several iterations, the advisor approves their proposal. The faculty adviserwill meet with each student individually on a weekly basis at a regularly scheduled, mutuallyagreeable time. These meetings are considered mandatory for the students. Occasional conflictsare inevitable, but the students need to understand that a portion of their grade for participation isbased on attendance at the weekly meetings. At each meeting, issues associated with the projectwill be discussed and a status report will be provided by the student to the advisor. Students willkeep a daily journal/work log detailing the work that was done, how much time was spent thatday, and any technical details that might be needed for later reference. The faculty advisor keepsnotes
issues and proposedattributes for successful engineers of 2020, these attributes and issues may almost alwaysbe couched within the following pedagogical concerns: There is a need to construct engineering curriculum so as to serve more diverse learners. There is a need to help students develop better complex thinking skills. There is a need to provide learning environments that more actively engage students on multi-disciplinary team projects. There is a need to create an opportunity for value added curriculum, particularly in the areas business, management, and leadership skills.To do this is going to require more active and engaged pedagogies that usually providesome opportunity for experiential
of institution to a level not known before because of the coursetransfer issues. Over time this allows for a particularly strong sense of trust to be developedamong collaboratives, as expanded upon below. Curriculum formulation in support ofengineering education, to an ABET approved level, necessitates faculty professionaldevelopment for science, mathematics and technology instructors as well as the “rare”engineering instructor on staff at the TCU. These levels of interaction eventually strengthensindividual collaborations between academics in the program, which heightens concern for thestudents on either side of the transition process. Additional benefits also accrue to the TCUs byavoiding the most costly segment of engineering education
website. We employ this innovative framework to educate the CEA conceptsto high school students and new entrepreneurs through gamified and interactive onlinelearning modules, addressing the limitations of traditional teaching methods.The objective of this research is to establish CEA as a sustainable food production systemcapable of efficiently producing nutritious foods within a low-carbon economy. For thispurpose, students can explore fundamental modules in water quality assessment, insect pestmanagement, pH level evaluation, precipitation-related issues, and nutrient imbalancesthrough this platform, ensuring effective learning.The platform consists of four primary panels: an administrative panel, an educator panel, astudent panel, and a
Stages of group development A typical course at the sophomore level would utilize teams as a way to get students workingon more complex problems that develop a broad understanding of the new material. Thus a designproject with greater complexity could be divided into pieces that are each done by an individual butalso coordinated by the team. A research project could cover a much greater range of issues. Ingeneral, these projects would be specified by the instructor, have a range of possible problems andsolutions, and be solvable by high functioning teams. Page 3.390.9ASEE Paper #2632 Page 9, 04/06/98 For courses intended to meet ABET
and recycling trucks. The landfill project was givenmore class time in 2006 and 2007 at four and five weeks, respectively.The course typically includes 4 to 5 guest speakers each semester. Another professor lectured onsustainable energy in 2007 and 2008. In addition, two of the four professional guest speakers in2008 interfaced with the energy sector in a significant way. In 2006 a three week case study ofsustainable and appropriate technology to achieve wastewater treatment for a native Americancommunity included energy issues.10 The changes in course content over time have been largelydriven by stated student interest areas, job opportunities in these areas, EVEN faculty research onthese topics, and a desire to highlight areas of interest
otherfactors that may increase self-efficacy and ultimately resiliency of the students in this programand beyond.IntroductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, engineering students faced significant academic challenges asuniversities transitioned quickly to remote learning. The abrupt shift disrupted hands-on labs,group projects, and practical experiences important to an engineering education and manyengineering courses [1, 2]. With the loss of access to physical lab spaces, equipment, and campusfacilities, instructors sought creative solutions for achieving course goals and ABET learningoutcomes remotely. Faculty and students had to learn to adapt to these new learning modes,tools, and technology quickly, which was challenging since few instructors or
classroom, we describe asurvey that focuses on web site and presentation applications. The sample set includes two classes: aJunior-level required course, and a Senior-level elective course. Finally, we finish the paper withconclusions and recommendations for further study.BackgroundFew will argue that the personal computer (PC) and world-wide-web (Internet) have ushered in a newtechnology revolution with significant impact to everything from our global economy to how we lead oureveryday lives. As a result, the Engineering Educator now faces a host of new opportunities including: • Increasing enrollments, • Shifting demographics, • Overburdened faculty and staff, • Rising student expectations, and • Increased
, including learning and developing beyond their initial comfortzone, outweighed the concerns that the participants had about the program. In the interviews,they definitively stated that they were glad they participated in the program, it will positivelyimpact their teaching in the future, and they would recommend the program to future preserviceteachers. However, there is room for improvement for next year’s cohort. 5. Lesson Learned For some of the faculty mentors, this was their first experience of mentoring high schoolteachers through the RE-PST program. There are many lessons learned from the first cohort ofthe PSTs. The PSTs also provided their comments on improvement through an anonymoussurvey and interview. The lessons are classified
learning and developing beyond their initial comfortzone, outweighed the concerns that the participants had about the program. In the interviews,they definitively stated that they were glad they participated in the program, it will positivelyimpact their teaching in the future, and they would recommend the program to future preserviceteachers. However, there is room for improvement for next year’s cohort. 5. Lesson Learned In summer 2023, for some of the faculty mentors, this was their first experience ofmentoring high school teachers through the RE-PST program. In summer 2024, taking thelessons learned from the cohort, our mentors adjusted the strategy and level of knowledge andresearch skills to better accommodate the PSTs. The PSTs also
Associate Vice Provost for Digital Learning at UT San Antonio, where he established the Office of Digital Learning that created a unit focused on innovative delivery across the entire spectrum of technology enabled learning - from in-class to online. Over his career, he has helped a few hundred faculty from varied disciplines develop hybrid and online courses. He has also taught traditional, hybrid and online courses in various STEM disciplines ranging in size from 28 to 250. He is also co-developer of a Digital Academy which was a finalist for the Innovation Award by the Professional and Organizational Development Network and an Innovation Award winner. He was also named as the Center for Digital Education’s Top 30
online learning. Academics also speculate that there could be asignificant increase in the amount of research done to address the issues currently affectingonline education.Course development can be significantly enhanced when implementing online education. This isbecause collaborative efforts can be made between subject matter experts in certain areas to de-sign related courses. As a result, the courses being offered can be developed jointly, thus givingthe students different perspectives on the subject matter. A similar approach can also be taken toteaching online courses. Courses could be taught by subject matter experts remotely and hencethe students could have access to a much more qualified pool of faculty, thus resulting in a muchbetter
.Educational ContextThis initiative seeks to make a positive impact on K-12 education in the context of growingnational concerns about the ability of U.S. schools to successfully prepare students for theworkplace and higher education. Issues that have received the most intense national attention arethe unacceptably low high school graduation rates, the poor preparation of entering collegefreshman, and the inability of our schools and colleges to meet the growing demand forgraduates who will help the U.S. retain its global lead in science and technology.Nationally, only about 68% of all students who enter 9th grade will graduate “on time” withregular diplomas in 12th grade. While the graduation rate for white students is 75%, onlyapproximately half of
allows projects in EPICS toaddress complex and compelling needs in the local or global community. EPICS teams, or course sections, each consist of 8-25 students and are student led witha faculty or industry instructor, which we call an advisor. Graduate student teaching assistantssupport the advisors and each one supports 3-4 sections providing a mechanism for consistencyacross teams. Each team or course section comprises multiple sub-teams, each one of whichsupports a single design project. Once a project is delivered, a new project is then identified bystudents under the guidance of their faculty mentor(s) and community partner(s). Exampleprojects include designing assistive technology for people with disabilities, developing
development, promoting traditional exchange programsas well as a model of trade focused between neighboring countries for mutual benefit.Study Abroad programs emulate the successful model employed at many liberal arts institutionswith an engineering twist that adds design or internship/coop experience. The inclusion oflanguage and cultural study is important, but the constraints of engineering curricula often limitthe extent of language and cultural study that can be achieved. Many of these programs do notemphasize an understanding of globalization as an economic, political, or cultural phenomenon.Rather most seem concerned primarily with preparing students for careers in transnationalbusiness, which requires some knowledge of other cultures and
theme which stood out in the data: the role ofinformal mentoring by research supervisors in retaining undergraduate students in engineering.In this paper we describe what informal mentoring looks like in the context of engineeringresearch experiences and how it has contributed to students‘ persistence in engineering. We alsoexplore how informal mentoring may be particularly beneficial for URM students. We proposethat incorporating more informal types of mentoring into the research mentor-menteerelationship is one effective way for faculty to facilitate the retention of URM undergraduatestudents in engineering.Introduction“My mentor believed in me when I didn't believe in myself. My mentor was great for motivationand perseverance. Because of my
the table where the team sat,and I situated the tripod with my video camera at an angle so that the entire group was visible. Itook notes from the back of the room on how the team was interacting during their discussion,but I found it difficult to hear their conversation from so far away.The first team meeting had taken place in a warehouse-like space that was not conducive forclear audio recording. After communicating this concern with the faculty mentor for the project,he arranged for the team to have the remainder of their weekly meetings in a conference room.The new meeting space provided better audio and video quality and made it easier for me to hearthe student’s conversations during meetings (Process Reliability). I gave careful
support services to increase the retention of first-year engineeringstudents 7, 9. In addition, particular high attrition rate of underrepresented groups in engineering,e.g., female and minorities demand the exploration of alternative support options in transition 10,11 . In the transition process of their first year at college of engineering, new engineering studentsare influenced by academic performance (GPA), social interactions with peers and faculties aswell as family, support programs, pre-college characteristics, innate personalities, and perceptiontoward engineering. 7, 10-15.The purpose of this study is to identify and understand the effects of support programs toacademic performance and retention in the first year. The study also
ASU. She is also the Co-Editor of The Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Her teaching responsibilities include science curricula, teaching and learning, and assessment courses with an emphasis on constructivist theory and issues of equity. Her research focuses on issues of gender, science, and science teaching. She has won two awards for her research in these areas.Sharon Kurpius-Robinson, Arizona State University Sharon E. Robinson Kurpius is a professor of Counseling Psychology. She completed her doctorate in Counseling and in Educational Inquiry Methodology from Indiana University in 1978, at which time she accepted a faculty position at Arizona State University. She has received
for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering EducationEach EPICS project involves a team of eight to twenty undergraduates, a not-for-profitcommunity partner – for example, a community service agency, museum or school, orgovernment agency and a faculty or industry advisor. A pool of graduate teaching assistantsfrom seven departments provides technical guidance and administrative assistance.Each EPICS team is vertically integrated, consisting of a mix of freshmen, sophomores, juniors,and senior and is constituted for several years, from initial project definition through finaldeployment. Once the initial project(s) is completed and deployed, new projects
using an FPGA, this is typically not as much of a concern. h) Part quantities To ensure there will be enough PCBs and parts for the course, double the number of com-ponents needed per student. Students new to soldering and PCB assembly frequently dam-age components. The instructor should consider purchasing additional components, especiallysmaller surface mount components. These components tend to be misplaced quickly. The LEDsalso tend to be placed backwards or be overheated while soldering. i) Assembly time While an experienced technician or engineer could completely assemble the OwlBoardin less than 15 minutes, it took students 3-12 hours to complete the board. Ideally, studentsshould complete the board within a three hour lab period
example, women report higher levels of dissatisfaction from workingon teams compared to men [19-20]. While team-based learning encourages students to work withand learn from their peers, it may also result in an environment which pressures students in anunfamiliar environment or encourages pre-existing inequities to grow.Another major concern from students regarding team-based learning is the idea that team-basedlearning brings about unfair grading experiences. Specifically, two major concerns arecommonly expressed among students: the first concern is that instructors are assigning grades tothe team without consideration of the individual contributions of students towards the teamdeliverable, resulting in an unfair allocation of grades, and
timeline. During the course of the project student'steam meet with their faculty advisor weekly to discuss the progress report. The weekly formalmemo is required the day prior to each weekly meeting and addresses the following three areas:current progress, problems encountered and their resolution, and plan for the following week.To stay on the top of industry requirements sponsoring the project and to receive valuableengineering feedback students conduct by-weekly web conference calls with industry liaison.The oral and written reports due near the end of each semester are to concern themselves withthe progress made in each semester. The one at the end of the first semester will be a progressreport, with a full final report due at the end of the
Paper ID #12504Studying the fidelity of implementation of an intrinsic motivation course con-versionDr. Geoffrey L Herman, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dr. Geoffrey L. Herman is a visiting assistant professor with the Illinois Foundry for Innovation in En- gineering Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a research assistant professor with the Department of Curriculum & Instruction. He earned his Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer En- gineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign as a Mavis Future Faculty Fellow and conducted postdoctoral research with Ruth Streveler in
is a natural progression from previous attempts at solving this problem11–13.The Current ProblemDeveloping a successful educational program to train those interested in developing the cyber-security skill set is difficult. Most institutions interested in these programs must deal with limitedresources when designing an appropriate learning environment, limited teacher time to devote tomaintaining systems, limited administrative support due to misunderstanding of these skills, andaccidental (or deliberate) misuse of tools and skills. All of these issues can hinder or halt agrowing cyber-security program. These problems often lead to a program focused on theory withtoo little attention given to development of practical skills necessary for
this class and other activities ofthe M&E/WPI program, and J. Walsh for serving as Teaching Assistant for the course.9. References1. Bourham, M.A., and D.J. Dudziak, “Undergraduate research as an enhanced educational tool and transition mechanism for post-graduate studies”, Proceedings of the 1997 ASEE Annual Conference, Milwaukee, WI, Jun 15-18, 1997.2. Hillesheim, G., “Distance learning: barriers and strategies for students and faculty” Internet and Higher Education v1 n1 1998 p 31-443. Luthy, R.G., D.A.Bella, J.R. Hunt, J.H.Johnson,Jr.,D.F.Lawler, C.R.O’Melia, F.G.Pohland, “Future concerns in environmental engineering graduate education”, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, Vol
. Homero’s goal is to develop engineering education practices that value the capital that traditionally marginalized students bring into the field and to train graduate students and faculty members with the tools to promote effec- tive and inclusive learning environments and mentorship practices. Homero aspires to change discourses around broadening participation in engineering and promoting action to change. Homero has been rec- ognized as a Diggs Teaching Scholar, a Graduate Academy for Teaching Excellence Fellow, a Global Perspectives Fellow, a Diversity Scholar, a Fulbright Scholar, a recipient of the NSF CAREER award, and was inducted into the Bouchet Honor Society. Homero serves as the American Society for
) event in Sommerset, New Jersey in June 2008 16. o Presentations at the ISPE event included (i) Surface Engineering for Medical Devices: Biocompatibility, Friction, Coating Issues, (ii) An Innovative Method for Tissue Scaffold Design, Manufacturing and Testing, (iii) Rapid Prototyping and Manufacturing in Medical (and Dental ) Applications, and (iv) Kinesiology: the Study of Movement.Since then, the group represented SME at INTERPHEX Canada, another ISPE event held inMontreal Quebec, and agreed to work with the Nanotechnology Tech Group within the SME’s Page
to those of their peers on campus11.They also address the needs of students with motion disability. Simulated experiments are moreaccessible to learners who often find it difficult or unsafe to use a real laboratory.An issue of major concern is the recruitment of female and minority students12. Being portable,recruiting professors will be able to take the VL with them when going on recruiting trips.Steps in the Development of Virtual LaboratoryThe virtual laboratory development is composed of several phases as described in Figure 1. Theseare: I. Development of lab modules II. Instructor training III. Dissemination IV. AssessmentThese tasks are interrelated and feedback was used regularly to improve the lab
, workshops for each lesson and many otherlearning resources are available at the following internet site; http://pc-education.mcmaster.ca/default.htm, which has been open for fifteen years and has been recentlyupdated to include this new teaching material. The e-Lessons can be reached by selecting“Process Control Learning Support” in the menu bar at the top of the home page. e-Lessons areavailable for many of the textbook chapters. This site is open 24/7 and is available to all studentsand faculty without charge or password protection. This paper begins with an explanation of the goals of the study. Both the teaching andlearning goals and the technology goals are addressed; by technology goals, we mean the costand technical complexity of the