satisfy human need(s)”. If one subscribes to the abovedefinition, then every engineer has to be somewhat knowledgeable of manufacturing methods, ofdrafting (drawing) standards and programming techniques. We are proposing that these topics becovered in freshmen/sophomore level courses. Page 14.308.12Manufacturing Methods CourseManufacturing in the US has been continuously shrinking in the past decades, reaching historicallows (www.infowars.com/us-manufacturing-at-lowest-level-since-1948/). One reason for thedecline can be attributed to the lack of awareness of graduating engineers of the challengespresented in manufacturing a particular product
High School Study on 1/28/2009.2. American Time Use Survey 20033. Korean Time Use Survey 20044. Juster, T.F. and Stafford, F.P., “The Allocation of Time: Empirical Findings, Behavioral Models, and Problems of Measurement,” Journal of Economic Literature, 29 (1991), 471-522.5. Nist, S., “College Study Tips”, College Rules! How to Study, Survive, and Succeed in College, Ten Speed Press, 2002.6. Reilly, Ed, “Freshman Study Tips,” accessed at http://www.villanova.edu/studentlifr/counselingcenter/infosheets/studyskills/for_freshmen 1/28/20097. Sax, L., et. The American Freshman: National Norms, Fall 20038. National Survey of Student Engagement 20039. Sax, L., The American Freshman: National Norms, Fall 2004.10. Zeek
shared practice: Design engineers’ learning at work. Jyvaskyla Studies inEducation, Psychology and Social Research, Jyvaskyla.22. ibid., p. 12.23. ibid., p. 27.24. ibid., p. 28.25. Schrage, Michael. (2000). Serious Play: How the World’s Best Companies Simulate to Innovate. HarvardBusiness School Press, Boston MA.26. Trevelyan, J. (2007). Technical coordination in engineering practice. Journal of Engineering Education, 96 (3),p. 191.27. ibid., p. 191.28. Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., Lee, C., B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: lessons for engineeringeducators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (2), pp. 139-151.29. Korte, R., Sheppard, S., & Jordan, W. (2008). A qualitative study of the early work experiences of
rewardstructure) as it affects faculty attitudes and behavior. Using incentives to encourageyoung faculty to increase their commitment to teaching may help, but continuing tohire new faculty whose primary emphasis and interests is in research, inevitably doesreinforce existing cultural norms that favor research over teaching.Facilitate and Support Faculty in Acquiring Relevant Practical Experience:Encourage faculty members, particularly the young, to get involved with the practicein their locale, and devise equitable system(s) that allow faculty to gain theengineering experience they desperately need, in order to keep up with newdevelopments in their areas of specialization. Thus asserting the view thatengineering faculty “with practical experience under
and Assessing Engineering Professional Skills. iJEP, Volume 3, Special Issue 3: “EDUCON2013” June 2013, pp. 13-20.Barry, B. E. and Whitener, J. (Spring, 2014). Impact of professional skills on technical skills in the engineering curriculum and variations between engineering sub-disciplines. Teaching Ethics, pp. 105-122.Downey, G. (2005). Are engineers losing control of technology? From “Problem solving” to “problem definition and solution” in engineering education. Trans IChemE, Part A, Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 83(A6): 583–595Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire: Toward Valid and Meaningful
resources. Engineering self-efficacy is emerging as a usefultheory in evaluating the confidence of students to pursue engineering related professions and theconfidence of teachers to teach engineering related content. In particular, Faber et al. [5] andYoon et al. [18] developed the Student Attitudes toward STEM (S-STEM) survey and TeachingEngineering Self-Efficacy Scale (TESS) survey, respectively. Such surveys used in conjunctionwith outreach activities may help allocate time and resources to more influential activities. In summary, the literature provides valuable information about engineering education inK-12, including typical types of program offerings, what has been most effective, andsuggestions for assessment to help evaluate the
the James F. Lufkin Award for the best conference paper—on the intersections between professional communication research and social jus- tice—at the 2012 International Professional Communication Conference. In 2015, he won the Ronald S. Blicq Award for Distinction in Technical Communication Education from the Professional Communica- tion Society of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). His current research focuses on rendering visible and integrating the social justice dimensions inherent in three components of the engineering curriculum—in engineering sciences, engineering design, and humanities and social science courses. That research, conducted with co-author Juan C. Lucena, will
opportunities.IntroductionMost universities use a capstone senior design course(s) to address ABET’s General Criterion 5which states “students must be prepared for engineering practice through a curriculumculminating in a major design experience” [1]. These programs likely use the capstone course(s)to assess at least some combination of ABET Student Outcomes 3b (design and conductexperiments, analyze and interpret data), 3d (function on multidisciplinary teams), 3e (identify,formulate, and solve engineering problems), and 3g (communicate effectively) [1]. In theory,the benefits students gain through exposure to such an experience and the advantages facultyhave in using the experience for assessment are substantial and well-documented. However,students who have never
Report NSF 15- 311. Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.3. Mann, Allison and Thomas A. DiPrete (2013). Trends in Gender Segregation in the Choice of Science and Engineering Majors. Social Science Research 42(6), 1519–1541.4. Settles, I. , Cortina L. , Malley, J. , Stewart, A. (2006). The Climate for Women in Academic Science: The Good, the Bad, and the Changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), 47-585. Seron, C., Silbey, S. S., Cech, E., & Rubineau, B. (2016). Persistence Is Cultural: Professional Socialization and the Reproduction of Sex Segregation. Work and Occupations, 43(2), 178-214.6. Leskin E. , Cortina L. , Kabat D. (2011) “Gender Harassment: Broadening our Understanding of Sex
careers improve society. This could thentranslate to an engineering profession that places overall societal benefits above the needs ofindividual clients and corporations.AcknowledgmentsSome of this material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation underGrant #1158863. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Works Cited1. Layton Jr, E. T. The Revolt of the Engineers. Social Responsibility and the American Engineering Profession. (ERIC, 1986).2. Wisnioski, M. Engineers for change: Competing visions of technology in 1960s America. (MIT Press, 2012).3. Vesilind, P. A. Evolution of
modelled and analyzed individually without changing the nature of the remainder of thematerials. When combined with an in-depth understanding of the structure, the creation processbecomes more precise. Furthermore, this program is currently the industry standard, much likeAutoCAD was when it arose in the 1980’s; it has become the design standard and a larger part ofthe Building Information Modeling (BIM) movement within the construction industry and so ifany adjustments had to be made to the actual building, multiple firms could use the files toinform the changes. This also allows for the opportunity to test certain conditions, such as anychanges to be made and determine their impacts within the software prior to construction.Finally, Revit
three, weeks 14-15, includes packaging the modified software system for the next iterationof the course, individual reflection by team members on their participation in the course project,and final presentations and demos. A weekly course assignment schedule is shown in Table 1.Students are assigned Reading Response Questions in Phase 1 (weeks 3, 4, and 5) and Phase 2(weeks 6, 8, 10, and 12). These are questions on assigned readings and need to be answered inwriting.Table 1. Course Project Phases and Weekly Assignment Schedule Phase Week(s) Assignment Purpose Program Review Install and evaluate the course project, analyze 1 Report documentation
.) - Cancellations - What is the best way to notify each other in case a meeting needs to be postponed? Will you use MentorCity messages to notify each other of changes? What is the length of notice required if unable to keep a meeting appointment? (Mentorship Program requirement: Mentee is responsible for logging the cancellation in the MentorCity system.) - (A) Agendas - How will the mentee share an agenda prior to each meeting? The professionally- formatted agenda can include updates, specific discussion topic(s), action items and setting the next meeting date. (B) Minutes - How will the mentee document and share minutes from each meeting? These professionally-formatted meeting minutes can include highlights
of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Design, Build, Fly (DBF)team competitions.For example, the US Air Force Academy (USAFA) possessed hands-on student satellite androcketry programs beginning in the mid-1990’s (one author was a founding member of theseefforts). The satellite program has been a robust multidisciplinary effort, involving cadets from theastronautical engineering major, as well as those from mechanical engineering, electricalengineering, computer engineering, space physics, and management majors. These satelliteprograms could span 1-2 academic years, with cadet teams of roughly 20-40 participating for upto 2 years (junior and senior years). Cadets receive formal course credit and participate in all phasesof the systems
coverage sometimes leads to more learning.After the introduction to course mapping, the presenters guided participants to first construct aconcept map for their course and identify connections. Lastly, the presenters briefly discussedthe use of visual syllabi.Day 1—Working Reception The objectives of Day 1’s last session were to network with members of other cohortsand the leadership team and discuss ideas for specific course development modules. Participantsreceived a homework assignment to complete before returning for Day 2: create a draft modulefor a particular course that incorporates EML and bring that module for peer feedback.Day 2—Incorporating Entrepreneurship and Innovation into the Classroom Day 2 began with a
decision making and risk management. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2015.[6] B. V. Koen, Discussion of the method: Conducting the engineer’s approach to problem solving. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2003.[7] C. Murphy, P. Gardoni, and C. E. Harris, “Classification and moral evaluation of uncertainties in engineering modeling,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 553–570, Sep. 2011.[8] I. van de Poel, “Investigating ethical issues in engineering design,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 429, Sep. 2001.[9] NSPE, “Code of Ethics for engineers,” 2007.[10] D. R. Haws, “The importance of meta-ethics in engineering education,” Sci. Eng. Ethics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 204–210, Jun. 2004.[11] J. S. Busby and M. Coeckelbergh
OrganizationFigure 4. Existing Corporate Division of Labor Model:Direct and Indirect Labor First Thing We Do, Let s Kill All The Lawyers Henry VI, Part 2 William Shakespeare Manager Manager Manager Engineering Engineering Mechanical Process Finance Manager Manager Manager Purchasing Production MarketingFigure 5. Existing
New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press; 2004. doi:10.17226/109993. Committee on Education of the American Society of Civil Engineers. Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge: Preparing the Future Civil Engineer. 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; 2019. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/book/10.1061/9780784415221.4. Sola E, Hoekstra R, Fiore S, McCauley P. An Investigation of the State of Creativity and Critical Thinking in Engineering Undergraduates. Creat Educ. 2017;08(09):1495-1522. doi:10.4236/ce.2017.891055. Surovek A, Rassati GA. Is Structural Engineering Education Creating Barriers to Innovation and Creativity? In: 6th Structural Engineers World Congress. Cancun
substantial qualification in engineering education pedagogy.Our assertion is that the USA should not risk being left behind, and thus it is imperative that awider cohort of early career engineering educators should acquire substantial pedagogical andeducational training during their initial year(s) of teaching. “Pedagogy” being taken to meaninstructional techniques, and “educational” to encompass the curriculum and the philosophiesthat underpin pedagogies. Four propositions support this view: 1. Assuming that teaching is a professional activity, it is incumbent on a professional to be aware of the knowledge that constructs the activity and act therein taking into account the evidence available. 2. Without such knowledge it is difficult
showing where they may — intentionally or unintentionally — “game” theprocess. This demonstrates that an applied ethics approach is a systematic analytic process andnot — as one student suggested “loosey-goosey feel-good b____t”.Requiring students to present their analysis to their peers in class and receive coaching andfeedback right then and there allows the instructors to help students build confidence in their newknowledge and skills at assembling stable ethical scaffolds, and to steer their projectsaccordingly. From their analysis and in-class feedback, students finalize their ethical assessmentand how it has affected their projects in their final project report to the faculty member(s)teaching the course and their clients.Students are also
80 individuals who taught only chemical engineering students and another27 taught both chemical engineering students and related area(s) (biomedical, n=12; biological,n=6; environmental, n=7; materials, n=5; petroleum, n=3; plastics, n=2; paper=1). These twogroups were combined to represent chemical engineering respondents, n=107. These individualsrepresented 76 different institutions, including 72 that award ABET EAC-accredited bachelor’sdegrees in chemical engineering and two international. The ranks of these chemical engineeringinstructors were 36% full professors, 33% associate professors, 21% assistant professors, and 8%full-time instructors. Additional positions held by these respondents included 20% directors ofprogram or center, 16