-Piñera, et al., “Design and integration of a problem-based biofabrication course into an undergraduate biomedical engineering curriculum”, J Biol Eng 10, 2016, 10.[3] A.B. Abell, “Embracing Ambiguity: A Framework for Promoting Iterative Design Thinking Approaches in Open-Ended Engineering and Design Curricula”, 2017.[4] S. R. Daly, C. M. Seifert, S. Yilmaz, R. Gonzalez, "Comparing Ideation Techniques for Beginning Designers", ASME. J. Mech. Des. October 2016; 138(10): 101108.[5] T.C. Davies, J. Manzin, M. Meraw, et al., “Understanding the Development of a Design Thinking Mindset During a Biomedical Engineering Third-Year Course”, Biomed Eng Education 2023, 3, pp.123–132.[6] A. S. T. Wong, & C
elements of the benefits of experientiallearning including increased engagement, retention, connections and new perspective taking. Sub-Theme #1: Engagement Traditional lecture notes that require students to fill in the gaps, worksheets, problem-solving sessions and some video or physical demos are the preferred approaches when implementing active learning. An opportunity to listen and diagnose a condition has never been employed in the classroom. Students described an increase in engagement and motivation with this STEAM approach combining music with STEM concepts to better understand physiology behind heart sounds. • This new interdisciplinary learning experience made me engage more with the curriculum as I was better able to
Paper ID #38501Board 11 : Work in Progress: An Enhanced Active Learning Approach toTurning Classroom into a NeighborhoodDr. Zhinan Wang, University of Illinois at Chicago Zhinan Wang is a Clinical Associate Professor from the University of Illinois Chicago (UIC) . He received his PhD degree in Biomedical Engineering in 2017. His current work focuses on undergraduate study and engineering curriculum design. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Work in Progress: An Enhanced Active Learning Approach to Turning Classroom into a NeighborhoodIntroductionBiomedical
course (this has held consistent for courses taught in Python and MATLAB).Additionally, our students have complained they are disadvantaged because their instructionused different languages and was missing deep study in a single language relevant to industry.Our introductory programming course switched to Python five years ago, and thus our studentshave even less preparation and familiarity with MATLAB than they had previously, this being amajor impetus towards migrating the BME curriculum to Python. We recently reached out to aMedTech industry executive who hires biomedical engineering graduates who estimated that ittakes 6 months for students to become proficient in a new language and having studentsalready trained in Python would give them a
Paper ID #43848Board 19: Work in Progress: Towards Self-reported Student Usage of AI toDirect Curriculum in Technical Communication CoursesKavon Karrobi, Boston University Kavon Karrobi is a Lecturer in the Department of Biomedical Engineering, as well as the Manager of the Bioengineering Technology & Entrepreneurship Center (BTEC) at Boston University. As a Lecturer in BME, Kavon teaches and mentors students in courses on biomedical measurements, analysis, and instrumentation. As Manager of BTEC, Kavon provides guidance, training, and mentorship of student projects that use BTEC ranging from student-initiated
educational design projects.Dr. Anthony E. Felder, The University of Illinois Chicago Dr. Felder earned a Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Illinois at Chicago. His current focus is on engineering education and its restructuring to better meet the diverse needs of students and industries. Dr. Felder is also active in ophthalmology research for the multimodal imaging of retinal oxygenation and novel medical device design.Adrian P. Defante ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Work-in-Progress: Development of a Domain-Agnostic Standards Curriculum in Partnership with a Medical Device ManufacturerIntroductionThe medical device industry is widely considered one of the most
new perspective on what is possible in design.STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and math) is a term implying the integration ofart into traditional STEM, to encourage innovation and creativity [22]. Integrating STEAM intothe engineering/STEM/university classroom benefits students in similar ways to bio-inspireddesign, by encouraging creative thinking outside of traditional engineering practice. In these ways,students are encouraged to develop a versatile skill set that will aid them in a constantly changingworld and workplace.The next section will explain our approach to incorporating this interdisciplinary project(integrating the EM, Bio, and STEAM) into the Mechanics of Materials classroom.MethodsAt Rose-Hulman Institute of
also been the PI on an NSF REU site focused on multi-scale systems bioengineering and biomedical data sciences, a collaboration involving faculty in SEAS, SOM, SDS, and CLAS at UVA, as well as six partner institutions in the mid-Atlantic and Southeast. Dr. Allen has been the recipient of 11 teaching awards and honors and is an elected Fellow of AIMBE. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Work-in-Progress: A collaborative, principle-focused curriculum design process for a BMEundergraduate programHow biomedical engineering (BME) students learn to approach problem-solving is critical—theymust consider ethical and societal implications; develop and implement systems of increasingcomplexity
curriculum increases student awareness of frameworks and broader applications to practice AbstractThe intersection of human health and designing novel technologies that improvemedical outcomes requires personal and professional introspection on the ethicaldilemmas that clinicians and engineers will face in their careers. Given the diversefield of biomedical engineering, from imaging modalities to implantable devices toemergent biotechnologies, no singular approach to ethics training will prepare ourstudents to assess their professional obligation to the ethical, social, and legalimplications of their future work. Many engineering programs provide studentswith early modules in engineering ethics during
curriculum” (EAC) inengineering; however, these approaches leverage non-engineering department ethics courses ingeneral education requirements and do not emphasize technical content integrated with ethicaldecision making. Table 1: Approaches and challenges for teaching ethics to undergraduate engineering students Ethics course within social Modules in introductory and Ethics Across the sciences/humanities capstone design courses Curriculum (a.k.a. department Embedded Ethics) Approach General Engineering Ethics: Design-focused interventions Brief discussions, typically Safety, Welfare, Equity
future of modern medical treatment. Advances in tissueengineering, computational protein design, and high-throughput bioanalyticaltechniques across academia and industry motivate the need to develop curriculathat provides opportunities for students to interact and design early in theirundergraduate careers. To meet this need, we created two new junior-level courses:Molecular Engineering (BME305L) and Cellular Engineering (BME306L) thatwere offered in the Fall and Spring of 2022, respectively. We have emphasizedstudent-centered experimental and laboratory practice as the backbone of thesecourses to prepare students for authentic research experiences in any industry.Molecular Engineering integrates computational and experimental learningoutcomes
, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 WIP: Exploring Student Disposition in a Foundational Conservation Principles of Bioengineering CourseI. IntroductionGood problem-solving approaches are foundational to being an engineer regardless of the problem that isbeing solved [1]. To this end, most biomedical engineering curricula begin the curriculum with a problem-solving course, typically based on conservation principles [2]. One of the first foundational textbooks forBME curricula was developed by Saterbak, which is used in hundreds of programs nationwide [3]. The textprovides a structured problem-solving approach that is introduced in
and developed tools to study the alignment of products and services with organizational processes as an organization seeks to address needs and bring new products and services to the market.Dr. Ruth Ochia P.E., Temple University Dr. Ruth S. Ochia is a Professor of Instruction with the Bioengineering Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa. Her past research interests have included Biomechanics, primarily focusing on spine-related injuries and degeneration. Currently, her research interest are in engineering education specifically with design thinking process and student motivation.Dr. Holly M Golecki, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Dr. Holly Golecki (she/her) is a Teaching Assistant Professor in
of BME, she has also worked to revolutionize the future of graduate medical education serving as a founding member of the new Carle-Illinois College of Medicine, a first-of- its-kind engineering driven college of medicine. Amos is part of the Illinois NSF RED (Revolutionizing Engineering & Computer Science Departments) research team leading efforts to innovate assessment practices for engineering toward producing more holistic engineers. Amos has a decade’s worth of expe- rience leading curriculum reform and implementing robust assessment strategies at multiple institutions.Prof. Joe Bradley, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Joe Bradley is a Clinical Assistant Professor in Bioengineering, Health Innovation
engagement andinterest, these applications have become mainstays within engineering disciplines and havehelped to keep students interested in their respective fields [3, 4, 5, 6, 1].In addition to attrition due to disinterest in our curriculum [7, 8, 2], engineering educators alsocontend with attrition in bioengineering due to students feeling a lack of belonging [9, 10, 7], alack of support, or feeling othered due to many factors including discrimination [11, 7]. Othershave extensively reviewed the techniques used to combat these systemic issues [12, 13, 14, 15].These efforts aid in creating a more accessible method for teaching students and building bothconfidence and belonging in these students such that they can best achieve what it is that
initiative. This work aims to understand thepotential benefits and challenges of the I-Corps and IBL integration. By examining the feedbackof students, instructors, and mentors, the study seeks to document the experience of allstakeholders in the process and to identify how this approach may enhance practical skills, fosterinnovation, and improve market readiness among engineering students. While the study presentspreliminary results at this stage, it aims to establish a foundational understanding of the potentialimplications of using the I-Corps NSF program in an engineering IBL classroom. The insightsgathered from this study can inform future curriculum development, teaching methods, and theoverall approach to engineering education, focusing on
experience vehicle.References[1] C. Patrick Jr, J. Machek, R. Avazmohammadi, D. Alge, C. Peak, and M. McShane, "Process for faculty-driven, data-informed curriculum continuity review in biomedical engineering," Biomedical Engineering Education, vol. 2, pp. 265-280, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43683-021-00063-y.[2] C. Patrick Jr, "Guiding a curriculum redesign using a teleological approach: Application of Kotter’s change model," presented at the Biomedical Engineering Society Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX, October, 2022.[3] C. Patrick Jr, "Guiding a comprehensive curriculum redesign: An iterative application of Kotter’s change model," in American Society for Engineering Education Gulf-Southwest
modules for core BME courses and developing tools to support student learning in the studios via active learning techniques. She is particularly interested in researching the impact of the engineering studio environment on student learning, engagement, and motivation, and investigating how the new studio curriculum impacts student’s perception of their engineering identity.Dr. Alexandra Werth, Cornell UniversityProf. Jonathan T. Butcher, Cornell University ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024Work in Progress: Evaluating the impact of student cognitive and emotional responses toreal-time feedback on student engagement in engineering design studiosIntroduction. The Department of Biomedical
-centered approach that is thought to benefit student learning [5] and motivation [6] whenimplemented correctly. PBL courses are organized around problems and the instructor acts as afacilitator in PBL sessions. The PBL approach will also create flexibility to integrate coursecontent with engineering design. [7]We chose the bioinstrumentation course for PBL redesign since this course was the first coursetaught by the authors immediately after attendance and engagement issues were observed.Bioinstrumentation is required by more than 90% of bioengineering or biomedical engineering(BME) undergraduate programs. [8] The structure and content of bioinstrumentation vary by theprogram, but often contains a lab module to build electronics circuits and/or
the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Columbus, OH, 2017.2. Chesler, N.C., C.L. Brace and W.J. Tompkins. “Learning assessment in a design-throughout the-curriculum program.” Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, 2011.3. Topping, K. J. (1996). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. Higher education, 32(3), 321-345.4. Tien, L. T., Roth, V., & Kampmeier, J. A. (2002). Implementation of a peer‐led team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National
throughout the curriculum, not justat the end [2]. Unfortunately, in many BME undergraduate programs, due to the high number ofprerequisites, BME-specific courses are not the focus until junior year [3]. Therefore, there is aneed for earlier and explicit training to build and reinforce these skills and enhance BMEprofessional identity [2]. To address this need, we developed a core, sophomore-level, medicaldevices course in which students simulate the engineering teams found in industry to developworkplace-ready skills. The goals of requiring this new course in our curriculum are to • Increase students’ biomedical engineering professional identity, which we anticipated would occur as a result of earlier exposure to BME roles and skills
, medical waste management, modeling, and simulation.Dr. Sara Dorris, University of Mount Union Dr. Sara Dorris is an expert in the nursing field, with focus areas in Medical Surgical Nursing, Family Nurse Practitioner, and Critical Care. Dr. Dorris is known for expanding the educational foundation of nurses with the utilization of interdisciplinary learning within didactics, clinical rotations, and simulation. Dr. Dorris is an educator and a practicing provider for an orthopedic surgery group. Research focus has been on patient centered care, pharmacology, advancement of technology for improved care, simulation, and most recently the interdisciplinary approach of biomedical engineering students and nurses. Dr. Dorris
Paper ID #40178The Effect of In-Person versus Pre-recorded Final Presentations onStudent Learning Outcomes and EngagementJulie Leonard-Duke, University of Virginia Julie Leonard-Duke is a current graduate student in Biomedical Engineering at UVA highly interested in engineering education research. During her undergraduate degree at Georgia Tech, Julie was involved with engineering education research in the Department of Biomedical Engineering and the Center for Aca- demic Success. Additionally, Julie was named a University Innovation Fellow and through her training at the Stanford Design School designed a new
cited[1] W. Guilford, K. Bishop, W. Walker, and J. M. Adams, “Suitability Of An Undergraduate Curriculum In Biomedical Engineering For Premedical Study,” 2008 Annu. Conf. Expo., p. 13.1119.1-13.1119.7, Jun. 2008.[2] W. H. Guilford, “Clinician-engineer Career Bias and Its Relationship to Engineering Design Self-efficacy among Biomedical Engineering Undergraduates,” presented at the 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Jun. 2020. Accessed: Jan. 11, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/clinician-engineer-career-bias-and-its-relationship-to- engineering-design-self-efficacy-among-biomedical-engineering-undergraduates[3] W. H. Guilford, “A Skills-focused Approach to Teaching Design Fundamentals to Large
projects into a BME curriculum as theyincrease students’ engineering design knowledge and confidence in approaching design projects[8]. Using this knowledge, we developed a new required junior design course, “BiomedicalEngineering Fundamentals and Design” with the goal of providing students with additionalengineering design opportunities prior to their senior capstone course, while also integratingconcepts from previous biomedical engineering courses. The course learning outcomes (CLOs)were: 1) Apply engineering design principles to a bioengineering problem, and 2) Fabricate andassemble a solution that meets a client’s specifications.Electrospinning: Several projects were considered for this design course including bioreactors,spectrophotometry
realistic medical device design in education and the quality assessment of educational design projects for between-project comparisons.Dylan Lynch, The University of Illinois at Chicago ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 WIP: Development and Implementation of a Makerspace Class for BME Undergraduates to Enhance Skills in Senior DesignIntroduction:The undergraduate curriculum in biomedical engineering at the University of Illinois Chicagoemphasizes problem-based learning with a focus on as much hands-on project work as possible.To that end, our 100-level Introduction to BME course integrates CAD design, 3d printing andmicroprocessors to achieve learning outcomes. A 200-level course
Interim Department Head of Biomedical Engineering at Rowan University. Before joining the faculty at Rowan, Dr. Staehle worked at the Daniel Baugh Institute for Functional Genomics and Computational Biology at Thomas Jefferson University. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024A Multi-Institutional Assessment of Entrepreneurial MindsetPerceptions of Students Participating in Entrepreneurial REU Programs Through Concept MapsAbstractEntrepreneurial mindset (EM) development in undergraduate biomedical engineering studentsties to development of traits, such as innovation, designing for a customer base, andcommunication, that are highly valued for the development of new biomedical devices
Entrepreneurship Bootcamp specializing in new ven- tures leadership. He obtained his Bachelor of Engineering in Medical Electronics with University Rank from BMSCE, Masters of Technology in Information Technology, and a Masters of Engineering (M.E) in Bioinformatics from University Visvesvaraya College of Engineering, Bengaluru. His Ph.D. was in Men- tal Health and Neurosciences from Maastricht University, the Netherlands which received the best thesis award. Abhishek is a Senior Member of IEEE. He has served in various volunteering positions at IEEE. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Paper ID
pre-college experiences on student career paths, and 2) engineering identity/experiences for the LBGTQ+ community.Dr. Yanfen Li, University of Massachusetts, Lowell Dr. Yanfen Li is an Assistant Professor in Biomedical Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. She received her Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign in 2018. Dr. Li has extensive experience in engineering education focusing on recruitment and retention of underrepresented and under resourced students and engineering pedagogy. Her work spans the areas of curriculum instruction and design, program design and evaluation, and the first-year college experience. Dr Li’s research group aims to further the
Reinforce Research & Development Skills in a Biopharmaceutical Process Development CourseIntroductionBiomedical engineering undergraduate programs must prepare students to enter research &development (R&D) focused post-graduate work, whether in industry or academia. However,traditional biomedical engineering coursework may not always adequately cover R&D skills.This work focuses on implementing and evaluating experiential learning activities in abiopharmaceutical process development course at the University of Maryland, College Park. Inthe field of biopharmaceuticals, “research” refers to determining the structure of the new drugbased on the desired biological function, while “development” refers to creating