Paper ID #29471The New Engineering Education in Chinabased on 207 new engineeringresearch and practice projectsDr. Jinlu Shen, Zhejiang University College of Public Affairs, Zhejiang UniversityDr. Tuoyu Li, Zhejiang University Li Tuo-yu, Research Assistant Institute of China’s Science, Technology and Education Policy, Zhejiang University College of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University Research Center on Science and Education Development Strategy, Zhejiang University AddressRoom 1205-3, Administration Building, Zijingang Campus, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province; 310058 P.R. China American
Paper ID #16654A Systematic Weighted Factor Approach for Curriculum DesignDr. Nebil Buyurgan, Missouri State UniversityDr. Martin P. Jones, Missouri State University Martin P. Jones is an Associate Professor of Technology and Construction Management at Missouri State University. He earned his B.S. degree (Physics, 1981) from University of Maryland Baltimore County, M.S. (Materials Science & Engineering, 1984) from the Johns Hopkins University, and Ph. D. (Materials Science & Engineering, 1987) from the Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Jones is currently teaching at Mis- souri State University. His interests are in
nation’seconomy. The exponential growth of engineering education in India has affected the qualityof engineering graduates in terms of their employability. The National Board of Accreditation(NBA) accredits engineering programs using the Outcome-Based Education (OBE)framework. This framework has twelve graduate attributes of the ‘Washington Accord’aligned with program outcomes. This paper proposes a systems approach which consists ofinput, transformation and output towards achieving employable skills in engineers. Theprogram outcomes consisting of technical and professional skills are derived from thecompetencies required for the target roles in the industry and the graduates’ attributes.Keeping this in mind, a structured outcome-based curriculum was
qualitative process or list of best practices for setting upsimilar collaborations in diverse settings. The purpose of the specific collaboration betweenEngineering and Mathematics at our institution is to: 1. Investigate pre-existing faculty biases on why students found it difficult to transfer knowledge between different fields; 2. Develop a systematic approach to collaboration between the two departments that will lead to a better understanding of the difficulties faced by our students and thus to continuous improvement of both the Engineering and the Differential Equations courses; 3. Provide a “roadmap” that will enable other disciplines within VCU and other universities to develop similar collaborations between their
new curriculum was designed to provide students with a multidisciplinary perspective whiledeveloping basic engineering skills and fostering an understanding of basic engineeringconcepts. Each of the ten courses in the program were developed and are taught by faculty fromseveral disciplines. Course materials are intended to make students keenly aware of the highlyintegrated nature of the current practice of engineering. It was also expected that the novelprogram would prove to be attractive to a broader range of students than those drawn totraditional disciplinary programs. Finally, student retention was expected to be enhanced by thenew courses.Students who entered as freshmen in 2004 are currently juniors, taking courses in theirdisciplinary
againstpotential re-identification within the data, moves away from dismissing small samples as ananomaly, and refrains from essentializing diverse groups of individuals. This methodologicalapproach to understand diversity in engineering education is not a panacea for all methodologicalissues. Rather, this approach provides a new way of examining multiple affective and cognitivedimensions at once to understand how an individual experiences engineering.How TDA Has Been Used in Prior LiteratureTDA is an advanced statistical clustering technique that examines the topology, or the landscape,of the data to find common, dense areas in the dataset. TDA arose from a field of statistical theoryconcerned with “shapes” within data (i.e., topology); one of the most
) whatmotivates students to study engineering; and (3) how students conceive of their engineeringfuture. While the findings from the APPLES research have been disseminated through suchtraditional venues such as conferences and journal publications, an innovative institution-specificworkshop model was designed and piloted in spring 2009. This paper describes this new formatfor disseminating national research findings which is specifically aimed at engaging faculty inconversations that directly lead to changes in local educational practices and policies. Feedbackfrom the faculty participants and the impact of the workshop on teaching and learning practicesin subsequent months are presented. The broader implications of a national-local workshopmodel for the
-Based Design: A Vehicle for Curriculum Integration,” International Journal of Engineering Education. 20(3), 433–439.Zajonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151–175.Zajonc, R. B. (2000). Feeling and thinking: Closing the debate over the independence of affect. In F. (Ed.), & J.P., Feeling and thinking: The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 31–58). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current directions in psychological science, 10(6), 224-228.
approach we have taken has beencalled person-centered ethnography (Hollan and Wellenkamp, 1993; LeVine, 1982, Stevens,O’Connor, & Garrison, 2005). This term highlights both our interest in how people becomeengineers and that context shapes this becoming.Data from this work come from a large ethnographic study of the school-to-work transition ofearly career engineers. In total we observed and interviewed 20 new engineers (15 were bothobserved and interviewed and 5 were interviewed only) within their first two years in theworkforce (including both undergraduate co-ops/interns and newly graduated engineers) from 10engineering companies as they worked over several months. Data sources included: • Direct observations in the workplace, supported
Paper ID #28821Development and Insights from the Measure of Framing AgencyDr. Vanessa Svihla, University of New Mexico Dr. Vanessa Svihla is a learning scientist and associate professor at the University of New Mexico in the Organization, Information and Learning Sciences program and in the Chemical and Biological Engineer- ing Department. She served as Co-PI on an NSF RET Grant and a USDA NIFA grant, and is currently co-PI on three NSF-funded projects in engineering and computer science education, including a Revo- lutionizing Engineering Departments project. She was selected as a National Academy of Education
Paper ID #25096Work in Progress: Students’ Informal Reasoning when Approaching Classroom-based Scenarios Involving Diversity and Inclusion IssuesDarby Rose Riley, Rowan University Darby Riley is a student of mechanical engineering at Rowan University. She has a special interest in education, as well as issues of diversity and inclusion, both of which have pushed her to seek leadership positions wherever possible. She is a founding member of Rowan University’s oSTEM chapter, and working to make Rowan’s campus a safe and welcoming place for all students. Darby hopes to pursue a graduate’s degree in engineering education
are identified and corrected. Using procedures such as informalcooperative learning guarantees that students have been exposed to some active and interactive Page 15.919.6methods prior to engaging in PBL.B. Infusing PBL in the Curriculum: There are several strategies that may be utilized to infusePBL in an engineering curriculum. The selected strategy depends upon: 1) the commitment ofthe institution, as a whole, to the process of deploying active learning schemes in general, andPBL in particular, 2) the readiness of the teaching staff, and 3) available recourses, facilities, andsupport services. Table 1 illustrates three approaches to
Academy of Engineering’s (NAE’s) 2020 reports1,2 have identified the knowledgeand skills needed by the engineer of the 21st century and the large-scale curriculum reformnecessary to educate these new professionals. Blank-slate curriculum reform efforts,3innovations from the National Science Foundation’s (NSF’s) curriculum coalitions,4,5 and even abrand new engineering college6 have bootstrapped models for significant and effectivecurriculum innovation that offer a variety of plausible avenues for change. Yet, despitesignificant progress in outlining appropriate changes and widespread agreement that change isnecessary, many engineering curricula appear to be locked in a cold war time warp withincremental, grudging modifications coming at the
utbildningar till civilingenjör vid svenska universitet och högskolor.Rapport 2006:8 R15 Knight, P., and Yorke, M. (2004). Learning, Curriculum and Employability in Higher Education,RoutledgeFalmer, London and New York.16 Hills, J.M., Robertson, G., Walker, R., Adey, M. A., and Nixon, I. (2003). Bridging the Gap Between DegreeProgramme Curricula and Employability Through Implementation of Work-related Learning, Teaching inHigher Education, 8, 211-231.17 Crawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Ostlund, S., and Brodeur, D. (2007). Rethinking Engineering Education. TheCDIO Approach, Springer, New York.18 Edstrom, K., Soderholm, D., & Knutson Wedel, M. (2007). Teaching and Learning, in Crawley, E.,Malmqvist, J., Ostlund, S., and Brodeur, D., Rethinking
globalization, new organizationalconfigurations, and new technologies of communication, design, and production. More researchis needed to document images that are often discounted by students and even faculty, i.e.,portrayals of engineering practice that emphasize its non-technical and non-calculative sides,including work processes and dynamics that involve social and cultural dimensions [3-4].The aim of this work-in-progress paper is to introduce an exploratory project that will testinnovative approaches to data collection and analysis for rapidly generating new knowledgeabout engineering practice. Traditionally, engineering practices have been studied usingindividual interviews or in-depth ethnographic field research, the latter requiring researchers
students inMay 2009. A core group of engineering faculty from several disciplines moved from the Tempecampus to the Polytechnic campus to develop curriculum for the new program in 2004, after ayear of research into innovative undergraduate engineering programs. The curriculum that thesefaculty put together is very hands-on, with a project every semester. Below is a description ofthe B.S.E. program at the Polytechnic campus from their web site. Arizona State University has created one of the most innovative new engineering programs in the country at the Polytechnic campus in the College of Technology and Innovation. This new program combines a focus on interdisciplinary project-based, studio-based learning with exceptional
. Page 24.830.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Issues Surrounding a Heutagogical Approach for Global Engineering EducationAbstractHeutagogy is the study of self-determined learning, which places the learner, rather thanthe teacher or the institution, or even the curriculum, at the center of the learning process.The goal of heutagogy is to create responsible, self-capable, proactive, competentlearners, who are ready to face the challenges of the increasingly connected world, todayas well as tomorrow. The promise of heutagogy is ambitious and applaudable. Thispaper provides additional considerations for heutagogical approach to be successful in theglobal science and
Paper ID #18442A Systems Approach to Analyzing Design-Based Research in Robotics-FocusedMiddle School STEM Lessons through Cognitive ApprenticeshipDr. S. M. Mizanoor Rahman, New York University Mizanoor Rahman received his Ph.D. degree in Mechanical Engineering from Mie University at Tsu, Japan in 2011. He then worked as a research fellow at the National University of Singapore (NUS), a researcher at Vrije University of Brussels (Belgium) and a postdoctoral associate at Clemson University, USA. He is currently working as a postdoctoral associate at the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, NYU Tandon School of
systems approach. ABET, for example, suggests that it is important to use a Page 12.168.2“multi-method/multi source approach to maximize the validity and reduce the bias of any oneapproach” [6, p. 2]. While systems thinking is not new to program evaluation or engineeringdesign, it is seldom employed in course-level research, where the focus tends to be on evaluatingthe local impact of specific teaching methods on individual student achievement [7]. Unliketraditional courses, project-based courses, such as capstone design, are not bounded by the wallsof the classroom, the term of the course, or the enrollment list. Project sponsors, faculty, andeven
education to improve itsquality and direction. Former president of the National Academy of Engineering, William A.Wulf, said it best in his statement, “Incorporating a set of "new fundamentals" into theengineering curriculum and encouraging faculty to practice their craft are among the stepsneeded to bring engineering education into the 21st century.” 1The engineering student can nolonger be instructed through “chalk and talk” practices, but rather, there is a need to makeengineering education more dynamic and engaging to produce well-rounded engineeringstudents for the careers of the 21st century1,2. According to the National Academy ofEngineering (NAE) Engineer of 2020 Attributes3 report, engineers will be called upon to adapt tonew trends in
practice. Harcourt, Brace & World New York.[35] Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London: SAGE publications Ltd.[36] Stark, J.S., Lowther, M.A., Sharp, S., and Arnold, G.L. 1997. "Program-level curriculum planning: An exploration of faculty perspectives on two different campuses." Research in Higher Education, vol. 38, pp. 99-130.[37] Biggs, J. 2002. Aligning the Curriculum to Promote Good Learning.[38] Biggs, J., and Tang, C. 2007. Teaching for quality learning at university. Berkshire, U.K.: Open University Press.[39] Faulconbridge, R.I., and Dowling, D. 2009. "A Conceptual Framework for the Development of Engineering Courses." in The
Paper ID #31175Paper: Attendance and Social Interdependence in Game Development LabsBrantly Edward McCord, Purdue Polytechnic Institute Brantly McCord is a teaching assistant and co-instructor at Purdue Polytechnic Institute assisting with the development and instruction of video game dev curriculum. His instructional specialties are in Unreal Engine 4, visual scripting and art design, and his current research interests are concentrated on education in his field.Dr. Ronald Erdei, University of South Carolina Dr. Ronald Erdei is an Assistant Professor of Computer Science at the University of South Carolina Beau- fort
AC 2010-1793: A NEW ENGINEERING TAXONOMY FOR ASSESSINGCONCEPTUAL AND PROBLEM-SOLVING COMPETENCIESMorris Girgis, Central State University Morris Girgis is a professor at Central State University. He teaches undergraduate courses in manufacturing engineering. He received his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Hannover University, Germany. His current research in engineering education focuses on developing and implementing new educational tools and approaches to enhance teaching, learning and assessment at the course and curriculum levels. Page 15.64.1© American Society for Engineering Education
Paper ID #19667Engaging Engineers in Inclusive Cultural Change Through a New Method,Articulating a Succinct DescriptionEmily E. Liptow, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Emily Liptow is an AmeriCorps VISTA member at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo. She is involved with a variety of diversity and inclusion efforts in the College of Engineering ranging from student support programs, faculty bias awareness trainings, and inclusive cultural change. She is a recent Industrial and Systems Engineering graduate from Ohio State University, where she was also very involved with
collaboration with industry, their work is reshapingprofessional formation to ensure that ECE students develop critical skills for the 21st century.The team is implementing a new pedagogical model in the ECE department that builds on theconcept of “nanocourses”4,10 and emphasizes knowledge integration – a learning model well-grounded in education pedagogy and supported by research. 5 The approach combines rigor andflexibility to improve student understanding and efficacy through learning studio modules thatcross traditional course boundaries. While area-specific learning modules have been in existencefor years, such modules are usually supplements to the core curriculum and do not typicallycover fundamental subjects vital to comprehending abstract
technical curriculum. Ibelieve that we need to do more to connect how we understand technology to the world’smost pressing challenges, and I attempt to emphasize this in my own teaching.Through this proposed research, I am working in a relatively new area that isn’t well-defined by existing theory and methodology formed in higher education. Although thereis a body of research on the teaching of engineering ethics and the integration of thesocial sciences with engineering, and that is certainly relevant to examining thetechnology/society interface, I am examining faculty beliefs and processes aroundcurriculum choice with respect to contextualizing science and technology curriculum.After some early reviews of existing literature, I decided that the
dedicated professionals and equippedwith specialized equipment, and other support mechanisms.Analysis has shown that the university’s investment in the various elements of our currentprogram compare quite favorably with the costs associated with the number of instructorspreviously used in teaching writing. Looking beyond the fiscal comparisons, it has beenobserved that a significant number of additional benefits accrued with this model integratingcommunication into designated engineering courses of each department. Whereas the previousmodel focused only on writing, this new approach takes a broader view of communicationincluding an oral and a visual element. Rather than being taught as a general education courseacross campus, the integrated format
engineerAbstractIn the fall of 2004 a college with five undergraduate academic programs decided to integrateservice-learning (S-L) projects into required engineering courses throughout the curriculum sothat students would be exposed to S-L in at least one course in each of eight semesters. Theultimate goal is to graduate better engineers and better citizens. Four of the degree programshave achieved on average one course each semester, with an actual coverage of 103 out of 128semester courses, or 80% coverage over the four years. Of the 32 required courses in theacademic year that had an average of 753 students each semester doing S-L projects related tothe subject matter of the course, 19 of the courses (60%) were considered engineering science,that is, not
, we applied the exact same process taught in the course toimprove the course itself, by extracting a list of course design requirements.More specifically, inspired by the usability engineering process that students employed in thecourse to design software products [7], we applied the suggested methodology to move fromengagement evaluation outcomes to course (re)design requirements by treating the course asa product and the students as users of the product. Our main premise was applying a user-centered design approach to facilitate student-centered course design. As a tried engineeringmethodology, the usability engineering process includes an effective approach for consolida-ting and interpreting qualitative data (i.e., input from user
. The wider significance of this study is about leadership. Within the secure environmentof the curriculum incubator, individuals had the time and the opportunity to refine their teachingin ways that made personal sense, and moved the organization forward.Body of the Paper The curriculum incubator is an organizational change strategy that nurtures innovativeinstructional design and educational improvement. Based on a model for business development,the curriculum incubator offers a protected environment, a temporal space, in which faculty canexperiment with new approaches to teaching and learning. Curricular alternatives are tested andrefined in an environment free from challenges, criticism, or ridicule. Faculty are encouraged towork