was matched based on complementing skills andinterests. Creating such collaborative teams was intended to promote both horizontal and verticallearning in an interactive environment, thus laying the pathway to mold independent researcherswho are also team players. During this time, they were immersed in hands-on researchexperiences comprising of a transformative research project, capsulated technical sessions andcomplementary lab practice, field tours, research seminars, and professional developmentworkshops; this on-site experience was supplemented with a 1-year follow-up for continuedinteraction, growth, and guidance for pursuing advanced study. Student deliverables includeddissemination of research results, and a follow-up plan tailored to
standardization) from 1990 through 1994. He has been active in SONET’s National and International Standardization since 1985. In addition, Rodney has published numerous papers and presentations on SONET. Rodney began his career with Fujitsu Network Communications in 1989 as the Director of Strategic Plan- ning. He also held the positions of Director of Transport Product Planning, Vice President of Business Management, Senior Vice President of Sales Management, Senior Vice President of Manufacturing, and Senior Vice President of Business Development. Before joining Fujitsu, Rodney worked for Bell Labora- tories, Bellcore (now Telcordia), and Rockwell International. He earned both his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in
engineering economic analysis and stochastic, modeling, analysis and simulation. Professor Ryan’s research interests lie in the planning and operation of energy, manufacturing and service systems under uncertainty. Her work has been funded by several single and multi-investigator National Science Foundation grants, including a Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) award, as well as by industry, private foundations, and the U.S. Department of Energy through its ARPA-E initiative. She is PI of a National Research Traineeship on Innovations at the Nexus of Food, Energy and Water Systems. Dr. Ryan is a Fellow of the Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers and serves as Editor-in-Chief of The Engineering Economist.Dr
participants and mentors to address the impact of the project on the participants,to ask whether the goals and objectives were accomplished as planned, and to identify strengthsand limitations of the projects. These evaluation strategies will be detailed with special emphasison the steps taken to modify the educational programming in response to evaluation findingsfrom year one.Center OverviewThe Center for Innovative and Strategic Transformation of Alkane Resources (CISTAR) is aNational Science Foundation (NSF) Engineering Research Center (ERC) grant. ERCs aredesigned to integrate engineering research and education with technological innovation totransform national prosperity, health, and security. Purdue University is the lead institutionpartnering
Mentors review1:45-2:00PM Break2:00 – 2:45PM Session 5: Timetable (45 minutes) Brief Presentation what is needed for time table? (10 minutes) Hands on: PIs create draft timetable Mentors review2:45-3:00PM Break3:00 – 3:45PM Session 6: Management plan (45 minutes) Brief Presentation what goes in the management plan? (10 minutes) Hands on: Drafting a management plan Mentors review3:45-4:00PM Break4:00 – 4:45PM Session 7: Budget 1 (45 minutes) Presentation – the budget, what’s allowed, do’s and don’t Indirect Rate (IDR) and the impact on budget Q&A about budget5:00 – 6:00PM Session 7A: (30-60 minutes
Paper ID #30509Developing a Research Agenda for the Engineering Ambassador CommunityDr. Stacey V Freeman, Dr. Stacey Freeman is the Director of National Outreach for the College of Engineering at Boston Uni- versity. In this role, she is responsible for planning, developing, and implementing outreach and diversity programs and initiatives to promote Engineering and increase the K-12 pipeline for women and underrep- resented minority students.Dr. Sandra Lina Rodegher, Boston University Dr. Sandra Rodegher is the Manager for National Outreach Initiatives for the Office of Outreach and Diversity in Boston University’s
B.S. in ME, and both M.S. and Ph.D. in IE. He is a member of ASEE, INFORMS, ASEM, and a senior member of IIE. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 An Advanced Technological Education Project for High Value Manufacturing: Lessons LearnedAbstractProjects rarely go according to plan, but this is especially true of those that involve multipleinstitutions and have a significant degree of complexity associated with them. This work relatesthe experiences an Advanced Technological Education (ATE) project around high valuemanufacturing. The project was a collaboration with a Texas A&M University and HoustonCommunity College. The project comprised three main aspects
, process monitoring/control, data science, cyber-physical systems, and cloudcomputing to drive manufacturing operational excellence. The convergence of IT and OT iscritical to allow interaction across the four layers of automation, within the automation pyramidstandardized by the International Society of Automation (ISA) in 2010 [7], where, Level-0:Sensors/actuators (field-level); Level-1: Real-time control systems (control-level); Level-2: Datamanagement, modeling, learning (supervisory-level); Level-3: Manufacturing operationsmanagement (plant-level); Level-4: Business planning and logistics (enterprise-level).Application areas span equipment health and status updates provided to consumers of machineryand HVAC systems, mobility avenues (e.g
multicopter UAV [3].Figure 1. Concept of operation: Obstacle avoidance system for a multicopter using optical flow.Figure 2 shows the test plan and vehicle trajectory during the flight test of the participants-developed obstacle avoidance algorithm on the multicopter shown in Figure 3. Figure 2. UAV trajectory during flight tests.In the figure above, purple line shows the actual vehicle trajectory. The green circles with numbersindicate the waypoints that the vehicle was commanded to fly to. After detecting the obstacles,the vehicle moved to the left or right and after completing the avoidance maneuver, the vehicleattempted to continue to the mission waypoint. When another obstacle was
Heavy Maintenance Representative for ASERCA airlines in Venezuela. In August 2002, Carlos received his Masters in Aeronautical Science, with a Management and Safety Specialization, from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. Carlos joined the Embry-Riddle NEAR Lab team in June 2003 as a Simulation Analyst, specializing in the Total Airspace and Airport Modeler (TAAM) simulation soft- ware. Carlos is currently the NEAR lab Project Manager. His duties include project lead and simulation support for different projects. He also is a simulation specialist for software such as TARGETS, SDAT, and TAAM. In addition to his NEAR Lab duties, Carlos is an Airport Planning and Design instructor for the College of Business at ERAU
project is measured by the quality of the prototypecreated, ability to adhere to a project timeline, quality of the written project report anddocumentations, the oral presentation, and the team project portfolio. Future plans includeleveraging concept map to assess the impact of the whole course as well as the “UserInnovation” module on students’ perception and attitudes about entrepreneurial mindset.Acknowledgement: Support for this work is provided by the National Science Foundation'sIUSE program under Award No. 1624882Introduction:Preparing STEM students for the knowledge economy requires combining technical andtheoretical knowledge with the 21st-century skills. These have typically been defined ascommunication, collaboration, critical
ME students weretaught in two different sections, by different instructors but following the same syllabus andcourse plan. A separate syllabus, course plan, and deliverables were used with the EM and ISEstudents, who were taught together in one combined section.Every student in the study created pre- and post-course concept maps of their individualunderstanding of product design. They were first introduced to concept maps along with someexamples, and then they were instructed to individually “draw a concept map that embodies theconcept of ‘product design.’” From these submissions, the research team was able to assess thefrequency of the presence of different concepts and relationships in the maps, allowingcomparisons across major programs as
78/22/0 64/27/9 64/36/0 80/0/20(increased/same/decreased)Highest degree planned to obtain 44/56/0 36/55/9 36/64/0 40/60/0(increased/same/decreased)(*note: there is one REU participant (10%) indicated poor as overall experience)In both pre and post surveys, the REU participants were asked to rate their confidence on 19different abilities, such as formulating a research question. When comparing the pre and postsurvey results of 19 different questions, there are some differences among the REU participants’responses throughout the four years. By conducting two-tailed t-test, only one ability (dealingwith unanticipated delays in conducting research) shows significant improvement
Department of Education rules for federal financial aid • fill out an application that includes, but is not limited to, the following: name, contact information, classification, major, unofficial transcript (with GPA information), one faculty recommendation letter, and three essays written by the applicant addressing: how the SPURS scholarship will benefit his/her academic career, why the applicant should be considered for this program, and what is his/her 5 year plan including academic studies and professional career.Applications are reviewed using a review matrix by a committee in the College of Engineering.Students who accept the SPURS scholarship must graduate from their respective degree programwithin 3
three main analysisapproaches that we are currently undertaking: investigation of the quantitative survey data,analysis of the learned outcomes that students report in their final interviews, and aphenomenographic approach to understand how the students experience ethics and socialresponsibility. We conclude with future work related to this project, as well as plans to continueto track our participants as they begin their careers as young professionals to understand thecontinued evolution of their conceptions of ethics and social responsibility.Overview of the study designAs detailed in previous publications [1], the longitudinal study design for our project had threedata collection phases covering all four years of a typical undergraduate
response to active learninginstruction that would discourage instructors from using that activity or active learning in thefuture. Examples include refusing to participate, vocally objecting in the class to doing theactivity, giving low course evaluations, and/or distracting other students from participating.There are, however, effective strategies instructors can use to reduce student resistance [15, 16,17]. These strategies fall into three categories: planning, explanation, and facilitation [18].Planning strategies can be used during the development of an activity, in how it is organized, andhow to evaluate its effectiveness. Explanation strategies emphasize how an instructor can framethe purpose and the goal of the activity. Facilitation
address whether they were satisfied with their scores on the second exam and to list strategiesthey had used to prepare for the exam that they considered “effective.” As in Journal 2, we askedwhich specific strategies they employ when not comprehending a concept or idea and whichspecific strategies they planned to draw on for preparing for the third exam. In addition, studentswere asked to explain how, if at all, they had applied what they learned from our interventions(the class workshop and materials on metacognitive and study skill practice), and to explain theiranswers. Finally, students were asked to list strategies that they had learned from ourinterventions that they intended on using in future semesters. Responses to journal prompts
, Florida to pursue a master’s degree in the Construction Management program at Florida International University. During her Master’s program, she worked as a Graduate Research Assistant at Moss School of Construction Management, researching var- ious topics related to sustainability in third world countries, robotic implementation in the construction industry and aiding STEM majors to improve their professional skills.Prof. Shahin Vassigh, Florida International University Shahin has a Master of Architecture, Master of Urban Planning and Bachelors of Science in Civil En- gineering from University at Buffalo, the State University of New York. She is currently an Associate Professor at the Department of Architecture at
attend social events, serve as academic advisors, meet withadvisees regularly, and serve as the primary conduit for Scholars into the projects. Scholars whohave completed the program and are juniors or seniors are asked to serve as peer mentors; for thecohort under study, the Peer mentors were selected from a group of high-achieving juniors/seniorssuch as those in leadership positions. Peer mentors receive a modest annual stipend and are askedto meet twice per quarter with their assigned mentee(s), respond to an end of quarter survey, andto attend social events. Each Scholar will also be assigned an early-career professional mentor whois a recent alum working at a local engineering company. We are planning for this at the startingof the second
smaller assignments. In all three collaborations lesson plans were implementedusing the BSCS 5E instructional model, which was aligned to the engineering design process.Instruments were developed to assess knowledge in collaborations 1 (engineering designprocess) and 3 (computational thinking), while in collaboration 2, knowledge was assessed withquestions from the fundamentals of engineering exam and a science content assessment.Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME) was also used in all 3collaborations to assess teamwork across the collaborations. Finally, each student wrote areflection on their experiences, which was used to qualitatively assess the project impact. Theresults from the first full semester of
vary with respect to first-year engineering structure, content, andtiming describe their experience participating in engineering communities of practice and theiremerging engineering identities?” Data is being collected through a baseline survey of first-yearengineering students, three-phase interviews with students following their FYE courses, andfocus groups with FYE instructional staff. This executive summary and poster focus on thelongitudinal memos which have assisted in our ongoing analysis of participant interviews.Additional details regarding work completed to date and future plans are also discussed.Theoretical LensFor this work, identity and community are conceptualized using Wenger’s Community ofPractice [5]. We conceptualize
over graduate school. Thepaper provides an in-depth discussion on the findings of the REU program evaluation and itsimpact on undergraduate students with respect to their future plans and career choice. The analysisis also done by gender, ethnicity, academic level (sophomore, junior, senior), and type of homeinstitution (e.g., large research universities, rural and small schools) to explore if there was anysignificant difference in mean research competency scores based on these attributes. 1. IntroductionToday’s manufacturing operations are more complex and globally scalable compared to those inthe last century (Lee et al., 2016). This complexity in manufacturing operations is due to a shift inmanufacturing from craftsmanship model in the
andcommunities; (2) peer cohorts, providing social support structure for students and enhancingtheir sense of belonging in engineering and computer science classrooms and beyond; and (3)professional development from faculty who have been trained in difference-education theory, sothat they can support students with varying levels of understanding of the antecedents of collegesuccess. To ensure success of these interventions, the CAPS program places great emphasis ondeveloping culturally responsive advisement methods and training faculty mentors to facilitatecreating a culture of culturally adaptive advising. More details of CAPS interventions can befound in [4].CAPS program is a 5-year project that started fall 2018. The program planned to support
engineering majors now have access to virtual desktops with relevant software.Scholarship SelectionTo date, we have supported 54 students in the Fast-Forward Program. Our to-date target is 60.The original proposal sought to support 22 students per summer at a level that would cover full-time tuition and fees, housing, and a meal plan, subject to financial aid eligibility. Due to risingcosts of room, board, tuition, and fees at our institution, we have revised the target to 20 studentsper summer. In the first three years of the program, we have supported 54 students with themedian award size of $6,000 in Year 1 (average $5,762) and $6,500 in Years 2 and 3 (averaging$5,945 and $6,043 in Years 2 and 3, respectively). Across the three years the
engineering and its related technical skills. Students responded to 8 items, again using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree; lower DoingEngineering scores indicate stronger and more frequent prior experiences with engineering. Inaddition to these measures, students completed a demographics survey in which they providedtheir age, gender, race/ethnicity, first generation status, and future plans for college. At the end ofthe academic year, all registered EPICS participants were sent the post-survey via an anonymousQualtrics link. The post-survey mirrored the pre-survey, but with the inclusion of open-endedquestions and the removal of the registration section. TABLE 1
, 100% of the responding indicated they were extremely (94%) or somewhat (6%) satisfied with their overall experience in the S-STEM program. All students indicated their meetings with the S-STEM Student Success Coach were extremely or somewhat informative. Also, success rate of S-STEM students is higher than the other students in all STEM courses (e.g. calculus I, engineering statics, physics I). At the present, the actual impact of the Student Success Coach on academic success remains to be determined as incoming ACT scores indicate that the S-STEM cohort is academically better prepared. Further analysis is planned to investigate this. Additional updated and detailed information will be provided on our poster.Introduction
campus resources. While the Career Services presentation was perceivedas being extremely/very useful by most students, students were not as satisfied with workshops focused on general study skillsand time management. In the future we plan to rework these sessions to include a clearer connection to the CS major. A majority of the students were extremely satisfied with the organized social events with student leaders from Women inTech and the Diversity in Computing (Diversineers) student groups in our department. The Faculty Scavenger Hunt was alsorated highly by students. Figure 4 shows student feedback on those events. The field trips and overall faculty interaction wererated highly.AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION, JUNE 2020
contexts.This work is intended to help demonstrate to engineering education researchers how a case studymethod approach can be used to study complex phenomena with multiple variables of interest (inthis case, the process of using professional development to initiate a faculty change initiative).The paper also shares how a case study research design can benefit from utilization of atheoretical framework (e.g., the additive innovation cycle) and from the collection of multiplesources of evidence to help triangulate findings. We describe the set of decisions madethroughout the analysis planning stage to identify patterns of behavior among cases (facultymembers), including why decisions were made, how they were implemented, and to what ends.The process to
connection to industry. This paper reviews theactions taken to develop this culture based on the four essential areas of change. It also providesinsights on lessons learned thus far and plans to reach long term goals in the coming years.IntroductionIn 2017, the Mechanical Engineering Department at Seattle University was awarded a NationalScience Foundation grant to revolutionize the department. The project leverages thedepartment’s small size and close ties with industry to create a culture of “Engineering withEngineers.”This paper summaries the current status of the five-year project and is an updated version of theNSF Grantees Poster papers presented at the 2018 and 2019 ASEE Annual Conferences [1], [2].The project background and objective are
Tech University. His technical research focuses on the intersection of soil-structure interaction and structural/geotechnical data. He encourages students pushing them toward self-directed learning through reading, and inspiring enthusiasm for the fields of structural and geotechnical engineering. Dr. Wood aims to recover the benefits of classical-model, literature-based learning in civil engineering education.Dr. William J. Davis P.E., The Citadel William J. Davis is D. Graham Copeland Professor of Civil Engineering and Dept. Head of Civil, Environ- mental and Construction Engineering at The Citadel in Charleston, SC. His academic experience includes transportation infrastructure planning and design, infrastructure