-based efforts described in the literature thatrelate thematically to the emphasis areas in this curriculum, (4) assessment methods that haveappeared useful when applied to such projects, and (5) suitable categories of starter projects forthis new curriculum, including those that can be prototyped prior to the Fall 2020/2021 onset ofthe initial junior/senior-level design sequences.I. IntroductionA. Motivation and GoalA new Kansas State University (KSU) undergraduate Biomedical Engineering (BME) degreeprogram was approved by the Kansas Board of Regents in June 2016 [1]–[3], and the firstincoming cadre of freshman joined this program in Fall 2018. This program, partially spurred bydemand from prospective students and their families, (a
the field ofBME where advancements are often made at the interface of materials, electrical, mechanical,and medical knowledge. Moreover, today’s biomedical engineers must be capable problem-solvers who are comfortable working in multidisciplinary teams within the design process.Traditional educational approaches, which leverage standard lecture-style dissemination of siloedinformation with limited hands-on project and design experience, are not sufficiently preparingour graduates for success in the interdisciplinary, project-focused world [1]. At UVM,foundational technical content is currently taught across the departments of MechanicalEngineering, Civil Engineering, and Electrical Engineering. In the new curriculum, these topicswill be
development and deployment of a new, integrative, first-yearbiomedical engineering curriculum focused on studio-based learning of engineering design.Developed by an interdisciplinary team of faculty and staff, this curriculum is team-taught(meaning, multiple faculty are in the studio at all times) by biomedical engineers, mechanicalengineers who specialize in design, a professor of English, a computer scientist, and amathematician. The foundation of the curriculum is the engineering design studio, which meetsfour hours per day, four days per week. The design studio has a different general theme for eachacademic quarter – for example, the Fall quarter theme is ‘Play for All,’ focusing on children’splay environments, toys, and games that are
engineering engaged with thechairs of the chemistry, biology, physics, and math departments to identify required courses andthe logistics of course scheduling, as many courses are only offered once during the academic year.Meetings were also held with the director of the pre-medical program to identify required coursesfor a pre-med track for the BME students. This collaborative approach was instrumental in creatinga new program curriculum which is heavy in pre-requisite courses. Seven general engineeringcourses (22 credit hours), two chemistry courses (8 credit hours), two biology courses (8 credithours), three physics courses (12 credit hours), four math courses (14 credit hours), and one projectmanagement course (2 credit hours) were incorporated
Paper ID #24697Work In Progress: Faculty Partnering With Students in Biomedical Engi-neering Undergraduate Curriculum DevelopmentDr. Cristi L. Bell-Huff, Georgia Institute of Technology Cristi L. Bell-Huff, PhD is a Lecturer in the Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering at Georgia Tech and Emory University where she is involved in teaching and engineering education inno- vation and research. In addition to her PhD in Chemical Engineering, she also has an MA in Educational Studies. She has industrial experience in pharmaceutical product and process development as well as teaching experience at the secondary and
healthcare. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Work in Progress: Student Training in Data Analytics Approaches for Bioprocessing through Co-curricular ActivitiesIntroductionThe rapidly growing biologics category now makes up more than 30 percent of the overallbiopharmaceutical market, with the majority of manufacturing production focused on protein-based drugs [1]. As a new wave of clinical trials progress, a wider variety of new gene, cell,exosome, and recombinant protein therapies are moving closer to commercialization andmanufacture [2]. The complexity and cost of these biologics, as well as the unique manufacturingrequirements and patient
, instructional design, and educational technology.Dr. W. David Merryman, Vanderbilt University W. David Merryman, PhD is the Walters Family Professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering, and Professor of Pharmacology, Medicine, and Pediatrics at Vanderbilt University. He is also Associate Chair of the Department of Biomedical Engineering. His research interests are cardiovascular and pul- monary mechanobiology with a particular focus on developing new therapeutic strategies, cell and soft tissue biomechanics, and bioengineering ethics. Prior to his arrival at Vanderbilt, Dave was an Assistant Professor of Biomedical Engineering at the University of Alabama at Birmingham and prior to that, a Research Associate of the
Paper ID #33666WIP: Effectiveness of Different Reflection Approaches for ImprovingMastery in an Engineering Laboratory CourseMs. Amy N. Adkins, Northwestern University Amy N. Adkins is a PhD candidate in Biomedical Engineering at Northwestern University. She received her M.S. in Biomedical Engineering from Northwestern and her B.S. in Engineering Science from St. Mary’s University in San Antonio. Her technical graduate research is focused on utilizing novel imaging techniques to quantifying adaptation of muscle architecture in humans. She also desires to implement innovative teaching, mentoring, and hands-on problem
number of our undergraduates are interested in pursuingindustry careers in design and innovation and would benefit from open-ended context drivendesign experience in medicine that fosters observation skills, deep empathy, and needs-finding.These contextual skills have been found lacking among engineering graduates by nearly half ofrespondents in a survey of 1,622 employers [3]. A contextualized learning approach [4-5] inengineering education has been shown to improve student motivation, confidence, andconceptual understanding in a variety of studies [e.g. 6-7].To meet this “design gap” in our curriculum and to address the need for human-centeredcontextualized design experience for our students, we developed an upper-level elective courseentitled
anticipate these changesand define the professional practice of future bioengineers. Our aim is to educate ourbioengineering students to possess core technical capabilities that can be applied to disciplinaryproblems with awareness of societal contexts with the leadership skills to produce impactfulresults. To begin this training, we are integrating co-curricular, grand-challenge driven tracksinto the curriculum for students to address these societal problems in health and medicine.Our bioengineering program includes five technical track (approach) areas: cell and tissueengineering, therapeutics engineering, biomechanics, computational and systems biology, andimaging and sensing. Each track is composed of fifteen engineering credit hours, and
].Representative excerpts from end-of-course evaluations include: “Yes, it was my favourite class this quarter! It enabled me to approach concepts of diverse representation in STEM and bioethics in entirely new ways that will make me a better engineer.” “[The] honors section was one of the most interesting classes I have taken. The topics we discussed were thought-provoking and forced me to consider ideas that I have not thought about before.” “The Honors section of this class was very intellectually stimulating. We learned about aspects of bioengineering that I had never thought about before and most STEM classes do not discuss. It also challenged us to think about problems from multiple
from different fields and countries. Dr. Gulacar has developed and organized workshops about implementation of social constructivist methods and effective use of technological tools in science classrooms.Dr. Jennifer H. Choi, University of California, Davis Jennifer Choi is currently a Lecturer with potential for security of employment (LPSOE) in the Depart- ment of Biomedical Engineering (BME) at UC Davis. In addition to teaching core undergraduate courses, Jennifer is aimed at integrating engineering design principles and hands-on experiences throughout the curriculum, and playing an active role in the senior design course. She has interests in engineering educa- tion, curricular innovation, as well as impacting
of increasing complexity. The teamsdevelop models, test their models with laboratory experiments, and validate their models withexperimental data. At the conclusion of the course, freshmen gain an appreciation for the powerof modeling physiological systems and can propose their own hypothesis, which they can thentest in lab. With practice, freshmen become more comfortable with the modeling process [3].They understand the value of solving challenging, open-ended problems with multiple potentialsolutions. Engineering students must learn to creatively ideate and assess numerous approaches,often with conflicting outcomes, starting their freshmen year. Modeling and design team-basedprojects engross students in learning beyond lectures and
Paper ID #30525Work in Progress. Building a Learning Continuum: Forging ConnectionsAcross a Bioengineering Curriculum for Improved Student LearningDr. Sabrina Jedlicka Jedlicka, Lehigh UniversityProf. Eugene Thomas Pashuck, Lehigh UniversityDr. Susan F. Perry, Lehigh University American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020WIP: Building a Learning Continuum: Forging Connections Across a Bioengineering Curriculum for Improved Student LearningAbstract:It is becoming increasingly clear that higher education must adapt to address the needs and learningstyles of a new generation of students and to
the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering Department at the University of New Mexico. The research in her lab is focused on understanding the dynamics and structures of macromolecular assemblies including proteins, polymers, and lipid membranes. Undergrad- uates, graduate students, and postdoctoral scholars are trained in a multidisciplinary environment, utilizing modern methodologies to address important problems at the interface between chemistry, physics, engi- neering, and biology preparing the trainees for careers in academe, national laboratories, and industry. In addition to research, she devotes significant time developing and implementing effective pedagogical approaches in her teaching of
of programming may each be most relevant for different types of careers,but BME programs generally do not know what careers their students will have, and with acrowded curriculum, choices have to be made about what type of computing course(s) to require.In some cases this decision is made for all programs by the engineering school, but more than60% of universities give BME the responsibility of deciding on fundamental programmingcourses, and additional applications courses are at the discretion of the department. The data may be useful in several ways. They show a diversity of approaches, withMATLAB, CAD, and modeling being the most prevalent courses. In general, they allow aprogram to judge whether it is in the mainstream of BME
Paper ID #27420Board 7: Work in Progress: Approaches to Introduce Biomedical Engineer-ing Design to a Class with Diverse STEM BackgroundsMs. Angela Lai, Carnegie Mellon University Angela is a current 5th year PhD student in the Department of Biomedical Engineering at Carnegie Mel- lon University. She is actively involved in mentoring undergraduate and graduate students in both the laboratory and in the classroom and promoting the field of BME to the younger generations.Ms. Elaine Soohoo, Carnegie Mellon University Elaine is a 5th year PhD student in the Department of Biomedical Engineering at Carnegie Mellon Uni- versity
our engineering curriculum[9], it is evident that team-based activities and prototyping geared toward solving these problemscan result in increased inclusion of students with disabilities. These solutions can have adramatic impact on the ability of people with disabilities to complete coursework and engage incourse-based ADL independently. Incorporation of guest lecturers including therapists,rehabilitation engineers, and people using assistive technology (known as “need-knowers”during the course) in conjunction with design thinking and rapid prototype fabrication led toremoval of two barriers to success identified by students with disabilities. The purpose of thispaper is to discuss results from two semesters of a new elective engineering
sciencesare taught alongside clinical sciences [4]. This approach has been shown to improve both studentknowledge and clinical skills [5, 6]. In an undergraduate engineering curriculum verticalintegration has previously been used to improve student engagement through concurrent teachingand utilization of the concepts. More specifically, in an engineering design course a combinationof professional, ethical, technical, or communication skills are both taught and used [7, 8]. Vertical integration can give students exposure to design skills prior to a fourth yearcapstone project; yet, it does not inherently provide a context for the experience. Industry,service learning, or academic research could all fill this criterion. Industry or service
positive responses to the projects are encouraging, but there is room for improvement.Better delivery of the projects, enhanced instructional tools, and improved team managementcould all contribute to student learning and enjoyment.Conclusions and Outlook: The addition of newly developed design projects into the second andthird years of a BME curriculum has been mostly successful. After completing these projects,students gain design knowledge, perceive growing self-confidence in approaching new designsituations, and improve their abilities to apply and document the engineering design process.Further, a significant majority of students have found the projects to be both worthwhile andenjoyable, and evidence suggests that students apply knowledge
relevantprofessional design topics [2, 3]. This approach aims to provide educational experiences thatsimulate the real-world industrial design process and encourages creativity, innovation andteamwork among students [4, 5].For over thirty years, our Biomedical Engineering (BME) program has been successfullyteaching design as part of our BME curriculum. Over its lifetime, our design curriculum hasseen several significant revisions to address changing industrial practices and to improve thestudents’ educational experience and learning outcomes. In line with the modern industrialdesign practice, our current curriculum focuses on the systems engineering approach andincludes key phases such as project definition, system-level design, prototype development
user-centered innovation potential.During the past years, closing the gap between engineering design and clinical needs that ensureuser-centered solutions has been of great interest in the BME undergraduate curriculum fordesign learning. Researchers have explored new teaching techniques to bridge the gap betweentwo courses at Clemson University, “Clinical Immersion for Engineers” and “Senior Design”, tobetter translate unmet clinical needs into user-centered design projects [4]. Additionally, theDeFine (Design Fundamental in Needs-Findings Experience) program developed in a partnershipbetween Clemson University and the Greenville Health system, offers clinical and technologicalimmersion experiences to support translating clinical needs into
-level comparisons were conducted for the Senior Exit Surveyconsisting of ten survey items.ResultsThe first objective of this study was to determine whether the new approach toward coveringprofessional topics in a biomedical engineering curriculum was associated with improvedmeasures of effectiveness of topic coverage. Both the UIC Survey and the Senior Exit Surveywere administered to the final cohort of students on the previous curriculum and first cohort ofstudents following the new curriculum with the professional topics course. To show the results ofthe UIC Survey qualitatively, the percentage of students agreeing or strongly agreeing with eachsurvey item was computed, as was the percentage of students disagreeing or stronglydisagreeing. The
as is his B.S. degree. He holds an M.S. in MBE, also from Ohio State. He was the director of the BME program at the Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE) from 2009 to 2017. He has been teaching at MSOE since 1990. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020Work in Progress: Redesigning a Biomedical Engineering Capstone Design Sequence toEnhance Student EngagementThe Accreditation Board for Engineering Technology Criterion 5 states that an accreditedundergraduate engineering curriculum must include a capstone design process to better prepareits graduates for careers in engineering [1]. One common pedagogical approach to teachingdesign focuses on problem-based learning and includes clinical
oc- cupational therapy, management, adaptive technology and adult physical disabilities. These reflect her interest in the history, philosophy and current research in the profession. Her work experience incorpo- rated interprofessional collaboration which she believes has positively influenced practical application in the classroom. This experience has also contributed to her interest in interprofessional education (IPE) as a component of student curriculum and expanded to assistive technology where occupational therapy and engineering students collaborate on project designs. Her interest and research in IPE has led to local, na- tional and international presentations related to this subject matter. She has
technical areas of exper- tise include signal and imaging processing, and statistical analysis. In her previous and current product development roles, Olga gained extensive experience in clinical product management involving market analysis for new and existing imaging products, and clinical product marketing. She has experience in managing product evaluations at multiple clinical sites, and has a comprehensive knowledge of neurology, oncology, and cardiology imaging markets. She has established a number of strong collaborations with clinical experts in recognized neuroimaging and oncology centers. Olga has earned her undergraduate degree in biomedical engineering from the Milwaukee School of Engi- neering in 1999
it connects to other relevant courses in thecurriculum, data from four (4) related questions in the end-of-course evaluation (CC1 -CC4 in Table 1) were analyzed (Figure 3). Student’s assessment of their own ability topropose and evaluate engineering design solutions (which is a critical skill required fortheir senior design course) improved significantly in 2016 and 2015 relative to 2014.Additionally, an increased number of students felt that the course was more closely linkedto its pre-requisite transport course (BME 304) within the curriculum. The students’perception of the course’s ability to meet these criteria showed 24.21% and 13.73 %increases, respectively. This improvement is particularly significant due to the difficultyin
Paper ID #33978Work in Progress: Promoting Equitable Team Dynamics in an IntroductoryBiomedical Engineering CourseDr. Jennifer H. Choi, University of California, Davis Jennifer Choi is currently an Associate Professor of Teaching in the Department of Biomedical Engineer- ing (BME) at UC Davis. In addition to teaching core undergraduate courses, Jennifer is aimed at integrat- ing engineering design principles and hands-on experiences throughout the curriculum, and playing an active role in the senior design course. She has interests in engineering education, curricular innovation, as well as impacting the community through
their questions outside of the class timeframe. In large-size college classes, usingemails and online office hours have been introduced as effective substitutions for face-to-faceoffice hours [1-4]. Moreover, cooperative learning has repeatedly proven to have positiveimpacts on students’ educational experience [3,5]. Cooperative learning, which can beincorporated in classes of any size, enables students to improve their social and team-workingskills. In addition, cooperative learning provides an opportunity for students to discuss theirquestions and overcome challenges within their groups without forming long lines outside theinstructor’s office during office hours.Nevertheless, for certain technical courses in engineering curriculum
Learning About Social JusticeWe describe the development of a new curriculum, “Science and Engineering for SocialJustice,” a 5-credit course that explores social justice in a science and engineeringcontext, with specific focus on race, gender, sexuality, and disability. This course contentis important for all engineering students, and is appropriate for all undergraduate majors.We have received overwhelmingly positive student evaluations from the first threeofferings of the course. We discuss the positive aspects of the course material, whatstudents learn about themselves from the class, and changes we have made in response tostudent feedback.In this paper, our aim is to make teaching about social justice issues more manageable forengineering