Collection

2016 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Jeffrey S. Bates; Taylor D. Sparks

was provided. Second, student groups exchanged final papers with at least two other groups to gain feedback on their projects. Furthermore, students began their projects by reviewing current research and focusing on what had been done in research related to their chosen problem, defining the limitations of current products, identifying current products on the market, understanding user needs, and designing with the needs of the end user in mind. Students consulted with © American Society for Engineering Education, 2016

Collection

2016 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Dixon Y. Nielson

2016 ASEE Rocky Mountain Section Conference Teaching Ethics and Professionalism to Engineering Students: An Educational Dilemma Dixon Y. Nielson Utah State UniversityAbstractHiring managers have typically focused on GPA’s and technical competence in their attempt tohire the best possible applicants for engineering positions. Now, because there are severaltechnically well qualified graduates for each opening, hiring managers are increasing usinginterviews to focus on an applicant’s ability to effectively communicate, solve non-technicalproblems, and resolve ethical and professional issues. This

Collection

2016 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Jason C. Ganley

, though we recruit in multiple states. The Mines grads hit the ground running, head and shoulders above other new hires in terms of presentation skills and critical thinking.” (Schlumberger) • “I trust the new grads from Mines to handle problems that aren’t completely defined yet – they don’t mind diving right in and finding out what needs to be done.” (Baker Hughes) • “We hire a lot of Mines kids, and they know how to work. I don’t need to tell supervisors to watch their progress marks every month, and they don’t waste anyone’s time.” (Ball Aerospace) • “Our experience with CSM chemical engineers has been fairly limited, but very positive. They come in as top communicators, and are

Collection

2016 Rocky Mountain Section Conference

Authors

Evan Bingham; Clifton Farnsworth; Justin Weidman

. The topic with the highest priority could then be selected for furtherdiscussion.Table 1. What advantages do you see to using interactive polling in a lecture? Response Response rate 7 Fun! 6 Not afraid to make mistakes 5 I can steal my answer 5 It keeps my mind stimulated and engaged 5 Attention grabber 5 Each person is engaged, unlike a discussion where only one person can talk at a time. 4 Everyone can work out problems 4 Answers can be biased to what everyone else says 4 Funny responses 4 Fun to interact 4 It encourages participation and engagement in the questions 4