(COEIT) at the University of Maryland BaltimoreCounty (UMBC). These students, known as teaching fellows, not only have an impact on theirengineering and computing peers (students who they taught), but also develop skill sets in anunconventional way giving them new routes into academics and industry. Many in their third,fourth or fifth year of their program, perform, act and behave as potential future faculty (leadtheir own discussion/class, grade papers, hold office hours etc). In a recent case study [1],students discussed their consideration going into faculty positions and found this programincreased their efficacy in both their professional and technical competencies.In the commitment to teaching and innovation excellence, UMBC decided to
. 1/16 Figure 1 Engineering Technology Program at Southeastern Louisiana UniversityTo meet all the aforementioned requirements, some curriculum limitations took place. These limitationsresulted in having only 33 credit hours dedicated for each concentration, 31 common ET credit hoursshared among the 5 concentrations, in additions to 10 hours of Math, 15 hours of Natural science, 17hours of General Education, 12 hours of English, and 6 hours of Technical Electives, totaling 124 hoursfor the ET degree. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show sample ET curriculum sheet and chart for the mechanicalET concentration. Because of these limitations, advanced courses, (such Measurements and DataAcquisition, Kinematics of Machines, Vibration) are not
, construction, and technical writing.2. IntroductionThis work is part of the Dialogue of Civilizations course activities at Northeastern University [1]-[3]. The course titled “Customer-Driven Technical Innovation: Silicon Valley” studies the role ofengineering innovation in addressing customer needs in early start-ups, and the need to conceivea successful innovative engineering design as part of the commercialization strategy. It emphasizesunderstanding how engineering innovation can meet real technical market needs and how to gatherthe necessary, relevant technical information early in the innovation process to produce asuccessful engineering design.The course analyzes common shortcomings of early technology startups and creates anunderstanding of
apply knowledge in real-time to solve a givenscenario.Students were required to comply with the parameters set for each exam. The minimumparameters that students had to agree to in order to attempt the Option #1 knowledge-based(classroom only) exam were: 1) Students installed the LockDown Browser® [21] on theirlaptops and used it while taking the exam, 2) students who did not want to use the LockDownBrowser® could request a printed copy of the exam, 3) the exam session was not recorded, 4)students had to be physically present to take the exam on the date and time the exam wasscheduled in the classroom, 5) the exam included 60 questions with the combinations ofmultiple-choice and true and false questions, and 6) students had 50 minutes to
adaptability between team members, decision-making, team management, andcollaboration. Literature Review Research Design Testing Implementation Figure 1. Proposed Scaffolding Technical AreasEngineering curriculum is reinforced in the proposed model by allowing research students toperform literature readings on specific technical areas of need. Such component of the modelexposes students to the existing real-world research problems and the various types of solutiontechniques. As such, the literature review will enhance the technical notion of
team building activities to foster student interaction.Students were given unstructured time in the evening where additional informal interactions tookplace.Finally, on Sunday students were transported back to campus on the bus. The only formalactivity during that time was for the students to complete the post-field trip survey beforearriving on campus. The general schedule for the trip can be seen in Table 1, below. Table 1. General Schedule of Field Trip Activities Day Time Range Activity Name Brief Description Friday 2 - 6 PM Transportation to Students selected and read an article on Resort engineering logistics of ski resorts and pre
in the Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology. His research interests are engineering students beliefs about knowledge and education and how those beliefs interact with the engineering education experience. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Gender and Human Imagery in the Halls of a BME DepartmentColleges and universities struggle with the numerical representation of women in engineeringdepartments as well as the often chilly climates found therein [1]. Studies of women inengineering academic environments mostly focus on human components of the environment,such as the experiences of women
ideals of caring and relational responsibility. We offered some practical implicationsabout how to support and engage female students who may experience tension between theircare-oriented disposition and highly technical and/or controversial engineering course contents.Study Objectives The purpose of this study is to explore how male and female students evaluated the value,relevance, and authenticity of knowledge presented by instructors in an engineering course thatcovered various applications of military technology. Through social constructivist and standpointfeminist theories, we inspected how a small number of female students in the male-dominatedcourse environment constructed positive meanings from their learning experiences
Engineering and Expeditionary Warfare Center (EXWC) in Port Hueneme, California. The EE&C Division at EXWC seve as subject matter experts for the design and analysis of DoD facilities against blast and impact gener- ated by accidental explosions. Dr. Oesterle has been involved with many blast and impact experimental projects, including confined blast testing of hardened structures for the DoD. He has also conducted sev- eral research studies using advanced finite element models to analyze and design hardened facilities for the DoD Explosives Safety Board, Air Force Research Laboratories, and NAVFAC. Dr. Oesterle is also the technical lead for the layered hardening effort under the Hardened Installation Protection for
of our study. The staggered entry process allows the PAtENTfaculty to implement a process of continuous improvement and iterative design where lessonslearned from Group 1 can be applied in fine tuning the pathway model for Group 2. Figure 2provides an for an overview of how students progress through the patent roadmap. Figure 2. PAtENT Program Student ProgressionThere are several key components of the PAtENT program. Technical rigor is maintained in thePAtENT program through the appointment of an external review committee (for each project) thatperforms a single-blind review of the technical merits and commercialization viability of the patentapplication prepared by the student participants. We leverage the resources
Program A total of 12 credits level participated in the competition. These students also4 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION, JULY 2021 TABLE I: eCTF participant Details First, in the first lecture sessions, reviews on advanced crypto- Student ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 graphic techniques were introduced. These sessions confirmed Gender (M/F) M M M M F M F that the students are comfortable with using advanced tools in Doctoral/Master’s Student D D D M D M D Years in Graduate School 3 3 1 1 2 1 2
approach to inquiry.Five (5) male junior and senior electrical engineering students who had taken at least two electriccircuit courses participated in this study. The participants were asked open-ended questions viathink-aloud protocol to explain real-world electrical incidents. They were expected to verbalizetheir thought process and learning of circuit concepts. The analysis was guided by the skills aspectof the engineering habits of mind framework, where students use mental models and toolsnecessary to make educated choices and use approaches to thinking when solving problems insimilar or new contexts. All participants generally used mental tools associated with electric circuittheory, which indicated that students use mathematical models and
Initiative (B&R) being conducted byChina and participating countries and regions. This is evidenced by the fact that 138 countriesand 30 international organizations have so far signed cooperation agreements with China onjointly building the Belt and Road, according to data published in January 2020 on China'sofficial Belt and Road web portal, including 27 European countries, like Italy, Greece, Russia,Luxembourg, 37 Asian countries, like Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Pakistan, uzbekistan, 44African countries, 11 Oceanian countries, 8 South American countries and 11 NorthAmerican Countries. [1] The B&R prioritizes the interconnection of infrastructure includinghighways, railways, ports, and pipelines of oil and gas. The enthusiasm for
to be a useful tool for connecting and organizing course topics forboth students and instructors.IntroductionConstructivist learning theory, in which learners create their own meaning of new material andmake connections with prior knowledge, is the basis for a variety of active learning approaches[1], [2]. Creating a concept map is one way for students to represent connections between ideas.Concept maps, or mind maps, are visual representations of the organization and connectionsbetween pieces of information [3]–[5]. Relationships between various concepts are shown byconnecting lines or arcs. Concept mapping has been used as an educational tool for more thanthirty years, but has recently gained attention in STEM (science, technology
as well as the institutional behaviors that enable unequal outcomes.Ultimately robust data analysis and communication will be the basis for new structures to sustaina productive and diverse faculty.Inclusion has been broadly defined as: “active, intentional and ongoing engagement indiversity—in the curriculum, in the co-curriculum, and in communities (intellectual, social,cultural, geographical) with which individuals might connect—in ways that increase awareness,content knowledge, cognitive sophistication and empathic understanding of the complex waysindividuals interact within systems and institutions” [1, para. 6].For academic institutions the goal of inclusion addresses recognition of individuals acrossmultiple identity factors (e.g
and use of flexible thermoelectric generators. His investigation is both for the high-tech and low tech applications. In addition to teaching courses such as energy systems, mechanics, mechatronics, and production, he investigates best ways to expand cutting edge technologies to the workforce.Dr. Uduak Zenas George, San Diego State University Uduak Z. George is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics at San Diego State University. She received her B.S. in Electrical/Electronic Engineering and M.S. in Computational Mathematics with Modeling. She earned her doctoral degree in Mathematics. Her research interests include computational fluid dynamics, biomechanics, parameter estimation
forengineering. It is unknown how many incoming students chose to participate in these programs inplace of the Connect for Success Program.The Connect for Success Mentoring Program was sunset at the end of the Spring 2017 semester.3. Peer Leadership and Mentoring in Engineering InitiativeThe Engineering-to-Engineer Network launched in Fall 2017. The new initiative consists of twocore elements: (1) peer mentoring of all first-year engineering students by trained upper level peers,leveraging student driven social and technical events and (2) leadership and DEI training for upperlevel mentors. The goals of the program are to: ! Improve retention of female and URM students by increasing their sense of belong and confidence through connecting
satisfaction.1 The workshop for international students was so well attended each year that OISS started offering it regularlythroughout the academic year. It is therefore no longer on WIE’s annual calendar.Networking activities provide students the opportunity to meet and learn from role models.These events tend to center on hearing people’s stories. Our signature networking activity is anannual career panel, which brings engineers from across the country to campus to talk to studentsabout their jobs and career paths. Panelists provide brief introductions, but most of the session isreserved for audience questions. The discussions are always lively and appreciated by thestudents.Another example of a networking event is our “Meet Your Faculty” lunches
course experience? o Was the material new to the students? o Was there a difference in the number of correct responses pre vs. post? Were there significant differences in attitudes? o Did the course material represent areas that they already had confidence in? o Did students’ confidence in the course material increase after taking the course?MethodsThe course was assessed through a pre / post survey analysis in which students were asked aseries of multiple choice questions based on course topics. The same questions were asked at thestart of the semester (prior to the first laboratory session) and again at the end of the semester(after the last laboratory session). The questions are shown below in Table 1
. Efforts for the freshman and sophomore years are currently underway.Junior Year: Foundation ModulesThe technical core in the junior year consists of the Linear Systems sequence (ECE311-2), theElectronics Principles sequence (ECE331-2), and the Electromagnetics sequence (ECE341-2). Aspart of the RED project, we have divided each of these courses into five LSMs, where each LSMcovers a set of anchoring concepts, and have aligned the coverage of the LSMs to enable KIactivities across courses. A list of the LSMs for the first semester of the junior year is provided inTable 1. More information about our approach to LSMs and KI activities can be found in 1,2,6 .The foundation thread champion and GTF together have dissected and rearranged the
noteveryone could attend even at that.The approach to scheduling meetings is discussed in the Activities section, and data collectionmethodologies are discussed in the Assessment Plan and Results section. 52.2.1 ActivitiesThe NFLC held weekly meetings during the semester for the faculty. Each meeting was structured toaddress one of the three outcomes, and the outcome addressed was rotated regularly. A schedule forthe Spring 2017 semester is presented in Table 1 to illustrate this. In order to address outcome 1, on-campus speakers were invited to discuss specific topics, such as creating instructional videos, activelearning techniques, and the learning management system. Sessions addressing
the survey results from Years 1and 2. Year 1showed that out of all the topics covered; the research statement was the least well understood 7.Furthermore, during Year 1 the peer review groups were meeting on their own schedules, leadingmost of the groups to fall apart by the end of the program. To combat this, the peer reviews werebuilt into the structure of the program in Year 2. The hope was that building peer reviews intothe program, plus moving all of the seminars closer together, would increase understanding ofthe research statement (as well as other topics).Figure 2 shows the participants familiarity and preparedness with respect to the faculty jobsearch process at the beginning, middle, and end of the program. The general trend
the last decade of The Engineering Economist and proceedings from theengineering economy divisions of ASEE and ISERC and found no papers on personal finance asa topical area. We searched more deeply within the ASEE proceedings, because those papersfocus on education and because presentation-only talks are rare. From 1996 to 2016 there were33 papers on peer.asee.org searched under a “personal finance” search, but only 6 are identifiedwith the engineering economy division—none focus on personal finance. Mutter (2011) is onpen-based tablet technology. Wick, Lynch, and Kauffmann (2014) is on using engineeringeconomy as a general education course. Ghanat et al. (2015) is on active learning. Lynch, Bober,and Wilck (2015) is on business expertise
that was well received by the students and teachers: they all expressed enhancedinterest in STEM as the design and design process was explained. This response inspired thefurther use of the robot as an outreach and recruitment apparatus.To make the device more effective for outreach, targeted instructional approaches for use withdifferent age ranges were created. These approaches vary in technical level and duration as ap-propriate. The outreach events were shown to increase the interest level of students in STEMfields through anonymous pre- and post- demonstration surveys. The primary goal of the outreachprogram is to target Title 1 schools and other under-served communities.IntroductionThe United States Bureau of Labor Statistics has
sessions. In the second year of implementation, three coaches assisted six schools,and in the third year six coaches assisted nine schools. In the final year, there were eight coachesserving nine schools. Some of the coaches worked at multiple schools, some at only one,depending on their availability. The coaches’ backgrounds included educators, a chemist,working engineers, and a college graduate with a biology degree (see last column of Table 1).Together, they and the program manager developed the training based on the needs observed bythe coaches and on the feedback provided by facilitators in monthly surveys. After theintroduction of coaching, training of mentors also shifted from a single half-day session to localtraining by coaches and
male dominance in the field.1 Among thechallenges women faculty face include gender disparities1 and unfavorable environments thatpush them out of the engineering profession.2 Discrimination against women, however, may notbe fully accounted for by gender alone, particularly for WOC who face the “double bind” ofexperiencing challenges as women and as people of color.3,4,5 Despite the acknowledgement ofunique challenges facing WOC in engineering, there is a dearth of empirical research of WOCfaculty in engineering.6,7 New research should explore the complex experiences of WOC acrossvarious institutional and social contexts. With growing interests in the perspectives of WOC inacademic and nonacademic (e.g., Margo Lee Shetterly’s bestselling
implementing the new course. Thefourth section will present self-reported student survey results and the last section will concludethe paper and present future work.Literature ReviewA number of studies and papers have been published on improving undergraduate computerengineering student's proficiency in Hardware Description Languages (HDLs) like Verilog andVHDL. Nestor et. al. introduced HDLs and Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) throughoutthe ECE curriculum at Lafayette College1. He began introducing HDL design in senior-levelelectives, but then propagated the material down into both a junior-level computer architecturecourse and two sophomore-level digital design courses. The results were generally positive withthe students appreciating the
American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Inverted Approach to Teach InversionAbstractInversion is one of the most important weather phenomena that determines air quality and istypically covered in courses concerning air pollution. Anecdotal evidence indicates that followingtextbook readings and lectures, students generally express misconceptions about this topic. Addingactive learning to the classroom has been advocated amongst the best practices for highereducation, with physical in-class demonstrations being especially effective for engineeringeducation. The study explores the impact of adding a laboratory demonstration, centered oncreating an artificial inversion layer (with dry ice, smoke bombs, and bubble
them, how to write a research paper. Basedupon their responses in the interviews and based on their deliverables, students met the fourlearning objectives during their research experiences. They also learned what research entailed,which was a motivating factor for several of the students in pursuing an undergraduate researchexperience. Other students noted that they wanted to pursue undergraduate research to help themobtain future internships, or to fulfill needed technical elective course credit.While students reported that they were forewarned that there would be bumps in the road, theywere still generally surprised by the need to reevaluate their direction often. While they were alsoforewarned of the need for physical work and the time
at all joints can be determined. Thesystem equation of motion is directly obtained by the application of Lagrange’s Equation d T T V − + = Q using the generalized coordinate θ, where V is the system potential dt energy, i.e., V = 12 m 2 g r sin , T is the system kinetic energy, i.e., d 2 1 d 2 1 T = 12 + 2 I2 + 2 m 2 v2 + ( 12 m3 v3 ) , and Qθ is the generalized torque due to 2 2 I1 dt dt torques that do work, i.e., Q