Conference Session

Biomedical Division Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kiersten Lenz, University of New Mexico; Eva Chi, University of New Mexico; Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico; Linnea K. Ista, University of New Mexico; Heather Canavan, University of New Mexico

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

engineeringskills (e.g., computer aided design, manufacturing, and prototype testing) [4].Working in collaborative teams increases critical thinking, test scores, and student engagementwith the material. Additional positive outcomes are increased self-esteem, personal assetidentification, and a gained appreciation of diverse perspectives [5]. Providing students with theopportunity to reflect on key areas of teamwork, such as communication, task management, andcooperation, can increase the effectiveness of team work [6].Research Design and MethodsThis study evaluates the effect of a collaborative prototype design project on students’ learningoutcomes and engagement with course material at a large Hispanic-serving research university inthe Southwest. The

Conference Session

Connecting BME education to the "real world"

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joe Tranquillo, Bucknell University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

non-prescriptive way tohelp students and faculty consider sustainability, while building their capacity to thinkingin four interconnected ways (systems, values, strategies, future). The framework is at theintersection of several movements within engineering education and is a way to craft anditerate upon learning environments that are challenge-based, real-world and seeded withhooks for independent inquiry and self-reflection (Stibbe and Luna, 2009; NationalResearch Council 2000; Caine et al. 2009; Bybee, 2002; Byrne, 2010; Huntzinger, 2007).Below each of the ways of thinking are reviewed (modified from the SEFT) and pairedwith a pedagogical movement within engineering education.Systems Thinking and Wicked ProblemsSystems Thinking advocates

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Gloria J. Kim, Northwestern University; Casey Jane Ankeny, Northwestern University; Mark James Fisher, Northwestern University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

development for use in Summer 2018. To evaluate the program for the 2018cohort and beyond, we will use both quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitativemethod will involve assessing student performance and perception. Entrance surveys, exitsurveys, and course evaluations will be used to collect data. The qualitative method willcomprise interviews with students, course instructors, and internship mentors. Surveys andinterview questions have been developed by working with Northwestern University’s Center forAdvancing Learning & Teaching. The results of the analysis will be then used to reflect on thecurriculum and form a basis for possible future revisions. As the alumni of the program builds,we will conduct follow-up surveys to assess

Conference Session

Design in the BME curriculum

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kay C. Dee, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Patricia Brackin P.E., Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Anneliese Watt, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Alan Chiu, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Glen A. Livesay, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Jay Patrick McCormack, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Renee D. Rogge, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology; Richard A. House, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

persuasive argument under pressure, and was a useful skillboth while in college and after graduation. Rubric for Assessing E-Learning Module Outcomes Module: The elevator pitch: advocating for your good ideas Assess each student’s level of attainment of the selected outcomes. Use the following rating: 1. Poor: Shows little or no progress in achieving the outcome 2. Below Average 3. Average: Shows evidence of progress in achieving outcome that reflects a merely acceptable level of mastery. 4. Above Average 5. Outstanding: Shows evidence of progress in achieving outcomes that reflects superior mastery. Student ID Made an Provided a non- Clearly stated a Provided a clear argument for technical

Conference Session

Biomedical Division Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Martin Li, Duke University; Brianna Loomis, Duke University; Kevin Caves, Duke University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

teaching others the skills they have learned, and the beliefthat they have deeper grasp with the fundamentals of engineering and problem solving.ResultsPreliminary data has been gathered for the beginning of the semester survey as well as the mid-yearsurvey. Currently two surveys regarding the opinions and attitude changes of students have beenadministered, where a self-reflection on given questions was answered. The provided questions were splitinto two categories: a technical skills section and a soft skills section. The technical skills sectionconsisted of five questions asking the students’ opinions regarding their own proficiency in soldering,multimeter and power/hand tool usage, circuit diagnosis and device repair. The other category

Conference Session

Hands-On Skills in BME

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Renata Fortuna Ramos, Rice University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

grades.Survey ResultsTo understand the students’ perception on the usefulness of the intervention, students in theexperimental group were asked to reflect on the modules in terms of their complexity, theireffectiveness as a learning tool and the ease of use of the step-by-step manual associated witheach module. A five-point Likert scale was used to measure the student responses on the threedimensions (Figure 4, n=103).When asked if the modules displayed an appropriate level of complexity, 62% of the studentsagreed or strongly agreed, 22% of the students responded in a neutral manner and 16% of thestudents disagreed or strongly disagreed. While these results suggest that complexity could beincreased in the available modules, it is important to note that

Conference Session

Clinical Learning Experiences in BME

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Anthony E. Felder, University of Illinois, Chicago; Miiri Kotche, University of Illinois, Chicago; Susan Stirling, University of Illinois at Chicago; Kimberlee M Wilkens, University of Illinois at Chicago

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

process by not only identifying needs, but also reflecting on them in thecontext of exploring appropriate solutions.Methods:Program Structure: The CIP is a six week long immersion experience designed to familiarize students withneeds identification as part of the engineering design process. Since 2016, students are placedinto interdisciplinary teams comprised of two BioE (rising seniors) and two IMED (rising secondyear) students. Each week, student teams participate in a Monday workshop (six hours) andspend Tuesday-Friday in clinical immersion (35 hours). This program year, teams spent all sixprogram weeks in a single clinical environment and supplemented their experience with needsidentification by including initial concept exploration

Conference Session

Active Learning in BME, Session I

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Nicole L Ramo, Colorado State University; Jasmine Erin Nejad, Colorado State University; Ketul C. Popat, Colorado State University; Kimberly Catton P.E., Colorado State University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Biomedical Engineering

studies may have lesspatience towards changes in instructional methods and may find initial attempts at incorporatingactive learning disorganized [12]. This frustration with perceived disorganization was alsoreflected in the survey comments from older students, including that of the 20-year old studentquoted above. They were more likely to find the active learning sessions, especially those whichdid not include problem-solving exercises, as “busy work” and unnecessary for their success inthe class and may reflect differences in motivational factors and preferred learning environmentsnoted by some researchers [32], [33]. The differences in gender are more puzzling and arecontrary to what has been reported in studies of active learning