Paper ID #22617Revealing the Invisible: Conversations about -Isms and Power Relations inEngineering CoursesDr. Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego Dr. Joel Alejandro (Alex) Mejia is an assistant professor of General Engineering at the University of San Diego. His current research investigates the funds of knowledge of Latinx adolescents, and how they use these funds of knowledge to solve engineering problems in their communities. Dr. Mejia is particularly interested in how Latinx adolescents bring forth unique ways of knowing, doing, and being that provide them with particular ways of framing, approaching, and
through a worksheet. This personality assessment connects individualinterests to related occupations, provides a vocabulary for students to discuss their careerinterests, and suggests relevant occupations based on the individual’s “type” [36]. Educationalopportunities beyond their current program were discussed, including education that can proceedafter their biosystems engineering degree, such as prosthetist training, medical school, orgraduate study in engineering [37]. Through this career development support, we explored theinterdisciplinary nature of biosystems engineering and the broad options for graduates of theprogram both within and beyond engineering, building on the course content covered by theprofessors of the course, and supporting
AC 2011-1200: A WRITING PROGRAM FOR MECHANICAL ENGINEER-INGWilliam K. Durfee, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities William Durfee is Professor and Director of Design Education in the Department of Mechanical Engi- neering at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA. His professional interests include design of medical devices, rehabilitation engineering, advanced orthotics, biomechanics and physiology of human muscle including electrical stimulation of muscle, product design and design education. Additional infor- mation is at www.me.umn.edu/˜wkdurfee.Benjamin Adams, Mechanical Engineering, University of MinnesotaAudrey J. Appelsies, University of MinnesotaPamela Flash, University of Minnesota Pamela Flash
Paper ID #17906Exploring Impacts of Flexible, Balanced Engineering Program CurriculaDr. Marissa H. Forbes, University of Colorado, Boulder Marissa H. Forbes is a research associate in the College of Engineering and Applied Science at the Uni- versity of Colorado Boulder and lead editor of the TeachEngineering digital library. She previously taught middle school science and engineering and wrote K-12 STEM curricula while an NSF GK-12 graduate engineering fellow at CU. With a master’s degree in civil engineering she went on to teach advanced placement and algebra-based physics for the Denver School of Science and
creative people aspire to be structural engineers.”4Creative people are drawn to engineering. Troublingly, however, there is evidence that thosegraduating from engineering programs are less creative than those who begin.5,6 One reason forthis may be the traditional focus of engineering education on specific procedures applied to well-constrained problems in which there is a single correct answer.7 As Surovek and Rassati state,“focusing predominately on developing analytical skills at the expense of variable solutionapproaches limits the development of the divergent thinking skills needed for innovation.”5Another reason may be that there is little formal creativity training within engineering curriculaleaving the development of necessary skills up
Microprocessors Course1. AbstractLearning to program is difficult and has been documented as a persistent problem not just forcomputer science majors, but also for other engineering majors who use programming as a toolwithin their disciplines. One solution may lie in Knuth’s literate programming paradigm, whichtreats a program as an essay, intermingling code with explanation in a beautifully typeset docu-ment. This stands in contrast to traditional programming pedagogy where difficult-to-understandcode is isolated from its explanation, in a separate file from the flowcharts and text which detailthe operation of the program. Knuth’s literate programming paradigm is consistent with cognitiveload theory, which states that keeping related concepts close
of CM education differs from that of civil engineering in that it tendsto be more applied and devotes more attention to management and techniques than itsengineering counterpart, and less time to basic science, mathematics, and design19. However,there are many similarities between the two fields of study in terms of general program content.Since there is a dearth of research specifically relating to writing in the field of constructionmanagement, we will often draw upon closely related findings from engineering. Page 22.1193.2Previous research suggests that the workplace success of new graduates is ultimately affected bytheir oral and
sociotechnicalthinking and methods. In 1970, Lafayette College initiated this degree program, with the goal ofproducing graduates who could bridge the gap between engineering and the liberal arts; after 50years, its mission is to help students recognize the increasingly complex challenges ofengineering in the larger framework of socio-technical systems and develop the ability to analyzeand understand these systems through multi-disciplinary perspectives. Lafayette’s coreEngineering Studies curriculum is designed to help students gain expertise in examining theplace of engineering and technology in society, with interdisciplinary skills to lead publictechnology debates around issues related to policy, management, economics, and theenvironment. When complemented
past eight years. As the Director of Operations for Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) Engineering, she managed operations and strategic initiatives for the newly formed Office of the Dean of Engineering. As Director of Marketing for Drexel College of Engineering, she oversaw an extensive communication portfolio and branding for seven departments and programs. Christine currently consults with engineering and science related insti- tutions to advise on best practices in communication, from presentations to print. Christine received her MBA in marketing and international business from Drexel University and her B.A. in English and Film from Dickinson College.Dr. Renata S. Engel P.E., Pennsylvania State University
engineering schools or Canadian faculties ofengineering and tend to employ faculty with training in STS or related disciplines. They aremandated to teach STS concepts to undergraduate engineering students, often fulfilling specificaccreditation requirements. The embedded STS department model can thus be understood as aresponse to these requirements chosen by a small number of engineering programs from among avariety of other avenues of response. Perhaps the most common response chosen has been torequire engineering students to fulfill the non-technical accreditation requirements by enrollingin ethics courses or writing courses offered by departments outside of engineering. Anothercommon response has been to require that engineering professors include
workshops that occurred once during the course of the summer REU program. Each ofthese workshops focused on a particular area (e.g., usability and design, cognition andcommunication, and developing and delivering engineering poster presentations) associated withsoft skills related to successful professional engineering practices. 3After the completion of the second summer session, the authors sought to assess this pilotapproach to teaching soft skills within an REU program. The objective was to determine howeffectively this workshop-based method was at imparting skills in ways students view aseffective and transferrable. To this end, the authors
programs. Haas currently consults with engineering and science related institutions to advise on best practices in communication, from presentations to print. Christine received her M.B.A. in Marketing and International Business from Drexel University and her B.A. in English and Film from Dickinson College.Lynn S. McElholm, Worcester Polytechnic InstituteMs. Sonya M Renfro, University of Connecticut Ms. Renfro is a Program Coordinator for the Engineering Diversity Programs in the School of Engineering at UConn. She is the advisor for UConn Engineering Ambassadors, and also works with other UConn diversity programs such as BRIDGE, daVinci, and MYO.Ms. Elizabeth S. Herkenham, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Ms. Elizabeth
notregularly worked together on academic initiatives. This team created the program’s frameworkand engaged with partners in the community of practice established by the Teagle-funded projectto write the proposal that launched the program in 2017.Though the program is open to any student at RIT, it is promoted primarily to first-year studentsfrom liberal arts and engineering. The program is highly flexible to leverage the wide variety ofexperiences students already pursue both inside and outside the classroom related to the GrandChallenges. Many of the typical activities that students use to fulfill the five GCSP competenciesare embedded in the engineering curriculum (e.g., co-op work assignments and senior designprojects connected to Grand Challenges
cultural history of engineering, and the aerodynamics of sports projectiles.Dr. Kristen L. Sanford P.E., Lafayette College Dr. Kristen Sanford is an associate professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Lafayette Col- lege. Her expertise is in sustainable civil infrastructure management and transportation systems, and transportation and infrastructure education. She teaches a variety of courses related to transportation and civil infrastructure as well as engineering economics, and for the last ten years she chaired Lafayette’s interdisciplinary Engineering Studies program. Dr. Sanford currently serves on the Transportation Re- search Board Committee on Workforce Development and Organizational Excellence
programs afforded studentsmore choice in their technical coursework than the chemical and mechanical programs.No differences were detected in the percentage of required non-technical coursework with choiceacross the four engineering disciplines (Kruskal-Wallis p=0.165).For comparison, the 151 chemistry, math, and physics comparator programs provided coursechoices for a median of 21% of required technical coursework versus 31% for non-technicalcoursework. Relating these results to the median course choice percentages from the 103engineering programs of 27% for technical coursework versus 88% for non-technicalcoursework, it seems that the disparity in course choice opportunities between technical and non-technical requirements may be more measured
fromparticipants. All participants in this paper are doctoral students in the DRRM program andrepresent a range of both academic disciplines and research interests. The research itself wasapproved by the Institutional Review Board at Virginia Tech. Nine current students consented tothe research.Purpose and Research QuestionsTo explore students’ understanding of DRRM, we used pre- and post-course concept maps.Researchers in engineering education have demonstrated the value of concept maps for trackingundergraduate students’ disciplinary understanding [10], interdisciplinary understanding ofsustainability-related concepts within undergraduate engineering courses [11], design knowledge[12], and conceptual understanding [13]. We build on this prior work to
Paper ID #27150Panel Discussion: Understanding Students’ Narratives of Grand ChallengesScholars Program as a Nexus between Liberal and STEM EducationDr. Yevgeniya V. Zastavker, Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering Yevgeniya V. Zastavker, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Physics at Franklin W. Olin College of Engi- neering and a recent Director of the Research Institute for Experiential Learning Science at Northeastern University. She earned her B.S. degree in Physics from Yale University in 1995 and her Ph. D. degree in Biological Physics from MIT in 2001. Dr. Zastavker’s research interests lie in the field of STEM edu
Paper ID #14838The Value of Interpersonal Skills Training in Engineering Education: An In-teractive Panel Discussion with the Tau Beta Pi Engineering Futures ProgramDr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Director for Graduate Initiatives at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she earned Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engi- neering from the University of Michigan. She has published more than two dozen peer-reviewed works related to her
: Developing and Inter-Relating the Role Identities of Engineering Ambassadors through Hands-On Outreach ActivitiesIntroduction In response to the need for a diverse and highly skilled STEM workforce, colleges ofengineering have developed diversity-focused recruitment, retention, and outreach efforts thattarget middle-school and high-school students. Simultaneously, many programs have also begunto emphasize technical communication in their engineering curriculum in order to promoteengineering students’ client-orientation, collaborative abilities, and effective communicationskills. The Engineering Ambassadors Network (EAN)[1] is a national organization that integratesthese priorities. The EAN trains engineering undergraduates in
throughout their on-boarding and (2) educational cultures that impact the professional formation of engi- neers, which was funded by the National Science Foundation. Both projects have been published in the Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education. He has also served as a series editor, contributed to trade publications, and facilitated workshops related to higher education administrators’ work experiences. Sean is also actively engaged within mentoring activities, and has served as an advisor to multiple student leadership organizations including Beta Theta Pi, which he has received both campus and international awards for his service and mentoring to the Purdue chapter.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue
an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technol- ogy. She received her PhD from Georgia Institute of Technology in 2011. She was an American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) teaching fellow and Student Teaching Enhancement Partnership (STEP) Fellow. Prior to receiving her PhD, she worked as a subsystems engineer at Boeing on the Joint Un- manned Combat Air Systems (JUCAS) program. Her research areas of interest include piezoelectrics, nanomanufacturing, optical measuring techniques, and intercultural design. Page 24.1370.1 c American
Paper ID #13597Liberal Studies in Engineering Programs – Creating Space for Emergent &Individualized Pathways to Success for Women in Computing DisciplinesDr. Jane L. Lehr, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Jane Lehr is Chair of the Women’s & Gender Studies Department at California Polytechnic State Uni- versity, San Luis Obispo. She is also an Associate Professor in Ethnic Studies, Director of the Science, Technology & Society Minor Programs, and Faculty Director of the Louis Stokes Alliance for Minor- ity and Underrepresented Student Participation in STEM Program at Cal Poly. She previously
multidisciplinaryteam as one of its undergraduate curriculum learning outcomes, listed in Appendix B.Communication skills are considered an important component within engineering curricula,either as stand-alone classes or integrated into a program curriculum along with otherimportant process skills. In the integrated approach, all of these skills are coveredprogressively in a series of courses. Examples of the integrated approach are those at theVirginia Tech's Materials Science and Engineering Department3 and the University ofQueensland’s Project Centred Curriculum in Chemical Engineering for the third and fourthyear students4.The communication skills course in our program is a stand-alone class, nevertheless, it hasbeen developed as part of our effort to
Energy Education Development Project [15]. While the students enjoyed learningabout new topics in the area of electrical engineering and renewable energy, the feedbackprovided by the students indicates that the interactive activities, experiments, and puzzles werethe most helpful and entertaining to perform and learn. An example of a assembling a basicelectric circuit activity is shown in Fig. 3.Figure 3: Facilitators and students working on building a simple electric circuit during the PowerForward program.In addition to increasing knowledge of renewable energy, the Power Forward Program providedopportunities for students to learn about careers related to renewable energy. In the seventhsession of the program, we had the opportunity to feature
Electric Tool. She received her M.A. and Ph.D. in English from the University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee (1986, 1992) and her B.A. in political science from Wright State University (1981).Dr. Cynthia Wise Barnicki, Milwaukee School of Engineering Cindy Barnicki is a professor in Mechanical Engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering. She holds a Ph.D. degree in Metallurgical Engineering from the Ohio State University. Cindy teaches courses in materials, manufacturing processes, and engineering design and is currently the program director for the Bachelor of Science in Engineering program. In addition to her teaching experience, she has industrial experience in quality management and production problem solving at Martin
learning only by influencing what thestudent does to learn [10].” In employing this crossover activity, we changed the experience ineffort to change the learning. Given the specific topics of the courses, the authors believe strongly that the content intheir courses can highlight important concepts, such as human dimensions of engineering,covered in other portions of the engineering-specific program curriculum. By incorporating ascience fiction novel related to nanotechnology in each of these courses, students had theopportunity to discuss human dimensions of engineering as well as technology erodingdemocracy and safety issues of humans interacting with nano-sized materials.Course Structure Both courses were carefully constructed to be
public mission and, largely, is arelationship which is poorly understood and has been under-studied.Gaining a deeper understanding of the relationship between engineers and “the public”, namelyhow engineers conceive of “the public,” was the impetus for the broader study that this paper is apart of. There are myriad historical and modern examples of engineering failures where thepublic was harmed or placed at risk of harm due to engineering decisions: some examplesinclude the lead-in-water crisis in Washington, DC from 2001-2004 and Flint, Michigan from2014-2015, complacency with respect to defective General Motors vehicles which led to 30deaths and 31 injuries between 2003 and 2014, and decisions made by engineers at Volkswagento program certain
, which are being implemented in 2020. This entireanalysis is embedded in a larger ongoing study of how a liberal arts-focused Grand ChallengesScholars Program can successfully provide transformative learning experiences for students. Theexperience related herein serves as an illustration of how liberal arts content and methods can bedeployed within an engineering curriculum to help students better position their course of studyand their professional ambitions within a larger personal narrative and a sense of purpose in thewider world.Introduction and BackgroundIn 2008, the National Academy of Engineering published a report on the Grand Challenges forEngineering in the 21st Century, setting out an ambitious agenda for the profession for
in twenty-first century Milwaukee, and why these endeavors could becomevaluable assets for those in the surrounding community. This is ultimately the point ofour program: to allow the students to make these connections between engineering,entrepreneurialism, and the world in which they live and work. Here, the liberal arts,along with a commitment to service learning, has proven to be a useful tool to help youngpeople make these connections between context, education, and innovation (see attachedsyllabi for the ways in which we’ve tried to help our students make such connections).ConclusionWhat we have done in our liberal arts honors sequence should be scalable to any
feel engaged in the engineering program, or are they more likely to use primary sources infuture research, such as capstone projects? While our study cannot answer these larger questions,it shows that these interventions can be integrated into an STS course without being “tacked on,”and that engineering students who are exposed to methodologies of liberal education, such asarchival research, feel more confident about engaging with primary source materials in thefuture.ConclusionThe archival interventions in this Science and Technology Studies course related to current andproposed ABET student outcomes. Students were exposed to a different type of raw data thanthey might normally encounter in engineering classrooms. The raw data of the