based on academic ability and financial need. Faculty mentoring, tutoring, peer studygroups, college survival skills training, career development, and undergraduate researchexperiences are all tools to help the scholars. Some MEP Scholars are actively participating inthe following research projects: 1) Design and Development of an e-Health System, 2) Designand Development of an Electronic Health Records program, 3) Study of the Field Effect onCharge Transport through Conductive Polymers Injected in Vascular Channels of AngiospermLeaves, and 4) A 3D-printed desk organizer. In this paper, MEP Scholars briefly present theirprojects and share their thoughts and reflections about the
academic life-cycleand can serve as an exploratory time with less pressure than the earlier Assistant Professorperiod. However, this is a time of transition that can often lead to isolation, confusion, andambivalence [1] – a perfect time to increase support. The intention of the coaching programdescribed in this paper is to help newly tenured faculty to explore their opportunities and identifyresources they need to strive towards developing their leadership potential whether that be inresearch, in their academic discipline, as a policy maker, a change agent, or as an academicleader.Vague expectations, including less than explicit requirements for promotion to full professor canbe demotivating and lead to disengagement [2]. Baldwin, et. al. [3
duringthe session and that provides a space for discussion.IntroductionThis Work in Progress describes an exploration of the roles that faculty development play ineducational reform to increase student retention in engineering programs and support studentsuccess in STEM courses. Focus in recent years on the recruitment and retention of diversestudent populations in engineering and other STEM programs is evident in the number of reportsthat highlight its importance, declare calls to action and identify critical factors that impactstudent retention [1-2]. Additional motivation for institutions to address student retention hasbeen provided by funding opportunities (such as those from the National Science Foundation,Gates Foundation, Howard Hughes
Education, 2018IntroductionIn 2013, the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan launched the CommonReading Experience (Edington, Holmes Jr., & Reinke, 2015). This program was developed forincoming first-year engineering students with three goals in mind: 1. Students build and develop a sense of community (including a sense of belonging and engineering student identity) 2. Students broaden their thinking about the skills (both technical and non-technical) that they need to be a successful engineer in the 21st century 3. Model intellectual engagementThroughout the history of the Common Reading Experience (CRE), program evaluations havebeen compiled annually. However, to determine if the program was meeting its
-nated by their stiffness or inertia. These limits, derived below, represent overdamped behaviorfor which the meaning of natural frequency is questionable. The meaning of natural frequency for second-order systems that do not oscillate, e.g.,overdamped systems, is not typically addressed in engineering textbooks [1-5]. It is unclearwhether there is agreement in the physics and mechanics communities on a precise and unambig-uous definition of a system’s natural frequency. In the physics community, the topic has beenraised, specifically in terms of what an unambiguous definition of “natural frequency” wouldoffer in clarifying how to present overdamped system behavior to undergraduates [6]. Some basic concept questions can be posed. Do all
content found in the original instrument. This approach madethe survey completion time more reasonable for the content experts. Proper human subjectapproval was obtained prior to conducting the study.Dilemma ReviewContent experts from the chemical industry and individuals holding chemical engineering facultypositions were asked to rate the dilemmas’ relevance to real-life engineering process safetysituations. Content experts could rate the dilemma as not relevant (1), moderately relevant (2), orvery relevant (3). Content experts were also asked to provide feedback on dilemmas they rated asnot relevant, or moderately relevant. Once the surveys were completed, the researchers averagedthe scores to determine whether or not a dilemma should be
approaches is presented from the point of view of the student. Theassessment also asked the student to rate the assignment topics, to list how many hours werespent per each lab, and to propose suggestions for improvement.1 IntroductionLaboratory work is essential for students in the Science, Technology, Engineering, andMathematics (STEM) fields, and its importance is well-studied [1, 2]. Laboratory assignmentsoffer students opportunities for practical applications of theory and have the potential to promoteknowledge acquisition via experimentation. Hands-on learning is an important process forstudents, as active learning achieves positive educational results and prepares students forreal-world problems in the STEM fields [3]. Laboratories allow
Work in Progress: Development and Implementation of a Self- Guided Arduino Module in an Introductory Engineering Design CourseAbstractThis Work in Progress paper discusses the implementation of an online module designed to teachbasic Arduino programming skills to students enrolled in a first-year engineering design course.The learning objectives for students were (1) to learn the basics of Arduino programmingthrough hands-on activities, (2) to connect with the numerous online resources available forcreating their own projects for personal or class purposes, and (3) to gain a sense of curiosityabout what types of challenges and problems they may be able to solve with their newfoundskills. This module
Education, 2018 Work-in-Progress: A Framework for Development of Web-based Multimedia Pre-laboratory ExercisesIntroductionEngineering is an applied discipline, and therefore, undergraduate laboratories are considered anessential part of engineering curriculum [1], [2]. Laboratories help reinforce theoretical concepts[3], and improve skills such as problem solving, analytical thinking and technical skills [4]-[6].Other benefits include learning professional skills such as time management, teamwork, effectivewriting and oral communication skills [7]-[11].Despite the potential value of undergraduate laboratories, there is a general agreement that theactual learning outcomes often do not balance the time, effort, and money
?IntroductionGraduate student instructors (GSIs) are not only essential to the instructional team at manyresearch institutions, but their teaching appointments are often the only teaching experiencesthey have prior to becoming faculty. Moreover, GSIs have been found to play an important rolein improving student retention and inclusion in science, technology, engineering and math fields(STEM) [1]. Undergraduate instructional aids (IAs) have also been found to benefit studentlearning [2, 3, 4], and their training is fundamental to that success [4, 5]. As a result, calls havebeen made to develop and improve the professional development of student instructors [4, 6].Trainings at different institutions range from two-hour departmental orientations with no
aims to address the broadeningparticipation challenge in engineering. Through a National Science Foundation sponsoredproject, a pilot collective impact alliance [1], [2] was formed to enhance entry and persistence inengineering of first-generation students, women, under-represented ethnic minorities, and thosewith socio-economic need. The distinctive mark of this alliance is that it comprises a range oforganized to self-adapting systems [3] that learn from and respond to each other around the goalof broadening participation in engineering. The approach adopted is to foster engineering identity [4], [5], [6], [7
detail the development of the program and its related research inquiry whichincludes a qualitative comparison of the students who are drawn to this new approach toengineering.IntroductionEngineering as a discipline sits at the volatile intersection of a professional landscape that israpidly changing and an educational system that is perennially resistant to change. Recent callsfor innovation and creativity including “The Moonshot Approach to Change in HigherEducation” [1] outline a needs analysis for education in the 21st century. Industry has stressedthe need for college graduates who are comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty, problemsolvers and problem finders, empathetic, bold thinkers, and lifelong learners. Many of theseneeds have long
on protein and peptide design. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Work in Progress: Identifying Current Outcomes and Addressing the Need for Process Safety Education in Unit Operations CoursesIntroductionIndustry leaders are concerned about the lack of safety education in chemical engineering due tochemical engineers working with a variety of hazardous chemicals that can cause harm to theindividual, the surrounding community and the environment [1]. The concern is furthermotivated by the 12 current and completed Chemical Safety Board fire, explosion and chemicalrelease investigations reported between February of 2017 and January of 2018 [2].To address these concerns in education
evolving based on observations of student perspectives, updated trends in theengineering field and broader world, and specific student feedback. The modular, onlinenature of the course allows for continuing evolution.The course redesign was informed by a desire to explicitly incorporate a BroadEngineering perspective by exploring the diverse challenges engineers will face in the21st century and examining the knowledge, skills and abilities required to meet thesechallenges. This broad perspective is analogous to the horizontal bar of the T-shapedskills model introduced by David Guest in 1991 [1]. The concept of the “T-Shaped”Engineer is concisely explained in Rogers and Freuler [2]. The value of broadengineering was recently reaffirmed by students
ethics important for chemical engineers? A variety of reasons havebeen posed, including but not limited to enhanced awareness on proper mitigation methods ofhazards and ensuring up and coming engineers understand their responsibilities when faced withadverse situations. By definition, process safety is a discipline that focuses on the prevention offires, explosions, and accidental chemical releases at chemical process facilities [1]. Processsafety provides the means for engineers to understand the risks they are taking to developmechanisms that make those situations inherently safer for all involved. Whether it is at thebench scale or manufacturing level, understanding hazards is crucial at all phases of a process.In the same respect, ethical
notion and as a result, many of them miss out on valuable learning opportunities. In amidterm exam study, a survey was given to 285 freshmen engineering majors and only 25% ofstudents reported trying to learn from their mistakes while the material was fresh in their minds.The majority of the students put the test away and often never looked at it again. In anotheranonymous survey of 456 first-year engineering students, only 21% reported that they would usethe exam again later, and many specified that would only be if the final were cumulative [1].This data prompted the First-Year Engineering Honors Program at The Ohio State University(OSU) to implement exam corrections as a mandatory assignment for any student scoring lessthan 90% on an exam. It
, introduce amultidisciplinary project to teach the fundamental principles of engineering, and to introduce awide array of engineering disciplines within a single course.The assumption entering into this project was that core engineering concepts can be graspedthrough practice, as opposed to traditional classroom lecture, to teach students the engineeringdesign loop, intra- and intergroup collaboration and communication, design methodology, andcritical thinking skills [1]. However, the idea of learning through practice in no way eliminatesthe traditional lecture to communicate topics necessary for practicing engineering, such as staticsor basic circuit design. Therefore, the course that was developed incorporates two learningstyles: active learning
a service learning projectconsistent with the university’s mission.This work examines two trials. The first trial had a single student participant and was quitesuccessful. The second trial had 4 students participate, but had mixed results.IntroductionAt Ohio Dominican University, there are two computing programs, a small Computer Scienceprogram, with approximately 30 total students, and a small Software Engineering program withabout 20 total students. The first students enrolled in the Software Engineering program in the fallof 2014. The program was created following the 2004 edition of the Association for ComputingMachinery (ACM) and IEEE Computer Society’s joint Software Engineering Curriculumguidelines 1 . The program culminates in a 1
among the RED teams and to study the processesfollowed by RED teams. This work in progress provides a brief overview of the program andcurrent progress of some projects. We highlight the diversity of current RED projects throughupdates from eight projects across the three cohorts: four from Cohort 1: Arizona StateUniversity, Colorado State University, Oregon State University, and the University of SanDiego, three from Cohort 2: Boise State University, Rowan University, Virginia Tech, and onefrom Cohort 3: Georgia Tech. Updates are also included from the REDPAR team about theRED Consortium (REDCON) and research that crosses the consortium. We hope that this paperwill help the engineering education community to learn how these projects are