Paper ID #29281FOUNDATIONS – Integrating Evidence-based Teaching and Learning Prac-ticesinto the Core Engineering Curriculum: Student Perceptions of theInstructional PracticesDr. Gail P Baxter, Stevens Institute of Technology Gail P. Baxter is the Co-Director, Center for Innovation in Engineering and Science Education (CIESE) at Stevens Institute of Technology. Baxter leads CIESE research and evaluation efforts and manages a program to support faculty adoption of evidence-based teaching practices in the core courses in the School of Engineering at Stevens. Before joining CIESE, Baxter was a Senior Survey Researcher at
resiliency computations consisted of integrating a provided function givencertain boundary conditions to relate to loss of functionality given the occurrence of a hazardousevent. Data collection and results from student work are discussed in outcomes and resultssection of this report.CE 330 is only offered during the spring semester, at which time the implementation of thesustainability ALM was performed. Implementation only consisted of the sustainability ALM.The method of implementation was performed by lecture with accompanying Power Point. Afterthe lecture an in-class activity was given to the students, in which they could either workindividually or in groups. The activity consisted of comparing head loss and power generation ina section of pipe
Paper ID #28778Reimagining Energy Year 2: Integrating CSPs into Course DevelopmentProf. Gordon D Hoople, University of San Diego Dr. Gordon D. Hoople is an assistant professor and one of the founding faculty members of integrated engineering at the University of San Diego. He is passionate about creating engaging experiences for his students. His work is primarily focused on two areas: engineering education and design. Professor Hoople’s engineering education research examines the ways in which novel approaches can lead to better student outcomes. He is the principal investigator on the National Science Foundation Grant
education, her research interests include engineering education, particularly as related to systems thinking, organizational cultures, professional identity devel- opment, and supporting the success and ideas of underrepresented students within engineering.Mrs. Javiera Espinoza von Bischhoffshausen, University of Michigan Javiera Espinoza von Bischhoffshausen is a Master’s student in the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan. She has a B.S. in Industrial Engineering from the Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaiso (PUCV), Chile (2012). Before pursuing her M.A. in Higher Education, Javiera had an appointment at the College of Engineering at PUCV in the engineering
or using modeling projects, particularly in the first years of theengineering curriculum [1-3]. There are some well-developed pedagogies that demonstrate thesuccesses of doing this. Model-eliciting activities (MEAs) are an impactful example of apedagogical approach used in first-year engineering to teach mathematical modeling skills [3].Even though there are some established approaches, there is still a need for more meaningfulways to teach modeling throughout the engineering curricula and especially in first-yearengineering courses [1].Developing computational thinking skills is something that has been emphasized in engineeringeducation more recently and aligns with this call for curriculum that explicitly teachesmathematical and
Paper ID #31691Initial impact of an experiment-centric teaching approach in severalSTEM disciplinesDr. Jumoke ’Kemi’ Ladeji-Osias, Morgan State University Dr. J. ’Kemi Ladeji-Osias is Professor and Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies in the School of Engineering at Morgan State University in Baltimore. Dr. Ladeji-Osias earned a B.S. in electrical engi- neering from the University of Maryland, College Park and a joint Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Rutgers University and UMDNJ. Dr. Ladeji-Osias’ involvement in engineering curricular innovations includes adapting portal laboratory instrumentation into
Paper ID #31012Assessing Impact of an REU program on Students’ Intellectual Growth andInterest in Graduate School in CybermanufacturingMr. Pavan Kumar Moturu, Texas A&M UniversityDr. Bimal P. Nepal, Texas A&M University Dr. Bimal Nepal is a Professor and Associate Director of Industrial Distribution Program at Texas A&M University. His research interests include integration of supply chain management with new product development decisions, distributor service portfolio optimization, pricing optimization, supply chain risk analysis, lean and six sigma, large scale optimization, and engineering education. He has
(UK) where he is currently a Professor in the Department of Chemistry and an Associate Director of the Center for Applied Energy Research. At UK he leads a research group focusing on biofuels and environmental catalysis. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Enhancing graduate education by integrating research and professional skill development within a diverse, inclusive and supportive academy1. Background1.1. Challenges faced by graduate education and training in engineering and the sciencesGraduate education and training often take a monodisciplinary approach that is not informed bybest educational practices, ignores the needs and
Paper ID #30781Integrating Asset-based Practices, Engineering, and NGSS: Lessons fromWorking with Teachers through a Community-focused ApproachDr. Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego Dr. Joel Alejandro (Alex) Mejia is an assistant professor in the Department of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. His research has contributed to the integration of critical theoretical frame- works and Chicano Cultural Studies to investigate and analyze existing deficit models in engineering education. Dr. Mejia’s work also examines how asset-based models impact the validation and recognition of students and
engineering education; design tools; specifically, the cost modeling and analysis of product development and manufacturing systems; and computer-aided design methodology.Dr. Bimal P. Nepal, Texas A&M University Dr. Bimal Nepal is an Associate Professor in the Industrial Distribution Program at Texas A&M Univer- sity. His research interests include integration of supply chain management with new product development decisions, distributor service portfolio optimization, pricing optimization, supply chain risk analysis, lean and six sigma, large scale optimization, and engineering education. He has authored over 100 refereed articles in leading journals and peer reviewed conference proceedings in these areas. He has
engineering at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is currently the chair of the Department of Chemical, Biological and Bioengineering at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 The Impact of an Intensive Design Experience on Self-Efficacy, Valuation of Engineering Design, and Engineering Identity in Undergraduate Engineering StudentsIntroduction This paper reports on a NSF IUSE:RED project that is focused on integrating elements ofneeds finding and design into courses throughout all four years of the engineering curriculum.The project is based on the
Observation Protocol (RTOP) and his work has been cited more than 2200 times and he has been published in multiple peer-reviewed journals such as Science Education and the Journal of Research in Science Teaching.Dr. Lindy Hamilton Mayled, Arizona State University Lindy Hamilton Mayled is the Director of Instructional Effectiveness for the Fulton Schools of Engineer- ing at Arizona State University. She has a PhD in Psychology of Learning, Education, and Technology and her research and areas of interest are in improving educational outcomes for STEM students through the integration of active learning and technology-enabled frequent feedback.Prof. Robert J Culbertson, Arizona State University Robert J. Culbertson is an
research interests relate to the incorporation of active learning techniques such as game- based learning in undergraduate classes as well as integration of innovation and entrepreneurship into the engineering curriculum. In particular, she is interested in the impact that these tools can have on stu- dent perception of the classroom environment, motivation and learning outcomes. She was selected to participate in the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) Frontiers of Engineering Education Sympo- sium in 2013, awarded the American Society for Engineering Education Educational Research Methods Faculty Apprentice Award in 2014 and the Raymond W. Fahien Award for Outstanding Teaching Effec- tiveness and Educational
Paper ID #29152Year 3 of an S-STEM Summer Scholarship for a Sophomore Bridge ProgramDr. Katie Evans, Louisiana Tech University Dr. Katie Evans is the Associate Dean of Strategic Initiatives in the College of Engineering and Science, Academic Director of Mathematics and Statistics and Online Programs, the Entergy LP and L/NOPSI #3 and #4 Professor of Mathematics, the Director of the Integrated STEM Education Research Center, and the Director of the Office for Women in Science and Engineering and Louisiana Tech University. Dr. Evans also serves as the Chair of the National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges Scholars Pro
federally funded projects. Dr. Sydlik’s interests are in supporting efforts to improve the educational experiences and outcomes of undergraduate and graduate STEM students. She is or has been the lead external evaluator for a number of STEM and NSF-funded projects, including an ERC education project, an NSF TUES III, a WIDER project, an NSF EEC project through WGBH Boston, two NSF RET projects, an S-STEM project, a CPATH project, and a CCLI Phase II project. She also currently serves as the internal evaluator for WMU’s Howard Hughes Medical project, and has contributed to other current and completed evaluations of NSF-funded projects.Dr. Allison Godwin, Purdue University at West Lafayette Allison Godwin, Ph.D. is
students from being able to integrate and extend the knowledge developed in specific courses in the core curriculum to the more complex, authentic problems and projects they face as professionals. Dr. Koretsky is one of the founding members of the Center for Lifelong STEM Education Research at OSU.Dr. Susan Bobbitt Nolen, University of Washington Susan Bobbitt Nolen is Professor Emerita of Learning Sciences & Human Development at the University of Washington. She earned her PhD in Educational Psychology at Pudue University. Her current research interests focus on student engagement in engineering practices and social interaction during learning activ- ity, and their relationship to engineering identity and opportunity
(items 16-46 on the AWE LAESE survey), including the original twenty-one 7-point Likert scale questions, plus the ten 7-point Likert scale questions asking “to what extent doyou agree.” The LAESE subscales include: (1) Engineering career expectations, (2)Engineering self-efficacy 1, (3) Engineering self-efficacy 2, (4) Feeling of inclusion, (5) Copingself-efficacy, and (6) Math outcomes efficacy. The two subscales measuring “engineering self-efficacy” are differentiated in what they seek to measure as follows: (1) The “Engineering self-efficacy 1” subscale measures a student’s perception of his or her ability to earn an A or B inmath, physics, and engineering courses and succeed in an engineering curriculum while notgiving up participation in
.) with the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) in Washington, D.C. Greg served as the responsible staff officer for the NSF-funded project ”Educator Capacity Building in K-12 Engineering Education,” published in 2019. Status, Role, and Needs of Engineering Technology Education in the United States.” He previously was the study director for the NSF-funded project that resulted in the 2014 report, STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda for Research. He was the study director for the project that resulted in publication of Standards for K-12 Engineering Education? (2010) and Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Im- proving the Prospects (2009), an analysis of efforts
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).Dr. Nicole P. Pitterson, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University Nicole is an assistant professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Virginia Tech. Prior to joining VT, Dr. Pitterson was a postdoctoral scholar at Oregon State University. She holds a PhD in Engi- neering Education from Purdue University and other degrees in Manufacturing Engineering from Western Illinois University and a B.Sc. in Electrical and Electronic Engineering from the University of Technol- ogy, Jamaica. Her research interests are exploring students’ disciplinary identity through engagement with knowledge, curriculum design, assessment and evaluation and teaching for
implementation strategies within engineering courses (e.g., [10, 11]), and theimprovement of MEA implementation strategies in large first-year engineering (e.g., [12]) andupper division courses (e.g., [13, 14]).Problem solving, design, and introductory computer programming are examples of somefundamental course concepts that have been integrated into most first-year engineering courses[4, 15, 16]. Even though, all three of these concepts involve modeling, they may not be explicitlydiscussed or demonstrated. Because mathematical modeling is essential to solving and designingengineering problems in the workforce, it is necessary to teach it more explicitly [4]. Teachingstudents how to develop an algorithmic solution (a type of model) is fundamental
higher education-workforce infrastructure for sustained, innovative Industry 4.0 workforce preparation. The factors being evaluated primarily involve objectives related to curriculum development, course integration, career pathway establishment, building partnerships and dissemination. Faculty Outcomes: To increase community college faculty members’ skills and comfort level with teaching Industry 4.0 curricula. The evaluation factors involve objectives related to the use of industry 4.0 curricula, and faculty and student satisfactions. Student Outcomes: To increase the number of workers (including underrepresented students) qualified to merge manufacturing OT & IT skills for an Industry 4.0
Computer Engineering at New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) College of Engineering and Computing Sciences. He received his Ph.D. degree in Electrical Engineering from New York University (formerly Polytechnic University). Before joining to NYIT, Dr. Artan was on the faculty of the New York University School of Engineering. He also worked as an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) Design Engineer and designed integrated circuits for commercial, academic and military applications. Dr. Artan served in the organizing committees of the ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems (ANCS), IEEE Sarnoff Symposium, and ACM Conference on Security and Privacy in Wireless and Mobile
to African Americanstudents, and that the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded to African Americans in physics hasnot increased at all since 2003, in spite of an overall increase of 39% across all physical sciencefields during the same timeframe [5]. Physics also consistently graduates the smallest percentageof female undergraduate majors granted than any of the other sciences (one-fifth of all bachelor’sdegrees awarded to women as of 2014) [6]. At the same time, studies on lower-income studentsand students of color have indicated that a physics curriculum which focuses on the students’future identity--including future career identity--improves the degree to which they identify withand participate in science. [7, 8]. Other studies indicate
Paper ID #28632Increasing Metacognitive Awareness through Reflective Writing:Optimizing Learning in EngineeringDr. Patti Wojahn, New Mexico State University As past Writing Program Administrator and current Interdisciplinary Studies Department Head, I have worked closely with academic departments interested in supporting the writing, communication, and aca- demic abilities of students. For many years, I worked with Integrated Learning Communities for at-risk, entry-level engineering majors, overseeing development and use of a curriculum adapted specifically for this group. I continue to analyze data from research studies
results.Stronger and more frequent student-TA interactions negatively predicted attention whilepositively predicting participation. Interaction effects between student-TA interactions andfaculty support were also significant, suggesting that what TAs do moderates the influence offaculty on student engagement.Given the importance that interactions play in facilitating academic integration, the distinctcontributions of TAs vs. faculty to student engagement are important and merit future research toassess their generalizability across other disciplines and institutions.Background: The Importance of EngagementStudent engagement is most frequently measured in terms of what students do, is measuredbroadly across multiple courses and academic activities, and has
employment is concentrated in two sub-sectors(3259-Other Chemicals and 3344-Semiconductor) and in 2015, constituted 24.6% of the region’stotal employment [1, 2]. Guided by the overarching research question (RQ) “To what extent docurriculum content, employer needs, and student experiences align within an advancedmanufacturing educational pathway,” this study’s goals are to 1) investigate the role AMprogram pathways have in meeting the needs of employers and new professionals who areemployed in the region; 2) expand the research base and curriculum content recommendationsfor entrepreneur and intrapreneur education; 3) build regional capacity for AM programassessment and improvement by replicating, refining, and disseminating study approachesthrough
or presentations. At Rose-Hulman, Sriram has focused on incorporating reflection, and problem based learning activities in the Software Engineer- ing curriculum. Sriram has been fundamental to the revamp of the entire software engineering program at Rose-Hulman. Sriram is a founding member of the Engineering Design program and continues to serve on the leadership team that has developed innovative ways to integrate Humanities, Science, Math, and Engi- neering curriculum into a studio based education model. In 2015, Sriram was selected as the Outstanding Young Alumni of the year by the School of Informatics and Computing at Indiana University. Sriram serves as a facilitator for MACH, a unique faculty development
deterring and a major barrier to retention andsuccess in the profession.[5-10]Several factors have been identified as key challenges: (a) the lack of exposure to engineering orcomputer science as fields of study or as career opportunities [11], (b) the lack of professionalidentity (inability to see oneself as a professional) [7], (c) an impaired sense of belonging [12,13], and (d) the lack of self-efficacy (how well one can execute a course of action to deal with aprospective situation) [14]. Adding to the challenge is the rigor of engineering curriculum whichsubstantially contributes to high dropout rates from engineering [15], averaging at 50%, andranging from 60 to 67% for minorities [12, 16, 17]. These numbers are strongly driven by highfailure
research aims to improve the design of educational experiences for students by critically examining the work and learning environments of practitioners. Specifically, she focuses on (1) how to design and change educational and work systems through studies of practicing engineers and educators and (2) how to help students transition into, through and out of educational and work systems.Dr. Cheryl A Bodnar, Rowan University Dr. Bodnar is an Associate Professor in the Experiential Engineering Education Department at Rowan University. Her research interests relate to the incorporation of active learning techniques such as game- based learning in undergraduate classes as well as integration of innovation and entrepreneurship
previously participated, acted as peer-mentors for‘Juniors’. Findings from Year 3 saw an initial rise in ‘asked help’ and ‘intervened help’ instancesduring the earlier stages of the school year but later saw a decrease school year progressed asJunior students master M2 practices through guidance by Seniors. Our work, through thisEAGER, demonstrates an approach to providing a situated and scalable curriculum that modelspractices in real world industries and those that are yet to come.2 IntroductionMaking has the potential to expand students’ understanding of STEM topics [1], this throughdirect interaction with physical materials for personalized designs [2]. More-so, Making has thepotential to inspire the Maker Mindset in Makers, meaning that they