conducts research on engineering education andDr. Helen L. Chen, Swarthmore College Helen L. Chen is a research scientist in the Designing Education Lab in the Department of Mechanical En- gineering at Stanford University. She has been involved in several major engineering education initiatives including the NSF-funded Center for the Advan ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Engaging Aerospace Students With Experiential Learning in Hybrid Project-based CoursesIntroductionAs the Stanford Aeronautical and Astronautical department’s project-based Spacecraft DesignCapstone course returned to in-person instruction, elements of online teaching and learning thatwere
maps organize project requirements, ensuring all aspects are considered. • Design Optimization: Engineers use them to analyze and optimize designs, considering various parameters, components, and criteria. • Communication and Collaboration: Concept maps facilitate conveying complex concepts to team members, stakeholders, and clients, aiding collaborative decision-making. • Knowledge Management: They capture and organize engineering knowledge, preserving best practices and lessons learned for future projects.2.1 Types of Concept Maps Analogous to the various uses of concept maps, their representation can also be dependenton the application. Figure 1 and Figure 2 illustrate how
?” is posed in the manuscript. The authors describe their proposed approach: “We believe that one answer to this problem is to get the student personally involved in a realistic engineering experience and, to us, this means a design experience. To be realistic, the design experience should take the form of a project which involves a genuine human need which is not solved satisfactorily today [11].”While this description could conceivably be from a recent manuscript, this particular manuscriptwas written in 1966. In the past 50+ years, we have seen pedagogical innovations designed toimprove first-year engineering programs and the introduction of problem-based learning, butefforts to incorporate authentic
students CSTswhile studying whether students adopted CSTs in their community-based design projects. Thisongoing project seeks to answer the following research questions: (a) To what degree doengineering students consider social issues, such as race, gender, and (dis)ability, in their initialways of thinking in the context of design problem solving? and (b) To what degree doengineering students adopt CSTs in their design thinking following their learning experiences inour Inventive Design course? We focus on the second research question herein.MethodsThe setting for this research study was two sections of an elective design course — InventiveDesign — at a small, private university in the United States. Inventive Design was designed toeducate
agreed that peer lectures should be kept as one content for the future senior capstone design project. 10.77% of students selected “No Opinion”. But there was still 13.85% of students who disagreed or strongly disagree with the idea of peer lectures in their capstone design courses.We had an open-end survey question “Any suggestions or comments about the peer lecture”.There were lots of different comments. Some comments were very positive. The followings area list of their typical suggestion and comments. • “Good way of learning about relevant topics. I learned a lot from other people’s lectures.” • “I enjoyed them. I liked they were project-based. Really gave us insight to every one project.” • “It
structures and engineering pedagogy.Dr. Lelli Van Den Einde, University of California San Diego Van Den Einde is a Teaching Professor in Structural Engineering at UCSD. She incorporates education in- novations into courses (Active Learning, Project-based learning), prepares next generation faculty through TA Training, serves as advisor to student organizations, and is committed to fostering a supportive en- vironment for diverse students. Her research focuses on engagement strategies for large classrooms and developing K-16 design-based curriculum in earthquake engineering and spatial visualization to support persistence.Dr. Nathan Delson, eGrove Education Nathan Delson, Ph.D. is a Senior Teaching Professor at the
“takes into account socioeconomic realities and issensitive to cultural differences.” (www.ewb-usa.org). And finally, the ABET accreditation bodyrecently included the two following learning outcomes into their criteria: a) “produce solutionsthat meet specified needs with consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, as well asglobal, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors,” and b) “create a collaborativeand inclusive environment” [3].Engineering programs have responded to these developments by designing curricula thatconsolidates these factors in their technical frameworks [4-7], using a variety of approaches,including problem-based learning [8], project-based learning [9], and service learning [10].Outcomes using these
Paper ID #41898An Exploration of Game-Based Learning in Enhancing Engineering, Design,and Robotics Education via ”The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom”Prof. Ryan D. Sochol, University of Maryland Dr. Ryan D. Sochol is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering within the A. James Clark School of Engineering at the University of Maryland, College Park. Prof. Sochol is a Fischell Institute Fellow within the Robert E. Fischell Institute for Biomedical Devices and an Executive Committee Member of the Maryland Robotics Center, and also holds affiliate appointments in the Fischell Department of Bioengineering and the
pedagogical techniques to facilitate student learning.Christopher M. StanleyDr. George D. Ricco, University of Indianapolis George D. Ricco is an engineering education educator who focuses on advanced analytical models applied to student progression, and teaching first-year engineering, engineering design principles, and project management. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Review of a Design Methodology in a Client-Based, Authentic Design CurriculumAbstractThe curriculum at a small, urban, private school is centered around a series of hands-on, client-based design courses called DesignSpine®. Projects are developed and completed through theentire
engineering educationand called for a more hands-on curriculum [19]. Dym et al. wrote, “The resulting engineeringgraduates were perceived by industry and academia as being unable to practice in industrybecause of the change of focus from the practical (including drawing and shop) to thetheoretical” [18]. In the past couple of decades, there has been increased attention to the practiceof engineering, particularly on design. Project-based learning (PBL) has increased significantlyin popularity in engineering education, including for first-year students (e.g., [20]). Projects moreclosely simulate what real engineers do [21]. To be as realistic as possible, these projects shouldbe ill-structured, have potentially multiple answers, and have constraints
paper, we focus on thefirst semester course from Fall 2022 by discussing the course goals and learning outcomes, thestructure of the course, and the course projects. Evaluation data of specific course goals will beanalyzed to understand student experiences and perceived learnings in the course. This willprovide evidence for the effectiveness and achievement of the desired course outcomes. Insightsfrom the teaching team on the approaches to support the success of students throughout theirmultidisciplinary design experience are also discussed. Understanding the student learningexperience along with insights from the teaching team of the course can also inform thedevelopment of a wide range of design experiences for undergraduate engineering
quality, professional behavior, and social-emotional intelligence comprisesa significant portion of the desired educational outcomes for a graduating engineer, it shouldcome as no surprise that Penn State’s team-based capstone course learning objectives mapdirectly to these criteria. It is therefore necessary for instructors and course designers to employmethods to assess individual student outcomes in these areas. However, accurate assessment ofindividual student performance and contribution to overall team productivity can be difficult incapstones, where 50% or more of the grade is often determined based on team-generated content.Significant research has been conducted on methods and techniques that can be used to informteacher evaluations of
. This ongoing research will persist, culminating in the collection ofLikert-based data at the conclusion of the course sequence (Capstone 2), providing acomprehensive assessment of students' experiences with the empowering rubric.Insights and Suggestions:Maintaining a delicate balance between structured rubric guidance and the promotion ofindependent, creative thinking in senior design projects is paramount. Crafting rubrics that offerclarity on essential components while allowing space for interpretation and creativity empowersstudents to navigate innovative solutions within the rubric's framework. This approach providesthe necessary structure for effective learning while fostering the independent and creativethinking essential for success in
biomedicine. He is a recipient of UCSB’s Center for Control, Dynamical Systems, and Computation Best PhD Thesis award and a UCI Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Research Mentorship. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 An Investigation of Psychological Safety in Student-Led Undergraduate Engineering Design Projects through Student InterviewsAbstractTo supplement classroom learning and prepare students to transition from school to industry,many undergraduate engineering students participate in team-based design projects, both indesign-focused courses and as extracurricular activities. These projects can be largely organizedand
asymmetry on work group and individual outcomes,” Academy of Management Journal, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 596-616, 2010.[2] X. Neumeyer and A. F. McKenna, “Engineering students’ perceptions of team conflict and high-performance teams,” International Journal of Collaborative Engineering, vol. 1, no. 3-4, pp. 274-297, 2014.[3] F. Chiocchio, D. Forgues, D. Paradis, and I. Iordanova, “Teamwork in integrated design projects: Understanding the effects of trust, conflict, and collaboration on performance,” Project Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 78-91, 2011.[4] O. Ryan, M. J. Fisher, L. Schibelius, M. V. Huerta, and S. Sajadi, “Using a scenario-based learning approach with instructional technology to teach
strongand which were weak. As presented by both Danielson and Kirkpatrick, there exists a large gapbetween the reported strengths and weaknesses by industry supervisors when compared to theeducator and early career engineers [7]-[8]. Focusing on the highest rated weakness by industrydenoted as “practical experience,” Kirkpatrick provides a recommendation of the incorporationof “curricular components that emphasize active, discovery-based learning…” [8]. Sheppardproposes that the design projects present an opportunity for professional development in skillssuch as formulating and problem solving [9]. One method of determining the ideal approach ofthis is through design neurocognition. This method provides an invaluable unbiased insight into
detail in thispaper, the project scope, building an automated monoblock pill bottle filling station, is broadenough to require large teams of 9-10 students, thus giving students more opportunities topractice team management, division of labor, and task interdependence while simulating anindustry setting [15].The details of this study are organized in the following sections. “Academic Setting of thisStudy” provides details of the year-long team design project on which this study is based, alongwith a brief description of the two semester-long courses and the learning objectives that supportand provide context for this project. Next, “Data and Collection Methods” describes the types ofdata collected for this study and the methods by which they
Design to Industry," in ASEE 124th Annual Conference and Exposition, Columbus, OH, 2017.[6] A. Badir, R. O'Neill, K. Kristoph-Dietrich, K. Simeon and J.-Y. Kim, "Fostering Project- Based Learning through Industry Engagement in Capstone Design Projects," Education Sciences, pp. 361-374, 2023.[7] C. Burns and S. Chopra, "A Meta-analysis of the Effect of Industry Engagement on Student Learning in Undergraduate Programs," Journal of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering, pp. 2-20, 2017.[8] J. Goldberg, V. Cariapa, G. Corliss and K. Kaiser, "Benefits of Industry Involvement in Multidisciplinary Capstone Design Courses," International Journal of Engineering Education, pp. 38-65, 2018.[9] I. Mohedas, S. R. Daly, R. P
require a veryabstract look at the purposes and function in the settings they will operate inside.Context and GoalsWithin a STEM-focused undergraduate school, we have identified multiple workspaces availableto students that provide aspects of makerspaces. The school primarily focuses on applying STEMlearning through hands-on learning, design and project-based learning. This mentality aroundpractical engineering and learning is derived from the school's history, where there are commontrends within the student body due to the traditional demographics, geopolitical factors, and along history of team-based learning and industry focused education. As a result, the school'sunique culture allows a more direct comparison between spaces and elements
: students take in a variety of inputs (Di ) and aim to learn using their own strengths andweaknesses, and is measured P with a quantitative representation fi (Di ). Teachers aim to maximizetheP sum of the functions ∀i fi (Di ) by designing or tailoring Di [15]. Ideally, θ is correlated with ∀i fi (Di ); thus by designing courses well (i.e. designing DiP appropriately) learners grasp θ, anda measuring tool to evaluate a successful class is captured by ∀i fi (Di ). Using the same functional representation discussed above, an ML algorithm implies the teacherhas some training data (d) and the framework is to find or use an algorithm (A) based on that infor-mation. The solution obtained (represented by A(d)) can then be used on a wide swath
concept will be needed, what design requirements are being evaluated by eachmodel, will subsystems be prototyped separately, and will digital or physical prototypes be used(or both). Our previous research indicates that engineering design teams often follow the sameprototyping strategy used in their previous design efforts. However, research also shows that thisis not always the best decision. Careful consideration of the prototyping strategy, based on specificcharacteristics of a design project, can lead to significant benefits for the outcome of the design.This current work provides a method for informing the engineering design team regardingdecisions on when to use digital and/or physical prototypes. Physical prototyping, in this context
Paper ID #43359”Fail a little, succeed a lot”: How Experiential Learning Influenced CivilEngineering Students’ Approach to CourseworkDr. Noel Hennessey, The University of Arizona Noel Hennessey is the Director of ENGineering Access, Greater Equity, and Diversity at the University of Arizona College of Engineering. She oversees a suite of research informed and evidence based initiatives designed to improve underserved students’ sense of belonging and engineering identity development.Dean PapajohnTyler Jean Le Peau, The University of Arizona ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 “Fail a little
shortcomings in engineeringeducation by more effectively preparing students for their capstone projects and, ultimately, theircareers in engineering.This introduction outlines our response to the identified needs by proposing specific educationalenhancements aimed at closing the gaps highlighted in employer satisfaction surveys. Byintegrating innovative pedagogical methods such as flipped learning, gamification, and project-based learning, we seek to enhance student engagement, improve learning outcomes, and ensuregraduates are well-prepared to meet the demands of the modern workforce. This systematicapproach to curriculum design focuses on developing both hard and soft skills, which are crucialfor the success of our graduates in professional
not necessarily result in all students completing the required activities. Some students takeon little responsibility for the team activity and depend on their peers to complete the work.Since it is a team activity, these students benefit academically from their peers’ efforts thoughtheir new knowledge is limited. Thus, assessing the outcomes of team projects may noteffectively measure individual student learning.This study addresses one means to increase the responsibility, and thus learning, of individualteam members when completing a team-based project. It reports on an intervention the courseinstructor made to increase individual contribution to a team design project and theintervention’s result on student learning and contribution
financial 2.00 4.06 impacts of sustainable developmentDiscussion and ConclusionsSome lessons have been learned from this innovative term project experience and assessmentresults. These lessons provide some empirical suggestions for implementing sustainabledevelopment projects to maximize student learning effectiveness: 1) The design charrette waseffective in this project to enhance collaboration and helped students’ general and specificknowledge related to their design projects. Based on the in-class observations and courseevaluation feedback, students agreed that the charrette improved their understanding of greenbuilding design. In the future, the charrette
Identification of Authentic Needs that Inform Engineering Design ProjectsAbstractWORK IN PROGRESS – ACADEMIC PRACTICE/DESIGN INTERVENTION. A significantchallenge facing design educators is “needs finding” – namely sourcing (i.e. identifying) andspecifying (i.e. appropriately bounding) student design projects. To develop authentic,community-based or client-sponsored projects, faculty spend considerable time making contacts,discussing problems, and packaging tractable design projects to meet the design problems needsof first year to graduate design teams. The skills of sourcing and specifying projects can also beimportant for students themselves to learn, as solutions to well-articulated and important needscan create value for our
academic performance [3], the use of AR headsets offers a more immersiveand integrated experience for DHH students. However, the benefits of AR captioning might notbe fully realized without certain features, preventing DHH students from fully participating instructured and ad hoc class discussions and potentially negatively impacting their learning andengagement.To address this challenge and enhance DHH students’ educational experience, new features wereexplored for inclusion into ScribeAR [4], a free open-source web-based captioning tool, toinclude speaker diarization and contextual visualization. By using the techniques of HumanCentered Engineering Design (HCED) [5] we incorporated three new features, which arediscussed in this paper
Timothy Bretl is an Associate Professor of Aerospace Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He received his B.S. in Engineering and B.A. in Mathematics from Swarthmore College in 1999, and his M.S. in 2000 and Ph.D. in 2005 both inDr. Elle Wroblewski, University of Illinois at Urbana - ChampaignMichael Lembeck, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 WIP: Using a Human-Centered Engineering Design Framework to Develop Learning Progressions in an Aerospace Engineering ProgramIntroductionHuman-centered design (HCD) [1], which offers a promising approach to promote situatedlearning in engineering design projects, and to facilitate
., vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 738–797, Oct. 2012, doi: 10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2012.tb01127.x.[13] E. O. Ejichukwu, “A quality assessment method for engineering student designs in project- based learning,” University of Michigan-Dearborn, 2023.[14] C. Schunn, J. Chan, and A. Goncher, “Measuring design innovation for project-based design assessment: considerations of robustness and efficiency,” Bitácora Urbano Territ., vol. 27, no. 4Esp, pp. 19–30, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.15446/bitacora.v27n4Esp.68959.[15] M. J. Grant and A. Booth, “A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies,” Health Inf. Libr. J., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 91–108, Jun. 2009, doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.[16] Z. Munn, M. D. J
professor in the Purdue Polytechnic with a joint appointment in the College of Education at Purdue University. Hired as a part of the strategic P12 STEM initiative, he prepares Technology and Engineering teachers for state certification.Amiah ClevengerDr. Andrew Jackson, University of Georgia Andrew Jackson is an Assistant Professor of Workforce Education at the University of Georgia. His teaching and research interests are to support design-based learning and teaching in technology and engineering contexts. His past work has bridged cutting-edge soft robotics research to develop and evaluate novel design experiences in K-12 education, followed students’ self-regulation and trajectories while designing, and produced new