new topics. “The US-Denmark PIRE Program was life changing, and the highlight of my college career. Without a doubt, the professor that led this program made this a truly memorable experience.”Moreover, participants were better able to define their own career paths, developing confidencefor future endeavors. “I want to work in the energy field, this course help me to define what I am the most interested in, thanks to the field trips but also lectures. Working on solar thermal energy for district heating is relevant for me because it was a topic I did not know a lot about, but now I can consider applying for a job related to it.” “My participation in this program has afforded me the opportunity to experience education in an
Paper ID #19292Early Validation of the Motivation in Team Projects (MTP) AssessmentDr. Peter Rogers, The Ohio State University Dr. Peter Rogers is a Professor of Practice in the Department of Engineering Education at The Ohio State University. He joined the university in October 2008 bringing with him 35 years of industry experience. His career includes senior leadership roles in engineering, sales, and manufacturing developing products using multidisciplinary teams to convert customer needs to commercially viable products and services. Rogers co-led the development of an ABET-approved year-long Capstone design experience
gender dynamics in MIT’s Mechanical Engineering Department havechanged over the past decade and a half, a range of mechanical engineering faculty wereinterviewed on their thoughts from their own career paths in engineering to what they haveobserved at MIT to what they think could be done better in achieving gender balance in the fieldof mechanical engineering.Ten MIT staff and tenure-track faculty members were interviewed for the original thesis. For thepurpose of condensing the findings into this conference paper, only quotes from four interviewsubjects are included here.Three of the four interviewees quoted in this paper are tenure-track faculty members, while thefourth heads MIT’s undergraduate admissions office. Two of the interviewees are
Paper ID #20403Guiding Principles and Pedagogical Tools for an Introductory Software De-velopment CourseDr. Mark Hoffman, Quinnipiac University Mark Hoffman is a professor of computer science at Quinnipiac University. He joined the University in 2001 following a career in industry and has taught a wide variety of courses including data structures, computer architecture and organization, software development, and the senior capstone project. His re- search interests include communication and critical thinking skills in computer science education, and the impact of technology on work/home boundary management. He received
Engineering d, lIntroduction to water pollution, air pollution, noise, hazardous and solidwastes, and their control. Environmental impact statements and globalpollution issues.Engineering Environmental Sustainability d, mAn introduction to the examination of global-scale resource utilization,food, energy and commodity production, population dynamics, andtheir ecosystem impacts.Environmental and Ecological Engineering Professional Practice lSeminarSeminar lectures and discussions to introduce students to aspects ofprofessional practice within Environmental and EcologicalEngineering. Topics include career planning and placement skills,professional responsibility and ethics
Competition.The primary goal of this study was to provide undergraduate Mechanical Engineering students inMECH 486 an introduction to lean manufacturing goals, tools, and best practices, and betterprepare students for their future careers. A secondary goal was to validate that leanmanufacturing principles can be taught to students in an introductory-level lecture, and thenapplied by students to a variety prototype projects.Background and Literature ReviewTo begin this study, two publications were reviewed to develop baseline knowledge on leanmanufacturing. The first was The Machine That Changed the World, a summary of a five yearresearch study on the automobile industry and differences between Japanese and Westernmanufacturing styles published by Womack
Buzzanell, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Patrice M. Buzzanell is a Distinguished Professor in the Brian Lamb School of Communication and the School of Engineering Education (courtesy) at Purdue University. She also serves as the Butler Chair and Director of the Susan Bulkily Butler Center for Leadership Excellence. Editor of four books and author of over 175 articles and chapters as well as proceedings and encyclopedia entries, her research centers on the intersections of career, change, leadership, and resilience. Fellow and past president of the International Communication Association, she has received numerous awards for her research, teaching/mentoring, and engagement. She has worked on
engineering, in eachcase no student reported a gain lower than moderate. 75% rated their gains at 4 or 5, foraverages of 4.2 in each of those three prompts.Additionally the open-ended prompts at the end of the survey suggest that students had animproved appreciation for the topic of sanitation and its importance in society. Somerelevant quotes are: “I have a better understanding of the variables one must take into consideration when addressing sanitation issues, such as culture, available resources, and community involvement.” “I had never considered working on solving sanitation issues in my engineering career. This course has made me realize the great potential we have as engineers to address (these) issues
is concerning for many reasons. Stevens and collaborators point out that: “Students often have vague images of professional engineering work, and the images they do have are strongly colored by the experiences in their educational careers…As a result, students often ignore, discount, or simply do not see images of engineering that emphasize its nontechnical, noncalculative sides and its non-individual aspects” ([6], p. 120).Similarly, Jonassen also notes problems in the discrepancy between engineering problems solvedby students and practitioners: “Learning to solve classroom problems does not effectivelyprepare engineering graduates to solve workplace problems” ([7], pp. 103-104). When apracticing engineer fails to consider social
electronicallybefore the beginning of the next class. The beginning of the next class began with discussion ofsolutions from these assignments.Five types of assignments were available to students: concept questions, practice problems,homework problems, unit tests, and an advanced project. Concept questions were designed tohelp students learn to connect detailed course content with their outside experiences, othercourses in the curriculum, and their own career goals. Some of these questions asked students toreflect on and self-assess their own learning processes. Practice problems were similar tohomework and test problems. The advanced project was a group project that involved visiting alab to acquire EEG data during an “oddball” experiment and performing data
creativityand innovation: Civil engineers don't magically become creative and innovative later in their careers. We must foster this during the pre-licensure period. Any job that does not require creativity and innovation can be automated and done by robots. Are we training engineer robots? or are we training problem solvers? Creativity should be promoted in our profession as much as is reasonable. The smartest tend to be the most creative and if we shun that part of a young person's interest, we will lose that valuable talent to another profession. Civil engineering is being left out of the innovation centers that are becoming so popular on campuses and proving to be highly effective in expanding the learning opportunities for
Paper ID #26697Tensions in Applying a Design-Thinking Approach to Address Barriers to In-creasing Diversity and Inclusion in a Large, Legacy Engineering ProgramSean Eddington, Purdue University, West Lafayette Sean Eddington (Ph.D., Purdue University) will be an assistant professor of Communication Studies at Kansas State University beginning Fall 2019. Sean’s primary research interests exist at the intersec- tions of organizational communication, new media, gender, and organizing. Within engineering contexts, Sean has examined career issues within the engineering discipline regarding (1) new faculty experiences
Paper ID #26443The Impact of Multidisciplinary Teams on Sustainability Projects in EPICSDr. Stephanie M. Gillespie, Arizona State University Stephanie Gillespie joined the EPICS@ASU program after finishing her Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. She has extensive experience in K-12 outreach and curriculum development, and is passionate about giving students opportunities to make a difference throughout their academic career. As the EPICS Director of Instruction, Stephanie leads the EPICS pro- gram’s curriculum development, EPICS-Community College program, and program
systemsthinking, ethics, social justice, and social responsibility (SR) into engineering education. Forexample, the problem rewrite assignment is a form of problem-based learning, a pedagogicalstrategy that others are using to teach SR and SJ [22]. Another promising strategy is usingcorporate social responsibility (CSR) as a tool in engineering ethics education, as a way ofpreparing students for “the CSR dimensions of their careers” and broadening studentsunderstanding of stakeholders, especially to include oppositional groups [23]. Nieusma andCieminski [24] suggest “a shift to ethics knowledge as ‘skills that must be practiced in order tobe learned’ [that] could fit nicely with the contemporary emphasis on active and problem-basedlearning approaches in
engineers. Because Make to Innovate is open tostudents from the freshman level to the senior level, we hope to reinforce these skills throughouttheir academic career continuously.ConclusionWe believe that the Make to Innovate program is helping our students in learning additional skillssuch as professional skills, manufacturing skills, and moving a design to reality. These skills willhelp our students in becoming better engineers and give them experience that can help them intheir future careers. The data we have collected so far have shown that we are making an impacton students and that employers have taken notice of the benefit of the program. As with anyprogram though, continuous assessment and improvement are needed to keep the
apost-survey the last week of class, administered for course improvement purposes. However,only students that consented to participate in the research study have their responses analyzedand presented in this paper. The surveys ask questions about the students’ level of comfort in theclassroom, sense of belonging within many contexts, engineering identity, skills and abilities,intent to continue engineering in college and as a career, and some math confidence questions.Since reflection questions were assignments in the class, all students submitted them as part oftheir coursework. But, only the responses from consenting research participants are included inthis research dataset. Students who dropped the course after attending multiple class
listed in Table 1. Note that weuse the title “Professor” for all faculty members on our team, both teaching line and tenure line,without implying that this is their official university rank. Professors A, B, C, and D are allmembers of the academic faculty at their institutions. Professors A and B have reached thehighest teaching faculty rank at their university, Professor C is an early career non-tenure trackTable 1: Research team and roles. Research Team Role Selected Demographics Member Professor A Lead author and professor (teaching Female, white (non-Hispanic), faculty) teaching the third-year course heterosexual, cisgender, not
Paper ID #29709A Study of the Effectiveness of Using Hands-On Active Learning Exercisesin a Production Operations Management CourseMajor Steven Hoak, United States Military Academy Major Steven Hoak currently serves as an instructor at the United States Military Academy in the Depart- ment of Systems Engineering, focusing on engineering management. He is a career Army Aviation and Acquisition Officer. He holds a Master degree in Nuclear Engineering (Air Force Institute of Technol- ogy), a Master of Business Management (Mississippi State University) as well as a Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering from the United
theentrepreneurial journey to designing programs that allow students to have founder experiencesand launch their own business ventures. The intention of these programs is for engineeringstudents to gain a skillset and orientation towards being more innovative and entrepreneurial intheir careers once they leave the university, whether they choose to try to immediately start acompany or not.Many of the activities that are designed into entrepreneurship programs, however, result instudents experiencing varying degrees of failure with the most extreme case being student-launched ventures that fail. While entrepreneurship programs typically talk about embracingfailure and learning to fail fast, it’s unclear what impact these failure experiences have
PBSL efforts may offer two additionaladvantages. First, since students are addressing concrete needs in an interprofessional workingenvironment, the interprofessional PBSL experience may help foster mature attitudes towardsprofessional practice. Second, the array of challenges, joys, and rewards associated with servingthe community in an interprofessional team may promote career readiness and confidence inone’s training and aptitude.The need for interprofessional education and collaborative practice is not unique to engineering.Training programs for pre-service professionals in allied health specialties, such as clinicalexercise physiology, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and athletic training, benefit frominterprofessional experiences
, highly considered by ANU's HE leadership as a critical aspect. In fact, there is along-term partnership of ANU's minor with five or six community organizations beyond EWB.A few social enterprises have been established by alumni, which are working both domesticallyand internationally, broadening the students opportunities to undertake internships or researchprojects, including Abundant Water with programs in Lao and Timor Leste, which helps remotecommunities stop diseases by providing access to clean water, and Enable Development, whichworks with empowering people with disabilities [21].Finally, HE at ANU is not compulsory but restricted to interested students. The evidenceprovided in the benefits for a professional career and consistent
-shelf engineering ethics textbooks, produce a mix of factors thatmay result in the common finding that students often become measurably less ethical as theyprogress through their undergraduate career [9], [10].In response to this, the College of Engineering at Boise State University is taking advantage ofsystemic curricular change efforts made possible by an NSF sponsored RED grant(Revolutionizing Engineering and Computer Science Departments) to its Department ofComputer Science [11]–[17], and adapting innovations from that project to other engineeringdepartments. This manuscript describes efforts in the Department of Mechanical and BiomedicalEngineering and Micron School of Materials Science and Engineering. These efforts
deeper and more critical exploration in one or two targetedcourses may provide a combination that yields appropriate student education on ESI.IntroductionChemical engineering students, like all engineers, need to be educated about ethics and societalimpacts (ESI), in order to prepare them for their careers. Accreditation requires this knowledge,with the new ABET criteria 3 outcome (4) acknowledging the interconnected elements of ethicsand societal impacts: “an ability to recognize ethical and professional responsibilities inengineering situations and make informed judgments, which must consider the impact ofengineering solutions in global, economic, environmental, and societal contexts” [1]. Inaddition, the Chemical Engineers Body of Knowledge
’ previous experiences with college writing.These results paint a rather bleak picture of our engineering undergraduates’ education aswriters. As Figure 4 indicates, many students will likely receive no disciplinary writinginstruction until their 3rd year of study. All of our students will be required to write at some pointin their undergraduate careers. However, considering the rate at which students place out of thefirst-year composition course and the lack of writing instruction in engineering courses havingwriting components, some students may never receive any writing instruction, disciplinary orotherwise, during their entire college career.Ideally, writing would be integrated throughout the curriculum by incorporating writinginstruction and
150 articles and chapters, her research centers on the intersections of career, gender communication, lead- ership, and resilience. Fellow and past president of the International Communication Association, she has received numerous awards for her research, teaching/mentoring, and engagement. She is working on Purdue-ADVANCE initiatives for institutional change, the Transforming Lives Building Global Commu- nities (TLBGC) team in Ghana through EPICS, and individual engineering ethical development and team ethical climate scales as well as everyday negotiations of ethics in design through NSF funding as Co-PI. [Email: buzzanel@purdue.edu]David Torres, Purdue University, West Lafayette David is a fourth year
Formative Feedback CoachingIntroductionFaculty development, as it relates to teaching and learning, has been a persistent challenge inhigher education. College faculty generally begin their careers with no formal training in teach-ing and, consequently, ‘teach as I was taught’ is the starting point for most new faculty. Respon-sibility for faculty development of teaching, therefore, falls to an administrative unit of theuniversity. Many institutions have successful faculty orientation and mentoring programs, butthose programs often fall short of moving new teachers to effective practice in engagement peda-gogy using active learning strategies. Modifying the practices of experienced faculty is particu-larly difficult.This paper explores how faculty
great area, but it's less than 15% of the courses that students take in an undergraduate career… then in the other 85% it’s completely invisible, you're going to think, as an engineering student, just doesn't matter. This broader impacts, if it had really mattered, my professors would have mentioned it more. But we’re trying to change that culture.Teaching ESI throughout the educational experience conveys the inherent interconnectedness ofethical decision-making and engineering. A psychology professor who teaches at a privatereligiously affiliated baccalaureate college with arts and science focus [26] developed an ethicscourse for computer science students that is integrated into the program. He described how thewhole department bought
implementation of a socio-technical laboratory, one that emulates anexperience of global engineering fieldwork.IntroductionThe practice of engineering is a profession that engages the material world. The work engineersundertake requires being in and around the processes, artefacts, and users of the solutions theydevelop. This necessarily leads to being involved in investigations “in the field” where a widerange of technical and non-technical data is gathered or generated, and situational awareness iscentral to their analysis and recommendations based upon the conclusions drawn in the givensituation. During their career, most engineers have undoubtedly faced the urgent matter of beingsent to an installation site or to visit a supplier to investigate a
. Lang’s current research interests focus on identifying, assessing, and developing key skills, knowledge, attitudes, and other intrinsic and extrinsic factors required for engineers to effectively lead others, particularly other engineers and across cultures.Dr. Meg Handley, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Meg Handley is currently the Associate Director for Engineering Leadership Outreach at Penn State University. Previously, Meg served as the Director of the Career & Corporate Connection’s office at the Smeal College of Business at Penn State University. Meg holds a PhD in Workforce Education at Penn State, where she focused on interpersonal behaviors and their impact on engineering leadership potential