utilityand functionality. This project allows each university team to follow General Motor’sreal-world Global Vehicle Development Process to participate in hands-on research anddevelopment with leading-edge automotive propulsion, fuels, materials and emissions-control technologies.Interdisciplinary Team StructureABET and employers have encouraged engineering programs to emphasize diverseinterdisciplinary teamwork. A project of the magnitude of Challenge X is best done insuch a diverse group. Prior to writing the proposal a team of faculty from fourdepartments (Mechanical, Electrical and Chemical Engineering plus Computer Science)agreed on an approach to the project. The faculty then recruited students from these andother departments to write a
students to weigh trade-offs betweenresponsiveness and excessive motion. In order to assess the value of collaboration in thesequizzes, we contrast student gains on one scenario-based quiz completed individually to thosecompleted collaboratively. We evaluated pre-test performance and conceptual growth using avalidated concept inventory [1]. Students also completed a pre/post measure of their abilities toco-regulate their work as members of a group. We found that students showed improved co-regulation abilities, performed lowest on the individually completed quiz, and that the studentswho began with the lowest scores on the concept inventory had comparable outcomes to theirhigher-scoring peers. Collaborative quizzes are well aligned to active
do, and uses the relationships among team members toaccomplish tasks more or less efficiently.The five- or six-member student design teams were assigned through a skills and personalityassessment at the beginning of the fifteen-week semester, using the CATME® team formationsurvey. The CATME results were checked against the students’ self-reported data about theircurrent skills in writing, speaking, and engineering graphics before the students were formallyassigned to their teams.Research methods followed an explanatory sequential design, in which the results of one or morequantitative methods are used to inform the choice of one or more qualitative methods to collectand analyze data. Quantitative data were collected and analyzed using a 32
modeling, Numerical Linear Algebra, microprocessors, artificial intelligence, sci- entific image analysis, compilers, exascale programing, and courses in program and algorithm analysis.Dr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Assistant Dean for Graduate Student Services at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she earned Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engineering from the University of Michigan. She has published more than two dozen peer-reviewed works related to her interests in educational technology and enhancing undergraduate education
Paper ID #22525Computing and Engineering Scholarship Program at SCSUDr. Susantha Herath, St. Cloud State University Dr. Susantha Herath is a professor and the Chair of the Information Systems (IS) department at St. Cloud State University. He holds a Ph.D. in computer engineering. His current research interests are in risk management, cyber security and information assurance. He has 25 years of college-level teaching experience at graduate and undergraduate levels and 31 years of research experience. He has published over 75 peer-reviewed articles. He has submitted over 45 competitive grant proposals and received over
-doctoral fellow at Carnegie Mellon Uni- versity, Pittsburgh (2001 – 2003) and BHP Institute for Steel Processing and Products, Australia (1998 – 2001). Dr. Manohar held the position of Chief Materials Scientist at Modern Industries, Pittsburgh (2003 – 2004) and Assistant Manager (Metallurgy Group), Engineering Research Center, Telco, India (1985 – 1993). He has published over 65 papers in peer-reviewed journals and conferences including a 2007 Best Paper Award by the Manufacturing Division of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), three review papers and three book chapters. He has participated in numerous national and international conferences. He is a member of ASM International, TMS, ACerS, AIST, ASEE
administrators, he succeeded via a transition fromprocedural C++, with a virtual robot called Karel, to MATLAB, with a video game calledGorillas. These two versions of the course are compared and contrasted, with a focus on theauthor’s own contributions. Furthermore, the pedagogical approach is compared and contrastedwith that of relevant literature. As with the state of the art, the work argues in favour of teachingintroductory programming using MATLAB. Unlike the state of the art, the proposed approachexploits video game design and iterative and incremental development. Effectiveness of thecontributions are demonstrated through student, peer, and self assessments.1. IntroductionAt the University of Alberta, all 1st year engineers take a 12-week course
Engineering Research and Learning (INSPIRE). Her research interests center on implementation and assessment of mathematical modeling problems. Page 22.1218.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Realistic Open-Ended Engineering Problem Solving as Sites for Postdoctoral Researcher Training in Course Instruction and DevelopmentAbstractTraditional roles of postdoctoral researchers often involve scholarly activities that are focused onresearch and grant writing. Seldom do PRs receive training on activities pertaining to curriculumand instruction – topics that are important if these PRs
tools and services, includingmentorship, professional readiness training, research opportunities, scholarships, and peer-mentor activities. These efforts have led to impressive outcomes, including a significant increasein retention and persistence rates, increased graduation rates having quad-fold those observed inthe general student population, and an impressive record of engagements in industry, research,and leadership experiences. This paper discusses the program structure and outcomes from fiveperspectives that include background experiences, the structure of provided services, the resultsof their execution, the elements of knowledge derived from its application, and the challengesexperienced throughout its implementation.I
problem-solving process – from ideasformation to solutions – with their peers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented lab strategies, students in theparticipating courses were randomly divided into experimental and control groups. Bothassignment grades and students' feedback via surveys were used to evaluate students' learning.Participants in the control group were learning in labs through the materials that were alignedwith core concepts by following predetermined procedures. Students in the experimental grouplearned through inquiry-based lab materials that required them to work in teams by integratingcore concepts together to find a solution and while following one of potentially manyapproaches. To maximize the online lab
unprecedentedly abrupt and challengingtransition from face-to-face to online instruction. And one of the hard-learned lessons was thatsolely changing the mode of class meetings from face-to-face to virtual did not work effectivelyfor engineering education. As shown in recent studies on student perceptions of online learningduring the pandemic, students experienced declines in peer-to-peer and student-instructorinteractions in fully online courses [1]. Students also reported difficulties in maintainingmotivation and getting support, which has negatively impacted their online learning [2].During this unusual time, the flipped classroom particularly has drawn attention as an effectiveway to address the challenges associated with fully remote teaching. In a
autistic adults often have difficulty joining or remaining in theSTEM workforce [5]. With the goal of creating maker programming to enable autistic youth toengage in the EDP with peers and to prepare autistic youth for future careers, a multidisciplinaryteam created the Inventing, Designing, and Engineering for All Students (IDEAS) MakerProgram. IDEAS brings together experts in maker education, autism inclusion, engineering,co-design, and research to bring interest-driven maker clubs into autism-inclusion public schoolsin New York City. The following paper describes the ways in which IDEAS supports autisticlearners in both in-person and online formats, and how IDEAS teachers responded to adversityby redesigning the curriculum for remote learning
multidisciplinary study and the beauty ofcollaboration among students. Co-taught by a CS/Engineering professor and a visiting artist-in-residence, the course brought together students from diverse majors from Brown University andthe Rhode Island School of Design (RISD) and aimed to augment existing artistic robots anddesign new dynamic interactive creations. Students developed both technical and artistic skillswhile also contemplating and discussing as a class the uses of technology and its interaction withinsociety. Some of the lessons learned from this unique course structure were the critical importanceof communication and the educational value of learning from peers. Students stated that the coursesignificantly enhanced and deepened their education
, majors, andability levels to participate in the makerspace as they build connections with their peers. Toencourage connection with peers, the engagement activities were supported and directed bymajor-level students who were hired as Student Engagement Liaisons (SELs).”This paper summarizes the development of the social engagement activities and reports onparticipation, student engagement, and student perspectives of the activities. Working closelywith the project PI, the SELs worked together to design, develop, and conduct five socialengagement activities: (1) Halloween DIY Night, (2) Inclusion Discussion, (3) Holiday Crafts,(4) Game Night & Innovative Workspaces, and (5) Spring Craft Night. For each activity, studentparticipation counts
students develop the skills and writing habits to complete doctorate degrees in engineering. Across all of her research avenues, Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 12 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award with her share of funding being nearly $2.3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 21 journal publications and more than 70 conference papers. She has won several Virginia Tech awards including a Dean’s Award for Outstanding New Faculty, an Outstanding Teacher Award and a Faculty Fellow Award. She holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Cornell University, an M.S. in Materials Science from the University of Connecticut and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University.Dr. Gary R
or state, and ensure the project design met allappropriate transportation requirements. The project also included possible business/residentialimpacts and relocations. This required student teams to weigh moral and ethical considerationsof impacting citizens or changing the design, which may result in higher project costs.Additionally, students developed and enhanced their engineering leadership skills by engagingtheir peers in a common vision, developing, and maintaining trust, and focusing on the use ofappropriate means to effectively provide meaningful contributions to society, through theiradopted design process that was reflective of professional engineering practice.Course Format and LogisticsStudent teams evaluated alternatives
acclaimed book, The Seven Habits ofHighly Successful People and to write a paper on use of each of the habits by themselves or someone else theyknew. This provided the framework for using other awareness and development tools, such as the MeyersBriggs and HBDI. Students were encouraged to share their individual results with their teams and were requiredto create an approximate team profile to facilitate discussion of individual strengths and weaknesses in regards toteam operation. Assessment Measures. Individual and team assessments were used throughout to determine theeffectiveness of the students and the courses. Peer appraisals, grades on team and individual assignments, self-reported development plans, and final written and oral report
potential ability whenguided by an adult or more capable peers. In a peer discussion setting, discourse andargumentation can provide learning opportunities within students’ zone of proximal developmentand hence support learning.Findings from Prior ResearchThis paper presents the third stage of a larger study that uses a three-stage sequential mixed-methods approach (qualitative quantitative qualitative). The first and second stagesinvolved the coding of student talk and correlation analyses between self-efficacy, achievement,and discourse type (Yaşar-Purzer, Baker, Roberts, & Krause, 2008). The goal of the third stage isto further investigate and explain what led to the results revealed through the previous stages ofthe study.Results
intentionalinvestment over the summer to orient and prepare new faculty members prior to their firstinstructional class with students. This strategy of integrating new faculty into the institution andof developing a classroom training environment has paid dividends with instructors havinggreater success during their first semester of teaching. New faculty members are given theopportunity to understand their role in the larger institutional outcomes, to learn best practicesand techniques, and to practice teach with their peers and mentors, allowing for refinement,before their first class. The department’s faculty development strategy has been recognized bythe Dean and shared with other departments as an exemplary approach to preparing faculty toteach. Written
Accessibility Caucus, Purdue’s Student ASEE Chapter, andGeorgia Institute of Technology’s Lean In Chapter will present their ideas on what helps create asuccessful graduate community. The common findings of all organizations are consolidated intocategories of funding, recruitment, evaluation of success, and best practices for graduate studentorganizations.Tulane University: Women+ in Science and EngineeringBackground and DevelopmentTulane University’s Women+ in Science and Engineering (WISE), a graduate student andpostdoctoral fellow initiative, will conclude its first full year in June 2017. At the ASEE 2016conference, two graduate students and a Tulane Assistant Professor identified a critical need forgraduate student and postdoctoral peer
, student-organization offices, informal spaces, etc. — should be thoughtof in terms of whether they allow students, no matter their focus within engineering,to develop boundary-spanning abilities like experimenting, writing, speaking, andcollaborating. Then they should be connected in a way that maximizes these functions.At Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, commonly known as VirginiaTech, the SmithGroupJJR-designed Institute for Critical Technology and AppliedScience II is organized expressly around the concept of interdisciplinary research. The42,189-square-foot building completed in 2010 includes state-of-the-art laboratoriesand auxiliary spaces that support both applied and fundamental research. Oakland University School of
needs in their areas.BackgroundCreating a wellness culture, connection, community, and professional sense of belonging arevital elements to all graduate students from the most well-adjusted and engaged to the mostdisenfranchised and fragile. Sense of belonging includes fit in the academic discipline, beingrespected and valued by peers, in the research group, by the faculty, and program representatives.Wellness initiatives not only lead to more engaged and productive students, the initiatives areassociated with increased retention and completion rates (Okahana, H., Allum, J., Felder, P.P., &Tull, R.G. 2016). Creating a thriving culture also enhances recruitment and increases enrollment.Mind, body, and spirit are integral to both health and
. Page 24.1387.2The AIChE Concept Warehouse was designed to lower one of the biggest barriers that preventsinstructors from using concept-based instruction: access to high quality conceptquestions. Construction of good concept questions is often difficult and time-intensive4. TheConcept Warehouse alleviates this barrier by giving instructors access to a variety of conceptquestions in the core chemical engineering curriculum along with providing a variety of ways toutilize these questions in their courses. Instructors can either assign these questions as homeworkor use them in class as part of active learning pedagogies (e.g. peer instruction). If using conceptquestions in class, the instructor can have students respond using their clickers
in line and watch to see how quickly other questions are being answered (Figure 1C).While a student is waiting, she will see her nickname moving up in the queue and then willreceive a notification when she is next in line. This is useful when the student needs to come tothe designated location, like an advising office or instructor office, to see the instructor oradvisor in person. Once the student’s question has been answered, the question is marked doneand it is removed from the list.Use Cases for the QueueOffice HoursTraditionally, office hours of large courses consist of many students packing into one or morerooms and writing their name on a list to receive help from a Teaching Assistant (TA) or anothercourse expert (“course staff”). In
discussion rent sessions sections, managing laboratory classes, or handling office hours. 55 min each In the second session, participants choose one of the following topics: teaching problem solving, grading, or handling office hours. Undergraduate Teaching Orientation Graduate Teaching Orientation Practice In small groups (5-7), participants take turns delivering a five-minute explanation on a Teaching topic of their choice. Peers and one trained facilitator act as students during the lesson, 2 hrs then provide written and oral feedback on the teaching.Table 1: Engineering teaching orientations during the Fall of 2017.As seen in Table 1, the new instructor
to studentsLarge classes can improve the student experience in at least four ways.1 The ASEE Engineering Technology listserv, ETD-L@listproc.tamu.edu; SIGCSE-members@listserv.acm.org, forComputer Science educators; and discussion@podnetwork.org, from the Professional and OrganizationalDevelopment NetworkThe first is community. A large class can grow into a supportive learning community. Studentshave more opportunity to partner with, and learn from, other students. Questions are answeredmore quickly on Piazza or a message board. Students can learn from their peers. Clicker-stylepolling provides immediate feedback, regardless of class size. It can even work better in a largeclass, since there is bound to be a critical mass of students who have
coaching system we implemented. Finally, section 5 reports the observation andanalysis of the experiment and our plans for future experiments with the model.Section 1: The OR Course StructureThe course is divided into ten topics. These topics are mostly what majority of the textbooksconsider as essential elements of OR curriculum for an undergraduate OR class. Each topic isbuilt on knowledge and skill gained in prior topics while building the foundation skill andknowledge set for succeeding topics. Page 24.696.2These topics are: Finding Feasible Regions Extreme Points, LP and Its Standard Form Writing LPs from Feasible
as agroup before we show the video. The students are told to bring the completed questions with Page 9.189.3them to the next class. Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering EducationClass two begins with a discussion of the homework assignment. We discuss the answersthemselves and then discuss how they approached the assignment. After concluding thisdiscussion, we hand out the “Team Functioning Assessment Tool”. This tool has threecomponents: Team Members and the Project, Team Functioning, and Peer
of the pumphouse. They attach a chinamarker nearby on a string. They also write out the details of each task and laminated theresulting two pages to the same wall. A sample of the “annual” portion of the tasks is shown inFigure 8. Then thestudents perform the tasks Every Twelve Months Date Completed Date to be Completedwith the homeowner, to 1. Check Batteriesinsure that everything is 2. Battery Equalizingunderstood. A year later, Chargethe system performs 3. Give Wind Generatorreliably. The customer, Complete Mechanicalon her own initiative, Checkseeks out the university 4. Check Concentration of Coolantpresident
-onexperience valued by employers, and serves to fill in any gaps in understanding from thestudents’ classroom education. Page 25.325.4The first major retention issue the solar boat project targets is the lack of a well-defined studentsupport system. Numerous studies have shown that students who are involved in small groupsretain more than students who work alone8. Isolation of a student from his or her peers can causestress beyond that imposed by an already formidable field of study. At the beginning of eachschool year, the solar boat project falls under the responsibility of a group of students who opt tobecome members of the University’s Solar Boat