Page 15.546.4than traditional practice.14 The focus of many IUEs on engineering in context strengthens theneed to investigate potential gender differences in students’ interdisciplinary understanding.The use of a disciplinary affiliation lens for this project was grounded in several studies. A studyat the University of California – Berkeley, for instance, revealed that undergraduate engineeringstudents have a strong belief system surrounding the nature of disciplines, which negativelyaffected the integration of these disciplines within the curriculum.15 Another study analyzedstudents’ perceptions of a lab course in communication systems.15,16 The results indicated thestudents viewed electrical engineers as technicians, focusing on the
attitudes with respect to community service than did students and that only minordifferences existed based on participants’ age and gender.The current research builds from this prior effort. In Bauer et al., data were collected in theMultidisciplinary Engineering Laboratory, EGGN250, a sophomore level course in the fall of2004. This course was selected because it was required of all students and it preceded the courserequirements within the Humanitarian Engineering minor. In other words, the existence of theminor and the courses associated with that minor would not yet have impacted the students’attitudes. Using the same instrument, data was collected in the spring of 2007 in a senior levelcourse, a time period when most of the original student
) program, developed new assessments grounded in social science andeducation research10. We have revised our assessment instruments to study the impact of service-learning on our participants multiple times throughout the course of each project and willcollaborate with other programs on gathering data around the impacts of service-learning onengineering students and the community. We hope to also address the shortcomings of lowresponse rate within our current members.From our lessons learned, we have generated recommendations (outlined in Appendix B) to helpother student organizations.ConclusionAs an engaging part of students‟ education, the EFAC organization creates an opportunity forstudents from all engineering disciplines to participate in
this coordination and meet our student engagement goals, we hosted several planningmeetings with members of the demonstration communities prior to the launch of BuiltEnvironment Team efforts. During these meetings we prioritized the needs of the communities,identified faculty and staff across campus with related expertise, defined undergraduate andgraduate student projects, and developed a plan with well-defined deliverables.Built Environment Team Case StudiesThe Built Environment Team holds biweekly meetings where the students have an opportunity toreport on their research and obtain input and guidance from the team members. In addition tothese biweekly meetings, faculty and staff from the Civil Engineering Department and SSCRCmeet regularly
- munication at the Hugh Downs School of Human Communication. He studies digital rhetoric, social networks, and educational technology. He works with hybrid class, project-based learning, and in- ter/transdisciplinary collaborations as part of various projects at Arizona State University. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019Cohering Small Group Communication with Introduction to Engineering and its Impact on Team DynamicsAbstractThis paper will describe the impact of cohering two first year courses, Introduction toEngineering and Small Group Communication on team dynamics. One of the important skills forsuccessful engineering students is their ability to work effectively in a team
Paper ID #26443The Impact of Multidisciplinary Teams on Sustainability Projects in EPICSDr. Stephanie M. Gillespie, Arizona State University Stephanie Gillespie joined the EPICS@ASU program after finishing her Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. She has extensive experience in K-12 outreach and curriculum development, and is passionate about giving students opportunities to make a difference throughout their academic career. As the EPICS Director of Instruction, Stephanie leads the EPICS pro- gram’s curriculum development, EPICS-Community College program, and program
. Prior to joining QUEST, Jessica was the Graduate Assistant in Columbia University’s Office of Student Engagement.Ms. Amanda Yard, University of Maryland, College Park Amanda Yard is a graduating senior from the University of Maryland, Robert H. Smith School of Busi- ness. She is receiving a major in Supply Chain Management and a minor in Spanish Language and Cultures. She will be working for PepsiCo as an Integrated Supply Chain Associate in Schaumburg, IL. Amanda has been a member of the QUEST Honors Program since Spring 2013 where she has served as a mentor, as well as on the capstone project scoping team. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Impact of
, this is the most important factor of any job I acquire.4.2 Quantitative AnalysisThe coded qualitative analysis was quantitatively displayed to investigate how the personalpitches connected to the twenty program competencies. The findings are provided in Figure 2. Insummary, students did a relatively good job of communicating their experiences and abilitiesrelated to oral communication, ethical and cultural engagement, leadership, and the individualcontribution they offered to projects. However, students failed to discuss their abilities related toseven of the twenty competencies, including integrated communication, written communication,information literacy, qualitative reasoning, active listening, give, receive and act on critique, andsystems
AC 2011-2068: GLOBAL INITIATIVES: SHAPING THE CURRICULARAND CO-CURRICULAR LANDSCAPE AND ITS IMPACT ON STUDENTDEVELOPMENTBarbara A Masi, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Barbara A. Masi Ph.D. is the Director of Education Innovation and Assessment in the MIT School of Engineering. Page 22.750.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011 Global Initiatives: Shaping the curricular and co-curricular landscape and its impact on student developmentAbstract This study examined the impact of global initiative campus programs as an integrative learningexperience and its impact
learning process for me to gain a specific skill as well as learning to think abouthow other people will interact with whatever design I create.”ConclusionThe ASPiRe program is unique because it engages students and faculty, in the present case almostfour dozen people total, from one school within the university, utilizing the school’s resources,and creating an active learning community during the summer.The perceived difficulty of the projects leaned towards “difficult” which is perhaps whyparticipating in the ASPiRe program had a positive impact on student confidence. As a result ofparticipating, most felt that they had chosen the correct major, could do well in their major duringthe current academic year, and will graduate with a degree in
out to and work with others? What might be thedifficulties, struggles, or even frustrations along the way? What constitutes the moments ofglory and/or offers real rewards to them? Do disciplinary boundaries play a role in theprocess of student cooperation? If yes, how? These issues need to be further understood inorder to expand the impacts of multidisciplinary education.This study presents the 3-year experience of a multidisciplinary teaching team workingtogether to co-teach Capstone courses aimed to enhance students’ capacity for solvingmultidisciplinary problems by providing real-world issues and conditions as well asmultidisciplinary team experiences. Students from four departments—civil engineering,building and urban planning, mechanical
situations, exposure to the habitus of others, or interacting with people who originate fromvery different backgrounds, all of which occur with regularity in the college environment [34,35]. Students who report having more experiences with diversity report that it is due to frequentexposure to diverse perspectives in their classes [36].Communication and Repeated ExposureRepeated exposure and time-on-task is one of the most significant predictors of task success [37,38]. The impacts of repeated exposure operate along linguistic and social dimensions. Repeatedexposure in a linguistic context has been referred to as linguistic entrainment or alignment.Entrainment refers to the spontaneous process by which dialogue partners adjust their verbal andnon
design-oriented, and as a result, IE studentslack a formal opportunity for conceiving, creating and “materializing things”. The engagement ofIE students in a multidisciplinary hands-on experience like the Solar Decathlon or independentdesign projects gave them the opportunity to experience the whole life-cycle of an engineeredproduct, understanding the impact from the economic, social, and environmental perspectives. Inthe case of this team, IE students were supporting areas related to Health & Safety, Logistics,and Environmental Impact. All IE students felt comfortable actually “doing” real things or as inthe words of one student “facing practical problems inspired by real problems”.Second, IE students could play a key role in project
asynchronous communication each have advantagesand disadvantages related to student engagement depending on the student’s individual learningpreference. For the student who prefers to observe anonymously while learning, a distancelearning environment where their body language, focus, and personal activity are masked ispreferable. They feel safer and might be more likely to take a risk, such as participating in agroup discussion. For the student who likes to look their peers in the eye, read the instructor’snuanced body language, and be able to gesture for meaning, the accountability of being face-to-face is more engaging for that student. Conversely that same student might feel muted in adistance learning environment.All online classes at National
how well the students thought they had achieved the learning objectives of the course,we asked them to rate their confidence, on a scale of 1-5, for the following learning objectives,both before the course and after the course: a) Operate and communicate effectively on a multi-disciplinary team with a variety of learning and personality styles b) Effectively communicate technical information in written and oral settings c) Critically evaluate the written, oral, and engineering analysis work of themselves and others by identifying the strengths and areas for improvement d) Assess the value of work from various sources such as the internet and peer reviewed journals e) Describe the importance of engaging the community
domain-independent design process that incorporated communication from all disciplinesthroughout the design4. Similarly, Austin et al. (2001), in their analysis of conceptualdesign processes in interdisciplinary teams, revealed patterns of interconnectednessbetween all activities and phases5. However, these studies were conducted in an industrysetting, so the focus was more on how teams operate rather than on educating students toparticipate in interdisciplinary design. In engineering education, Hirsch et al. (2001)found that an interdisciplinary teaching approach combining communication and designfaculty was an effective foundation for engineering freshmen6; however, the teams werecomposed of engineering students only. Likewise, Pack et al
-disciplinary learning goals byinvestigating students' understanding of cross-disciplinary; 2) examine how students' self-efficacy for cross-disciplinary goals was impacted by participation on cross-disciplinary projectdesign teams. This study seeks to address two major research questions: what is students'understanding of cross-disciplinary team learning, and how do students' levels self-efficacychange through participation on cross-disciplinary design teams.MethodResearchers conducted a mix-method approach in this study to assessing students' crossdisciplinary team learning. Research team developed two instruments for this study: self-efficacyscale reflection and mid-semester reflection. Instruments include a pre and post self-efficacyreflection
strongly supports this theory. One can also observe that audio-visualaids do indeed help; however, lectures have very little impact. One can say that, in the twentyfirst century, proper design of instructional systems is extremely important, useful andproductive. There are documented cases wherein students have specifically indicated that theywould like to engage in a lively classroom discussion, rather than being simply lectured to(Narayanan, 2010). Instructional systems should contain interaction between the learner and theinstructor because these lively classroom discussions always lead to greater student participationdynamics.Acknowledgements Dr. Mysore Narayanan is extremely grateful to the Center for the Enhancement ofLearning and
. Students wererequired to send weekly reports and even daily updates on their progress via e-mail. At the end ofeach semester, a performance review session was organized for each individual student. Studentswere required to criticize their performance and propose ways for furthering opportunities. ThePI provided constructive feedback and clearly explained expectations. A 360 degree survey hasbeen implemented by the human resources department of the university where students have thesame opportunity to critique the PI, anonymously. International and U.S.-based students weresuccessfully merged to form small research sub-groups to improve productivity.This paper outlines the details on recruitment and student engagement efforts by providing datasuch
the effect of its integration on theelectrical grid, and energy efficiency in systems engineering. Furthermore, the student-internswould demonstrate improvement in collaborative learning, project management, and engineeringdesign, in particular: communication, professional documentation, articulating milestones,reviewing and synthesizing relevant literature, analytic thinking, and iterative problem solvingusing “backwards design.” To accomplish this, the mentors planned to provide a combination ofparticipatory lectures introducing relevant STEM background and context with task-focusedexperiential activities that would engage multiple learning styles.Given the number of interns involved, a single project split into constituent and transitional
establish peer/mentor relationships.Students receive a paid 2-week research skills workshop, followed by 8-10 weeks of researchtraining as a full-time UMB employee during the summer.24Promoting early engagement for community college students in STEM research, the Internshipsin Nanosystems Science, Engineering, and Technology (INSET) program, is held at theUniversity of California at Santa Barbara, a tier-one research university. Similar to the SCCOREprogram goals, INSET provides research opportunities to increase retention and degreecompletion. Unlike bridge programs that were researched, the INSET program involvescommunity college faculty in all aspects of program planning and implementation of theprogram. The faculty from the four community
as well as in academic writing, and a critical inquiry class taught by theHSA faculty. The critical inquiry class has multiple sessions taught by different instructors. Eachsession focuses on a topic that is related to the instructor’s specialty, yet all the sessions have acommon component: for the first few weeks, students and instructors engage in a discussion ofthe meaning of liberal arts education and its implications for HMC. In addition to completing theCommon Core, every student at HMC is required to take at least ten courses in HSA, with atleast four courses in an area of concentration. The engineering curriculum at HMC consists ofthree stems: design, engineering sciences, and system. The design stem includes three
the program, but to also have the opportunity to see the broader impact of the cumulative efforts of past student efforts on the community. This is a perfect scenario for understanding the long-term relationship between technology and society. The program supports this connection with enrollment of students in one-credit hour course over multiple semesters – essentially projects are passed between cohorts as new people are joining established teams each semester. Community mentoring and education – The students are actively engaged in mentoring and educating local community members to promote adoption of practice ready solutions. By distilling their understanding of technical topics to
communication skills with studentsfrom other disciplines. The Multidisciplinary Engineering Capstone allows students to workwith other disciplines on a real-world engineering problem which can have multiple solutions.Allowing the students to be exposed to the program, helps the students understand the need tolearn modern engineering techniques as well as the managerial side and the organization behinda project. Figure 1 below indicates the students’ understanding of the importance of lifelonglearning while in the program and the significant importance while in their careers.Figure 1: Question 5/6(j) - Recognize the Need for and Engage in Lifelong Learning Responses (in Percent)By incorporating different colleges
Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Food Science from Cornell University and her Ph.D. in Food Process Engineering from the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Purdue University. She is a member of Purdue’s Teaching Academy. Since 1999, she has been a faculty member within the First- Year Engineering Program, teaching and guiding the design of one of the required first-year engineering courses that engages students in open-ended problem solving and design. Her research focuses on the development, implementation, and assessment of model-eliciting activities with authentic engineering contexts. She is currently the Director of Teacher
-school girls in computer programming. Will has been an active member of ASEE throughout his professional career, serving as an officer in his local section from 2002-2007 (Chair in 2005) and attending and publishing at national and sectional conferences. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Effects of Service-Learning Projects on Capstone Student MotivationAbstractMany engineering programs incorporate project-based, service learning into traditional classesand capstone experience. These projects focus on service-related challenges that impact the local,national, or international community and could be described as “humanitarian” or “for thegreater good”. While these projects have shown
), communicating effectively (g) and engaging in life-long learning (i).Since 2007, the engineering department at Messiah College has been pioneering a multi-yearplan known as the Integrated Projects Curriculum (IPC) that involves a four-semester project-course sequence, with students working on multidisciplinary teams, typically beginning in theirjunior year. Details of the IPC as a curriculum modification have been previously published,including benefits over the traditional senior capstone project course, portfolio evaluation ofstudent project work, structure of the course sequence, and the place of Group Orientation (GO),a one-credit course normally taken by our engineering students in the Spring semester of theirsophomore year, preceding the project
technical workforce. Using actual critical engineering design challenges toinspire and engage students in design solutions to real problems is the path to achieving a highdegree of student engagement. Sustainability, living better on less, and team projects that directlyimpact people’s lives speak to this generation of engineering students. Energy usage is one of themost critical engineering challenges we face today. Global warming due to harmful emissionsfrom burning fossil fuels and rising gas prices as well as national security issues have drivenpeople to look for new ways to reduce their fuel consumption and to live better on less. It hasbeen known for some time that streamlining vehicles can dramatically improve their fueleconomy and in
-being of poor and marginalized communities aroundthe world. Several other colleges and universities, including Dartmouth [3] and OhioState [4], also have Humanitarian Engineering programs. Stanford University [5]introduces a student-led course in learning sustainable design through service. Thisprogram’s goals are to (a) develop students’ iterative design skills, project managementand partnership-building abilities, sustainability awareness, cultural sensitivity, empathy,and desire to use technical skills to promote peace and human development, (b) helpdeveloping communities ensure individuals’ human rights via sustainable, culturallyappropriate, technology-based solutions, and (c) increase Stanford University’sstewardship of global
interdisciplinary engineering courseas a team training exercise. Communication patterns of the student teams are selected that modeleffective and ineffective behaviors. Positive and negative excerpts from actual studentinteractions are discussed as instructional vehicles for student training on teamwork skills and forguiding student understanding of simulation game dynamics.1.0 Introduction The ability to successfully work in teams is a crucial ingredient for success in theworkplace1. Researchers also report that team success in an academic setting is determined moreby the group’s ability to identify and overcome communication problems, than to handletechnical ones 2. Unfortunately, while universities know their students must understand