AC 2011-1504: VIEWS OF DIVERSE GROUPS OF INTERNATIONAL ANDAMERICAN STUDENTS CONCERNING BUSINESS, CULTURAL, ANDETHICAL ISSUESCraig T Evers, PhD, PE, Minnesota State University - Mankato Craig T. Evers currently I am an assistant professor at Minnesota State University Mankato teaching un- dergraduate and graduate courses in the Automotive and Manufacturing Engineering department. I have over 25 years experience in the manufacturing industry, mostly in automotive related positions. Some of my past employers include John Deere, Robert Bosch Corporation, Intel and IBM. Previous positions include tooling manager for a Fortune 500 electronics company, production engineer for fuel components line with $125 million annual
activity established a solid foundation for the newdual/concurrent technology degree program and enabled it to get off to a fast start. Two of thenew consortium members are already partnering in an Atlantis undergraduate student mobilityproject that is working well and which has generated considerable student and faculty traffic andcollaboration well in excess of the funding requirements [1]. The partners have investedconsiderable amounts of their own monies in building the relationship and thus evidence thesustainability of the new dual transatlantic technology masters degree program.Globalization, technological innovation and sustainability are critical issues for most if not allnations in the world. Nowhere do these concerns converge more than
, non-tenured, and adjunct faculty. The surveyconsisted of 12 multiple choice questions about their knowledge, experience with, and views ofplagiarism as an issue, as well as one open answer question, and four demographic questions.Three questions asked about their familiarity with academic integrity policies and three abouthow they inform their class of the academic integrity policies. Three questions asked about theirexperience with plagiarism in class and if they reported it, and if not, why not. The finalquestions asked about use of plagiarism detection software and their view of plagiarism being anissue of concern. From the 264 the surveys sent, 202 (77%) opened one of the messages with thesurvey link, 157 (59% of the total and 78% of
hazards, safety standards, qualityapproval, and compliance with environmental laws. Each one of these and other operationalareas can pose ethical issues. For example, in the quality approval area, the engineer may havethe responsibility to maintain records for continued certification, approve parts for selling orbuying involving ethical issues. The development of new products and services in the 21st Page 22.385.2century demands unprecedented interdisciplinary collaboration and teamwork. Engineers areactively involved from the concept design stage which requires more involvement in productsafety and environmental issues that have impact not only on
AC 2007-287: FACULTY REWARD SYSTEM REFORM FOR ADVANCEMENT OFPROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION FOR INNOVATION:RETHINKING A NEW MODEL TEMPLATE FOR UNIT CRITERIA OFPROFESSIONALLY ORIENTED FACULTYDonald Keating, University of South Carolina DONALD A. KEATING is associate professor of mechanical engineering, University of South Carolina, and chair ASEE-Graduate Studies Division.Thomas Stanford, University of South Carolina THOMAS G. STANFORD is assistant professor of chemical engineering, University of South CarolinaJohn Bardo, Western Carolina University JOHN W. BARDO is chancellor, Western Carolina University.Duane Dunlap, Western Carolina University DUANE D. DUNLAP is professor, interim dean, Kimmel
at Texas A&M University.Prof. Prasad N. Enjeti, Texas A&M University Prasad Enjeti (enjeti@tamu.edu) is a member of Texas A&M University faculty since 1988 and is widely acknowledged to be a distinguished teacher, scholar and researcher. He currently holds the TI-Professorship in Analog Engineering and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in the College of Engineering. His re- search emphasis on industry-based issues, solved within an academic context, has attracted significant external funding. Up until now, he has graduated 29 PhD students and 11 of them hold academic posi- tions in leading Universities in the world. He along with his students have received numerous best paper awards from the IEEE
Page 13.816.8these students. Resolving the job placement issue is a more significant problem, for itinvolves focusing on the skill sets desired in new faculty members as well creating amarket for these engineers.By understanding the issues and considering them when revamping policies andprocedures, it may be possible to mitigate these problems for non-traditional students,and improve the experience for those few non-traditional doctoral students.Bibliography 1. D. Comer. “Notes On The PhD Degree”, Purdue University. http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/essay.Ph.D.html. 2. R. Wilson. “For Love, Not Money”. The Chronicle of Higher Education. September 14, 2007. 3. R. Freeman. “Does Globalization of the Scientific/Engineering Workforce
based on environmental factors such as economic issues, requiring multiple mentorsfor faculty success9,10. Based on the literature, summarizing the elements discussed, Purduedeveloped the Preparing Future Faculty course.MethodsPreparing Future Faculty is a two credit hour course, which utilizes a Pass/No Pass gradingsystem. Students meet weekly for two hours for a mentoring session with vice provosts, deans,and department heads. PFF explores faculty roles and responsibilities as they relate toinstitutional missions and institutional types (community colleges, liberal arts colleges, research Iuniversities, etc.). Topics include faculty roles and responsibilities, the academic job search andhiring process, promotion and tenure, diversity in
, we recommend acomparison of teaching evaluations of Project STEP alumni currently in faculty positions withother new faculty members.AcknowledgementThe authors would like to acknowledge the NSF Graduate STEM Fellows in K-12 Education(GK-12) funding (grant # DGE-0538532) which supports Project STEP. Page 15.696.9
2006-2177: STATUS AND EXPERIENCES OF MINORITY GRADUATESTUDENTS, POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWS, AND FACULTY IN SCIENCE,TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS DISCIPLINESLaRuth McAfee, State University of New York-Stony Brook Postdoctoral Engineering Education Researcher, National Academy of Engineering Center for the Advancement of Scholarship on Engineering Education Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Technology and Society 1999 University of Michigan Graduate (B.S.E.), Chemical Engineering 2005 MIT Graduate (Ph.D.), Chemical EngineeringDavid Ferguson, State University of New York-Stony Brook Distinguished Service Professor Chair, Department of Technology and Society Joint Appointment, Applied
(CE) Department at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). Dr. Santiago has a combined experience of over 20 years in the areas of water quality, water treatment and wastewater treatment in Puerto Rico (PR), New Mexico and Texas. Dr. Santiago is passionate about providing experiential learning opportunities to both undergraduate and graduate students locally, regionally and internationally with a focus on Hispanic and female students. She is currently Co-PI of UTEP’s NSF-AGEP program focusing on fostering Hispanic doctoral students for academic careers; the Department of Education’s (DoE) STEMGROW Program and DoE’s Program YES SHE CAN. With support from the Center for Faculty Leadership and Development, she
common themes is studentengagement and how student-student and student-instructor interactions are mediated and effectedby the online medium. Using the JOEE as a case study for the outlet of research in online engineering education,a significant amount of their total publications are dedicated to student engagement. To date, morethan 95% of their issues either reference student engagement as a significant factor or are explicitlyfocused on student engagement. Although JOEE is an outlet for this type of research, very littleresearch has yet to focus on the actual effectiveness of online engineering education. Most of theresearch done thus far has centered on student and faculty perspectives rather than quantitativemeasures of student
mentoring relationships.Bringing together a large group of female attendees also helped to develop a network of peers,many of whom share similar concerns. The large number of female faculty presenters offered anintroduction to women who had negotiated these issues in their own careers. The participation ofmale faculty expanded the mentoring network and demonstrated broad-based support fordiversifying the academic ranks. Several other institutions have recently hosted workshops withsimilar goals, including the University of Maryland at Baltimore County, Virginia Tech, andGeorge Washington University.The workshop planners did not anticipate the extent to which planning and executing the
focuses on the importance of recruitment and retention of PhD students in engineeringfields from faculty and industry perspectives. Engineering faculty and industry experts wereinterviewed to explore their views of the recruitment and retention of domestic and internationalstudents into PhD programs in engineering fields. Findings point to a variety of ways to improverecruitment and retention of PhD students, including industry support and encouragement forgraduates who work in the industry, funding issues, communicating the possible advantages of agraduate degree to students, and online degree program development. The study specificallyexplores the problems and barriers to attracting, retaining, and graduating qualified individualsfrom
panelbased on a proposed project in engineering education. The final course, in Autumn Quarter,explores the academic job search process and the range of academic careers available. Paneldiscussions with new faculty, hiring committees from teaching-oriented and research-orienteduniversities, and recently tenured faculty provide up-to-date information.This paper focuses on the experience of a PFF student participant during the 2006-2007academic year, as well as the experiences of and benefits to his PFF program coordinator andacademic research mentor. Overall, participating in the program helped the student to preparefor an academic career. Having two faculty mentors in the PFF program activities providedinvaluable opportunities and feedback. The
institutions. The fellows brought their own laptops and arranged theirown housing. Hiring was accomplished under the title “Part-Time Visiting Faculty” whichprompted downstream actions like office assignments, key requests, being added to theinstitutional computing system with @rose-hulman.edu emails, and other integration details. Thepart-time designation also reminded all individuals concerned that the fellows were fulfillingmultiple roles that included their academic progress and not just working for RHIT. The timing of the experience was a major consideration for the fellows. Since VT is onthe semester schedule, it was possible for a fellow to participate in RHIT’s quarter-basedschedule (focusing on Fall Term for a single term/one semester
at University of Colorado Boulder, where she teaches Senior Design, Mechanical Engineering as a Profession, and thermo-fluids courses. She has also developed new curriculum and programming for student professional development and career exploration which have strengthened connections between students, alumni and industry part- ners. She serves as chair of External Relations for the Department of Mechanical Engineering at CU Boulder. She has been the Wolenski/Roller Faculty Fellow since 2017. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Work in Progress: Increasing communication avenues between Mechanical Engineering doctoral
faculty worked with these graduate studentsboth in Master and Ph.D. level. Several studies on the relationship between graduate student andtheir advisors have been conducted in the past. These studies are concerned with various issuesaffecting the mentoring relationship. However, there has never been a study on this mentoringrelationship specifically at Purdue University. This project is a study of the mentor relationship between mentor and mentee, or facultyand graduate students at Purdue University. Graduate students were invited to participate in thesurvey through email. The survey was conducted online anonymously. This study consists ofquantitative and qualitative analysis. The existing mentoring relationships are identified in orderto
of three invited papers prepared for a special panel session of the NationalCollaborative Task Force on Engineering Graduate Education Reform that is focusing on thecriteria for merit promotion of engineers in practice in industry to set the stage for designing anew faculty reward system for faculty participating in the graduate level instruction of practicingengineers. This is complementary to the traditional research-oriented faculty reward system foradvancement of professional engineering education. Using professional attainment guidelines inengineering practice for industry, government service, NSPE, and ASCE this paper sets thefoundation for rethinking new unit criteria for professionally-oriented faculty at the nation’scolleges of
at the host institution. We believe thisspecific focus will further reduce concern about participation and may increase applications.One source of error identified in this study related to the need for graduate students to serve ashired labor for faculty to maintain funded work. The need for hired labor may be superseding thegoals and ambitions of the graduate student. We believe that the finding of a conflict betweenhired labor and program participation highlights the need to rethink this issue. As noted inBorrego and Henderson (2014), we know that faculty reward structures can both help and hinderchange in higher education. We pose the question: What faculty reward structures cansimultaneously allow graduate students to prepare for their
still a problem which needsoversight and control where possible. There is a concern that growth will plateau when the pentup demand for this degree has been met, but the growth to date shows no sign of reaching aplateau. Given the significant foreign student interest and the rate of growth without muchadvertising, it seems that the growth is still rising at least for the short term.As an aid to others who may be facing similar issues, the table below is included with somesuggestions for consideration.Table 1: Suggestions for planning for new programPending Approval of Degree Post Approval—Degree OfferedBegin initial curriculum planning with faculty: Prepare Finalize three year plan of course
ProgramsAbstractThis paper discusses the importance of an on-campus residency experience to the success of adistance education program. The benefits of such an experience are described and reinforcedwith survey data and anecdotal evidence.Norwich University’s School of Graduate Studies is home to 10 Internet-based graduateprograms, including a Master of Civil Engineering program. At the completion of 18 months ofdistance study (36 credits), all students are required to spend one week on the University’scampus in Vermont during the month of June. The week’s activities include a mix of academicand social events designed to bond the students to each other, to their faculty, and to the bricksand mortar University. Academic debates on professional issues, social
and retreats that address the demands and opportunities of STEM practice and research - I am able to speak some of the language of engineers and engineering educators, and I can connect with them on common issues. In particular, I am aware of challenges for underrepresented groups for opportunity selection, advancement, and promotion.The co-author also discusses learning from others in engineering, and the influence of theinteractions on current advocacy and efficiency in a career that focuses on professionaldevelopment for faculty. My graduate accountability partner was a mechanical engineering student who shared a lot of my same struggles but also taught me about what she did as an engineer and how
AC 2007-41: THE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE: A COLLABORATIVEGRADUATE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROGRAMCharles Farrar, Los Alamos National Laboratory Chuck Farrar has 25 years experience as a technical staff member, project leader, and team leader at Los Alamos National Laboratory. While at Los Alamos, he earned a Ph. D. in civil engineering from the University of New Mexico in 1988. He is currently working jointly with engineering faculty at University of California, San Diego to develop the Los Alamos/UCSD Engineering Institute with a research focus on Damage Prognosis. This initiative is also developing a formal, degree-granting educational program in the closely related areas of validated
littleopportunity for discussion and feedback from the instructors on the homework assignments. Thelatter also included concerns about: timely feedback on homework grades, availability ofsolutions, only getting graded assignments returned by less than half the instructors, andinsufficient opportunity to discuss the homework assignments after their completion. Clearly,this is one aspect that should be addressed in future courses. One solution to this problem couldbe a greater engagement of the local faculty in all homework assignments, so that they can serveas recitation instructor for additional clarification and comment when needed by the students.The schedule should include a block of time for students to discuss issues with their localinstructor or the
effective educators1. A significantopportunity for contributing to improvement is to motivate well qualified engineering students toconsider the profession of teaching and to enhance their preparation for this career path therebyaddressing the faculty pipeline issue. Second, the national need to change the way students areeducated has been well established. Examples of approaches to these two facets include theNational Effective Teaching Institute (ASEE), activities of the New Engineering EducatorsDivision (ASEE), the NSF Engineering Education Scholars Workshops, and individual courses Page 22.449.2and academic programs at engineering
previously worked at the Indiana Education Policy Center, Project on Academic Success(PAS), as a graduate assistant to the vice president for enrollment services for Indiana University, andas a postdoctoral researcher at Purdue University, West Lafayette. Dr. Cekic’s research interests includehigher education policy, finance and the linkages between budget and organizational culture, and col-lege student retention. Currently Dr. Cekic works at as a research assistant at Canakkale Onsekiz MartUniversity, Faculty of Education in Turkey, where he continues to explore issues related to science andengineering at the graduate level, engineering education cultures, as well as leadership and policy issuesin engineering education. Osman has authored and co
. Therefore, one goal is to continue to examine similar programs around thecountry12,13 to continuously update the course as new pedagogical information becomesavailable. Another goal is to encourage the undergraduate students to examine their own skillsand perhaps find a match with a faculty mentor, which will also be implemented in Spring 2014.V. Bibliography 1. Ro, H. K. (2011) Predicting Graduate School Plans Based on Students’ Self-Assessed Engineering Knowledge and Skills. Presented at 2011 ASEE Annual Conference. 2. Schmidt, P. (2009) Doctoral Universities Pull Ahead in Competition for Foreign Graduate Students. The Chronicle of Higher Education 55 (32), A29. 3. Jha, M. K.; Amory, R. (2012) Examining the Explanatory
career so that they willbe more likely to persevere in majors and careers in science.41 Some of these programs addadditional components such as enhanced emphasis on mentoring, development of career plansand actual graduate applications, dealing with time management and work-life balance issues,and identifying a supportive peer group. Such programs have been described by Purdy et al.42and by Crosby et al.43 While many of these programs are highly effective, they do not alwayshave stable funding. .B. MentoringAs noted by Purdy and Wasburn2, "a continuing concern for all graduate students is how to findsufficient mentoring and role models. This need is not limited to academic subjects. Much morethan undergraduate students, graduate students are
proposal are included in theAppendix.Our proposal system is meant to imitate the process faculty often follow when suggesting a newcourse in established curricula. It serves to help student instructors clearly define the goals oftheir workshop and how those goals are to be met. Requiring a definitive workshop frameworkcan also help facilitate efficient workshop development, which may translate to more substantivecourses.c. Practice workshopsStudent instructors develop their workshops according to their submitted proposals and theexecutive board’s feedback. To give student instructors an opportunity to implement theirworkshop prior to the official date, practice workshops are held with members of the ASEEstudent chapter. During these practice runs