evaluations.AcknowledgementThe authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of Writing Lab, Institute for theFuture of Education, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico, in the production of this work.References[1] J. Planas-Coll, “El contrasentido de la enseñanza basada en competencias,” Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior, vol. IV, no. 10, pp. 75–92, 2013.[2] A. Wilson-Lopez et al., “Argumentation in K-12 Engineering Education: A Review of the Literature (Fundamental).”[3] C. Rapanta and K. Iordanou, “Argumentation and critical thinking,” in International Encyclopedia of Education(Fourth Edition), Elsevier, 2023, pp. 575–587. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-818630- 5.14073-4.[4] T. Låg and R. G. Sæle, “Does the Flipped Classroom
studentgroups. In addition to this, even students who complete the rigorous demands of an engineering major have beenfound to be indecisive and not necessarily committed to careers in engineering or STEM post-engineeringdegree[4]. Limited interest in continuing on to engineering graduate programs and/or industry career pathwayswas found to be associated with the following factors: 1. Singular experiences (i.e., interactions with faculty oreven staff, internships, or advice from a mentor), 2. Institutional support in their decision making (i.e., fromSTEM and non-STEM disciplinary faculty, staff, offices, and/or peers), 3. Institutional differences (i.e.,whether or not the institution offers more or less non-technical coursework), and 4. Exposure to a
onehour long and used a question guide with nine questions developed using key areas to probebased on a review of the literature and interview questions developed for similar studies10, 11.The focus group data was analyzed using a careful approach in order to minimize the potentialbias when analyzing and interpreting this kind of data. Krueger & Casey point out that a robustanalysis should be systematic, sequential, verifiable, and continuous17. The Krueger contentanalysis framework was used. This framework includes the following headings for interpretingcoded data: 1) words; 2) context; 3) internal consistency; 4) frequency and extensiveness ofcomments; 5) specificity of comments; 6) intensity of comments; and 7) big ideas18.Some of the
Institution.3 In addition, it is important to note that Transfer Model Curricula2 Cal Poly has currently identified increasing the numbers and success of community college transfer students as apriority. To this end, Cal Poly is one of thirty institutions participating in the inaugural Aspen-AAC&U Intensive:Transfer Student Success and Equity Program organized by the Aspen Institute College Excellence Program(Aspen) and the American Association of State Colleges & Universities (AASCU) Division of Academic Innovation[17].3 Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI) are defined under the Higher Education Act (HEA) as colleges or universitieswhere at least 25 percent of the undergraduate, full-time enrollment is Hispanic; and at least half of the
been recognized that simply developing technical expertise in a discipline does notadequately prepare a graduate for future success in a professional setting. Employers haveinsisted that graduates in engineering must also have mastered requisite communication skills inorder to become a valued member of their organizations.3 This view has been implemented intoCriterion 3 of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) ProgramOutcomes and Assessment; that is, “the necessity for engineering graduates to demonstrate theability to communicate effectively.”5At LSU, this criterion is addressed through a university-wide program initiated in 2004 thatfocuses on improving students’ communication skills in four modes: written, spoken
the art facilities, curriculum andpedagogy, and a supportive community. All faculty and staff in the school joined at least one ofthese groups and working group leaders were identified, usually consisting of one faculty andone staff member. The curriculum and pedagogy working group was comprised of faculty fromeach of the engineering and computer science majors. The composition and structure of theworking groups ensured broad representation across the school and meant that efforts to promotethe school’s vision were led by faculty and staff.The curriculum and pedagogy working group started its vision planning process with a set ofbrainstorming sessions to identify 1-, 3-, and 5-year goals. Faculty individually identifiedpossible goals, which
design and enables rapid cycles of improvement towardsinnovative solutions. However, iteration in engineering is described at different grain sizes of thedesign process and subsequently has many definitions within the fields of education and design,as well as within research [1], [2]. Where some see iteration as inextricably linked to action [3],others see it as primarily conceptual and more open-ended, a chance to explore all possibledesigns for a given problem [2]. Iteration can focus on problem framing, or on refinement of thesolution [1], [4]. It can happen around small problems within stages of the design process asdesigners troubleshoot, tweak, and make incremental improvements, or across stages in waysthat lead to large changes or
Preliminary Design Perspective”, International Journal on Engineering Education, Vol. 13, No. 5, p. 376-379, 1997 “ IEAust Comments on the Chief Scientist’s Discussion Paper: The Chance to Change”, Institution of Engineers, Australia, Engineering House, 11 National Circuit, Barton, ACT 2600, September 2002 D. Chasey , “It’s a Small World After All”, http://departamento15.com/orgullo_salvadoreno_Mario_Bolanos.htm J. Lenoir, J. Russel, “The Roles of the Student in a Project Based Engineering Curriculum”, Western Kentucky University’s Center for Learning and Teaching, Vol. 3, http://www.wku.edu/Dept/Support/AcadAffairs/CTL/booklets/projectlrn.htm “ Science and Engineering Indicators 2002”, National Science Board, http
Visiting Assistant Professor in Electronic Engineering Technology in the Division of Engineering Technology under the School of Architecture and Engineering Technology (SAET) at Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (FAMU). Dr. Mulay’s primary research area is speech signal processing, including but not limited to acoustic emotion recognition, digital signal processing, autonomous vehicles, and blockchain technology and its applications. She also has authored and co-authored articles in various technical journals and conferences in these areas of education in the engineering field. Dr. Mulay has been working with minority students in the STEM fields since her graduate school days. She has been assistant
support their work in solving electrical engineering problems. Outcome 2A: EE graduates plan and implement cost-effective electrical engineering designs using modern engineering equipment and software. Outcome 2B: EE graduates can effectively work with and on multi-disciplinary teams and understand the importance of teamwork in an engineering environment. Outcome 3: EE graduates are aware of trends in electrical engineering and are engaged in a path of life-long learning. Outcome 4: EE graduates are committed to excellence in all professional endeavors and apply their understanding of ethics to solve engineering problems. Outcome 5: EE graduates effectively communicate technical material in an
with students to develop an appropriatescope and partner relationship. These partnerships grounded the course in real-world contexts andhelped students learn to adapt design practices to diverse needs. We had eight projects that the sixteams of students were able to select from, partnering students with organizations in the US (3local options in Durham, NC or surrounding area), Peru (2 projects), Malawi, Uganda, and Nigeria.Next, we developed the lab and instructional content that would support the students’ technicaland theoretical development respectively. The class was structured to have a 3-hour lab segmentin a design space, and two 75-minute periods in a traditional classroom. The lab sections focusedon technical elements and prototyping
American Manufacturing Research Institution (NAMRI) and chair of the Manufacturing Engineering Division of The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (MED/ASME). Dr. Liang is a member of CIRP (The International Academy for Production Engineering) and the recipient of many awards including the Robert B. Douglas Outstanding Young Manufacturing Engineer Award of SME, Ralph R. Teetor Education Award of the Society of Automotive Engineers, and Blackall Machine Tool and Gage Award of ASME. Dr. Liang is fellow of both ASME and SME. Page 23.1296.1 c American Society for Engineering
methodologies are described below.Timeline 1. WEMADEIT program development began in March 2013 / public launch in September 2013. 2. Literature review: March to September 2013. 3. WEMADEIT brand development with Professional Communications graduate students: September to October 2013. 4. Interns hired to develop first iteration of brand guidelines: January 2014. 5. YTT recruitment phase: January to February 2014 / operational phase: March 22 to April 26, 2014. 6. Website and social media development. Soft launch for YTT feedback and public launch: April 2014.3.1. WEMADEIT Brand DevelopmentDescriptionThe aim was to design a female-inclusive brand for the initiative. Professional Communicationgraduate students were chosen
: Engineering Technical Communication Programs: A Changein Writing Instruction,” 2023 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference(ProComm), Ithaca, NY, USA, 2023, doi: 10.1109/ProComm57838.2023.00005. [17] R. Ivanic, Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in AcademicWriting, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1998. [18] L. Adler-Kassner and E. Wardle, Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts in WritingStudies, Boulder, Colorado, United States: The Univ. Press of Colorado, 2016. [19] M. Paretti, and L. D. McNair, “Introduction to the Special Issue on Communication inEngineering Curricula: Mapping the Landscape,” IEEE Transactions on ProfessionalCommunication, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 238-241
constraint sources fromthe CSM are provided below in Figure 2; these examples are significant as they collectivelyunderscore how the parameters of an ABET-listed example Criterion 3(c) constraint,environmental, can change depending upon a stakeholder’s point of view. Environmental-Technical Constraints: Environmental-Societal Constraints: A technically-derived environmental constraint Societally-derived environmental constraints occurs when the environment might have a occur when the product must be designed to potentially negative impact on the product, avoid a potentially negative impact on the thereby affecting the design of the product. environment. Examples
these courses aremissing opportunities for educating students on post-tensioned (PT) concrete design [1,2] herein this paper,the topic will be simply called PT. Adding to this, many educators of design courses must decide on howto teach their current courses (both topically and pedagogically). Decisions made encompass what topics toinclude [3], the amount of theory/fundamental/practical content [4,5], balancing design codes [6], contentdelivery strategies [7], assessment methods [8], and lastly, case studies [9]. A balance between theory andpractice within engineering has always existed [10, 11]. Engineering educators remain challenged bypractical teaching approach barriers not easily addressable due to the need to condense large-scale open
. The five main goals in this collaborative infrastructure wereestablishing (1) a management structure, (2) one primary high school partner, (3) two academictransfer agreements, (4) an Industrial Advisory Board of three members, and (5) seven additionalhigh school partners to scale future implementation.Three of these goals were fully accomplished within the planned timeline, and the two otherswere partially accomplished. This paper discusses detailed achievements in each area along withthe project’s external evaluation results and the project leadership team’s lessons learned. Thepartnership infrastructure that has been built will be used to build the skilled technical workforcein North Louisiana through increasing high school students
of a physicist, mathematician, engineer, educator,musician, and science teacher. The context for the math, science, and technical writing was thedesign and building of musical instruments. Students used the engineering process to design,construct, and demonstrate instruments. Additionally, a music school faculty and music librarianarranged weekly integrated sessions demonstrating the history, culture, physical features, andmusical character of a wide variety of instruments played by local professionals and graduatestudents. The course was assessed with respect to changes in technological literacy, problemsolving ability, and creative thinking and as a result of the project. The goal was to integrate thephysics, mathematics, and technical
and data products developed by Fujitsu. Along with Yau Chow Ching, Rodney conceived (and wrote the standards for), the SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) architecture, which served as the base for today’s North American telephone network. Rodney was Chairman of the T1X1 Technical Sub- Committee (the organization responsible for SONET standardization) from 1990 through 1994. He has been active in SONET’s National and International Standardization since 1985. In addition, Rodney has published numerous papers and presentations on SONET. Rodney began his career with Fujitsu Network Communications in 1989 as the Director of Strategic Plan- ning. He also held the positions of Director of Transport Product Planning, Vice
applicable My academic advisor Student Affairs or Services Faculty Members /Teaching Assistants Club / Extracurricular Advisors Peers / Friends Family Members Boss / Work Supervisor Religious Leader Other (specify): _________PART 3: Transferring to our university16. Please indicate whether or not you did these things at your 2-Year College prior to transferringto our university? Statement Yes No I talked with an academic advisor/counselor at my 2-Year College about courses I needed to transfer to our university. I got information about financial aid available at our university from my 2-Year College. I participated in Transfer Information session presented by our
to study and accommodate locale-specific interests of broadstakeholders (i.e., faculty, staff, administrators, and undergraduate and graduate students). InYear 2 (Ideation), we continued multimethodological analyses and focused on face-to-face co-design sessions with stakeholders to develop prototypical solutions to DEI concerns in ECE andBME. In Year 3 (Implementation), we encouraged prototypes to test or implement designs. Someof these prototypes have now been institutionalized in schools and undergo periodic assessment.FacilitationWe draw upon scholarship describing what facilitators do, or how facilitation is accomplished, invarious groups. The few studies that can be reviewed for these findings focus on different aspectsof the
oftenrequiring interdisciplinary teamwork. Students need to negotiate a range of viewpoints, including avariety of specialties, and balance their unique contributions to form a coherent whole. Teamworkis a necessary skill for engineers with its significance recognized by ABET (Accreditation Boardfor Engineering and Technology): Criterion 3, Student Outcome 5 - “Students should be able tofunction effectively as members of a technical team, and as leaders on technical teams”.Teamwork is often the key to solving the complex problems engineers face. One goal of higher education is to prepare students for their professional lives. Teamworkis imperative to solve “real-world” problems [3]. Teamwork is a highly important skill forengineers to have
curriculum of modern engineering undergraduateprograms [1]. As industry progresses, so does engineering curricula. As new and improvedmanufacturing processes are being introduced, there becomes a growing need for a solidfoundation in CAD among undergraduate students [2]. Recent advancements, such as theimplementation of artificial intelligence in CAD for automated decision-making [3], couldreinforce the need for a stronger foundation in basic CAD skills before leveraging these newtechnologies. For example, these new tools have been adapted to support efforts on generativemodeling tools [4] during the engineering design process.There are a wide variety of manufacturing processes available to an engineer, each with theirown inherent limitations and
[3], is intended for the institutions to demonstrate that thegraduates are qualified. This evaluation body, either jointly with other societies, such as theSociety for Modeling and Simulation International, or individually, may address theassessment process for an M&S degree in electrical engineering.Engineering programs must demonstrate that their students attain the following: a) An ability to apply mathematics, science, engineering, and computing principles. b) An ability to design and conduct experiments, and to analyze and interpret data. c) An ability to design a system, component, or process model to meet needs within realistic constraints, such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
Provost for Research and several WISE@OU faculty (who had served as former URCchairs) provided advice and tips on crafting a successful proposal. In contrast to external fundingapplications written for experts in a discipline, these internal proposals needed to be prepared sothat committee members from throughout the institution could understand them and appreciatetheir importance. Using technical jargon and cutting-and-pasting from existing NIH or NSFproposals were poor strategies for winning these awards. Yet developing the ability to clearlyexplain the motivation, goals and importance of one’s research is an important skill to have.Anyone who has served on an NSF review panel knows how important the first few pages ofnarrative of a proposal
questions that were specifically designed to measure the understand- ing of non-majors (i.e., questions that students within the discipline would be expected to know prior to the course, but that students outside the discipline would not be expected to know prior to the course). 3. Mid-Point Questionnaire • Approximately halfway through the course the students were given a non-technical questionnaire with bulleted ques- tions and essay questions regarding their opinions regarding the course’s cross-disciplinary effectiveness. 4. Discipline-Specific Discussion Sessions • About two-thirds of the way through the course, informal sessions with the assessor were scheduled, in which stu- dents in each of the CS
and extrinsic motivation, beliefs about 7-pt, 1-7 4/5 importance Affect Behaviors and internal reactions to those 7-pt, 1-7 4/7 behaviors Negative Extrinsic Believe sustainability considerations not 7-pt, 1-7 2/3 Value important Confidence Self-efficacy; confident in own ability 11-pt, 0-100 10 Overall Average Average of 4 sub-areas above 7-pt, 1-7 Interdisciplinary Value Belief in importance of
by a half-month preparation period for the final project and poster session. Anoverview of the module taught in this summer QISE laboratory course could be found in table 1.All students attended the course in person at the Blacksburg campus. 12 Modules Lab 1: Quantum Nature of Light and Photon Detection Lab 2: Quantum Interference Part One: The Wave Nature of Photons Lab 3: Quantum Interference Part Two: A Quantum Eraser Lab 4: Weak Coherent Pulses for Quantum Communication
, CMMI Program 20052008 Review Committee of Visitors in 2009, member of TRB Committee on Basic Research and Emerging Technologies on Concrete and ASCE committee on Performance Based Design.John Stephen Polasek, P.E., Western Michigan University John S. Polasek P.E. retired from the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) after over 38 years of service in 2009. John received his B.S. degree in Civil Engineering from MSU in 1972 and was hired at MDOT. Over the years, he has worked in the Design Division, as a Staff Engineer for the Local Government Division, as the Kalamazoo District Design Engineer and Project Development Engineer, as well as Region System Manager. In June 2003, John was appointed Director of the
) introduce the website interface/functionality/moduledesign and what optimization (or testing) techniques did the team use in 2 minutes; 3) brieflydemonstrate the workflow of the website in 1.5 minutes. Each team has a Q&A section wherethey can answer questions from other students and assessors.We invited three evaluators to grade students’ projects, including two females and one male. Theevaluators have had at least 3 years of experience working as full stack/back-end web developers.They were asked to grade the students’ presentations from five aspects: 1) the novelty of the idea;2) the technical depth; 3) the website’s design; 4) the presentation; and 5) the Q&A session. Thefinal grade for each team was 25 points, which was evenly divided