Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2002, American Society for Engineering Education”1. Icesi UniversityIcesi University was founded 22 years ago as a private small business school. It offered initiallyan undergraduate program in Business Administration. Five years after that the undergraduateprogram in Computer Engineering began to be offered. Also, the school was offering anassortment of graduate programs in Business-related subjects.These two undergraduate programs had separate Operations Research classes, but in 1996 and asa result of a review in their curricula, it was decided that they would take the same class in mixedclassrooms.The school then decided to broaden its academic programs
a small sample of student data to illustrate somepreliminary findings. Figure 3 depicts an example flow for one of our experimental studies, inwhich the impact of each factor on ideation is investigated separately – i.e., cognitive style,problem framing, teaming, and design heuristics, respectively. In other studies, we varied thesequence of interventions and explored the impact of only one factor in addition to naturalideation preferences. As discussed in more detail below, each intervention is followed by areflection survey, in which participants self-assess their ideation outcomes and behavior. Figure 3: Example flow from one of our studies• Cognitive Style Inventory: KAI inventories (www.kaicenter.com) were
introducedinto the large required first-year engineering course at Purdue University in 2002.7 Ten yearslater, with National Science Foundation support, MEAs have reached relative stability in termsof their design, implementation, and assessment in first-year engineering. This was achievedthrough a design research perspective8-14 that guided the development of increasingly betterapproaches to using MEAs. MEAs are now receiving some recognition as examples of effectiveengineering learning experiences.15This paper builds on a series of research studies previously conducted by the authors tocharacterize students’ mathematical modeling practices and investigate students’ experienceswith model-eliciting activities. Of particular interest to this paper is the
Volunteer and high school teacher in Linares and Talca, Chile, and has lived in more than 20 countries including Chile, Peru, Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Argentina, Mexico, South Asia, Europe, and Sub-Saharan Africa. Over his extensive career, he has visited more than 125 countries and is fluent in four languages and conversant in an addi- tional five languages. Hoyer has led several international development programs, including CARE, Plan International, and Heifer International. In these latter roles, he held executive leadership positions such as Senior Vice-President/Chief Operating Officer and Regional Executive and was responsible, among oth- ers, for raising large financial resources from a multitude of donors
Paper ID #38749Transforming Engineering Economy into a Two-Credit CourseDr. Kate D. Abel, Stevens Institute of Technology (School of Engineering and Science) Kate Abel is the Director of the Undergraduate Engineering Management (EM) and the Industrial and Systems Engineering (ISE) Programs at the School of Systems and Enterprises. She holds a Ph.D. in Technology Management and Applied Psychology. She is a Fellow in ASEM. She has held several pro- fessional service positions including President (2006) and Program Chair (2005) of the Engineering Man- agement Division of the American Society for Engineering Education and
Station. She completed her Bachelors in Electrical Engineering with a Minor in Mathematics from Mississippi State University.Samantha Ray, Texas A&M University Samantha Ray is a Computer Engineering PhD student at Texas A&M University. Her research focuses on creating intelligent systems for tasks that require human-like levels of understanding. She has previously worked on human activity recognition (HAR) systems for promoting healthy habits and educational tools using sketch recognition and eye tracking.Dr. Kelly Brumbelow, Texas A&M University Dr. Kelly Brumbelow is an Associate Professor and the Assistant Department Head for Undergraduate Programs in the Zachry Department of Civil Engineering at Texas A
individual competences should be taken into account, especially when managing large groups of students. In experiences 1 and 2, the assessment method was not redesigned since they were limited to a specific matter inside the subject, meanwhile the students were graded following the same criteria as the rest. In the specific case of experience number 3, a rubric had to be elaborated, combining and individual test with the every-day competences assessing of all students. In a more precise explanation, the assessed aspects were: • Performance of individual reports • Skills acquired while elaborating projects • Involvement degree of each student inside his group from the records performed by each group’s members
with these young researchers. In theseconditions, the new ET educators face the pressure of expectations for scholarly publications fromtheir institutions, at the same time that they have to balance a heavy teaching load, limitedinfrastructure and resources. This leads to a perception of non-competitiveness at the time ofsecuring external funding to develop work of quality and its publication in recognized journals andother periodicals.Publishing considerationsA large majority of faculty members teaching in Engineering Technology programs or Engineeringprograms in non-research universities share a strong teaching dedication, years of teachingexperience and more importantly, a very strong interest in undergraduate education as this is
understand the reason for the large number of ineffective teachersat the college level. However, it only takes a relatively small amount of focused effort in anexceptional program like ETW to lay the necessary foundation to become an effective teacher, aspresented in Figures 10 and 11. Even though the workshop does not have to necessary lookexactly like ETW, the workshop must present the principles of effective teaching (i.e.,presentation skills and class organization), demonstrate effective teaching styles and techniques,and require the participants to practice their skills under a mentor’s gaze and assessment.These concepts for successful teaching in our basic mechanics courses (and all others as well)were presented as a synopsis of the key
designing the curriculum and teaching in the freshman engineering program and the mechanical engineering program. She is also the Co-Director of the Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) at ASU. In this role, she focuses on student support and tracking, curriculum, program requirements, as well as programming for current students in GCSP. Dr. Zhu was also involved in the ASU ProMod project, the Engineering Projects in Community Service program, the Engineering Futures program, the Global Freshman Academy/Earned Admission Program, and the ASU Kern Project. She was a part of the team that designed a largely team and activity based online Introduction to Engineering course. She has also co-developed two unique MOOCs
education, essential to materialsselection. However, by some, materials science education has been described as outdated and oneof the overlooked fields in engineering educational development [1] – highlighting the need forreform. Many materials science programs rely on traditional lecturing strategies to teach thesefundamentals, which are effective for efficiently conveying knowledge to large classrooms butlead to limited opportunities to actively engage learners and provide memorable learningexperiences.Recently within the pedagogical field, transformative means of reforming traditional teachingstyles, such as active and experiential learning approaches, have widely been explored and adoptedto improve learner experience [2]–[8]. Where traditional
-long learning, is to view them and treat them as novices in the profession.[2] He also found thatthere is also a large body of research that indicates that students can achieve more when they are Page 11.319.3working and learning cooperatively.[3-12] Weak students working individually are likely to give up when they get stuck; working cooperatively, they keep going. Strong students faced with the task of explaining and clarifying material to weaker students often find gaps in their own understanding and fill them in. Students working alone may tend to delay completing assignments or skip them
are unrelated to pastacademic achievement and ability, but are instead cultural, social, and psychological impediments thatresult from students’ experiences within STEM programs and society at large (see Godwin et al., 2016 &Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2018). The construct of Identity has become one of the most useful tools forunderstanding and assessing the experiences of students from underrepresented groups withinundergraduate and graduate STEM programs. Indeed, a strong STEM identity has been shown to bepowerfully related to a students’ interest in STEM fields, beliefs about their own capabilities withinSTEM (i.e., self-efficacy), and motivation to persist to graduation (Collins, 2018). However, research hasalso shown that incompatibility
engineering andscience degrees awarded [2]. The Path to Graduation (PTG) program at the University of Arkansasin Fayetteville (UA) aims to increase the number of low-income students, including students fromrural regions of Arkansas, who graduate with a STEM degree. These students have been recruitedfrom the Arkansas Delta and other rural, impoverished areas of the state where opportunities tostudy STEM are extremely limited. The targeted students are also those which do not normallyqualify for large UA scholarships due to their modest ACT/SAT scores (ACT 23-27 or SAT 1130-1300). The program has adapted previously implemented, evidence-based academic, financial, andsocial support initiatives to help these students thrive and succeed in their UA STEM
of society at large but also “inward looking” that seeks guidance on the ideas,precepts, and principles on how to engage and empower students as next-generation geospatialprofessionals to effectively tackle difficult and seemingly intractable societal issues within thepurview of their professional practice. Section 2 gives a brief overview of the GTCM and itsapplication in traditional curriculum development for geospatial engineering, science andtechnology programs. The overview offers a simplified perspective in terms of the competenciesneeded at the various skill employment levels within the geospatial industry. Section 3 describesa framework for teaching and learning the GTCM that integrates soft skill development withadaptability to
Paper ID #13379Major Changes and Attrition: An Information Theoretic and Statistical Ex-amination of Cohort Features Stratified on Major SwitchesDr. George D. Ricco, Purdue University, West Lafayette George D. Ricco is the KEEN Program Coordinator at Gonzaga University in the School of Engineer- ing and Applied Science. He completed his doctorate in engineering education from Purdue University’s School of Engineering Education. Previously, he received a M.S. in earth and planetary sciences studying geospatial imaging and a M.S. in physics studying high-pressure, high-temperature FT-IR spectroscopy in heavy water, both
and the mechanical engi- neering program. She is also the Co-Director of the Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) at ASU. In this role, she focuses on student support and tracking, curriculum, program requirements, as well as programming for current students in GCSP. Dr. Zhu was also involved in the ASU ProMod project, the Engineering Projects in Community Service program, the Engineering Futures program, the Global Fresh- man Academy/Earned Admission/Universal Learner Courses Program, and the ASU Kern Project. She was a part of the team that designed a largely team and activity based online Introduction to Engineering course. She has also co-developed two unique MOOCs, Introduction to Engineering and
trailer/office for the judges. Thespace is easily large enough that we can set up 2 inflatable swimming pools for simple in-watertesting. Because the work tents, judges, and amenities are all on the open, level area around thearena, interactions between teams (and between team members and the judges, press, andaudience) arise naturally. It is quite common for teams to loan each other test equipment, tools,and parts, as well as sharing war stories and suggestions for solving technical problems. Thesponsors have stated in very clear terms that this atmosphere of collegial competition is critical Page 22.440.4to the success of the program, and they
MATLAB-based instruction into an electromagnetics course,receiving positive feedback despite initial challenges due to students’ limited MATLABexperience . The assessment was constrained to qualitative feedback and improvements in theElectromagnetics Concept Inventory, as program changes at Colorado State University (CSU)restricted a quantitative evaluation of the impact on student grades. Koll¨offel and Jong focused onthe impact of virtual lab inquiry learning in electrical circuit education, noting improvements instudents’ conceptual understanding and procedural skills, although their study faced questionsabout ecological validity [7]. Lastly, Dong and Guo studied the effects of collaborativeproject-based and inquiry-based learning in
high strength with toughness, it isdesirable to mimic nature in construction of large and small structures. Due to the finedetails of the layered microstructure of nacre, it is almost impossible to mimic it with theconventional fabrication methods. The nano/micro-scale thickness of the hard and softlayers that comprise the hard shell of nacre requires innovative automated in-situfabrication processes that span various fields including materials science, robotics,construction and metrology. This paper describes the details of instrumentation forrobotic construction using RV-M1 robots. It also presents some preliminary results on thefabrication of biomimicked materials. For the robotic part, vision enabled robots wereequipped with dispensers to
Paper ID #21967Field Investigations: An Overlooked Form of Laboratory ExperienceProf. David F. Radcliffe, Swinburne University of Technology Dr. Radcliffe’s research focuses on the nature of engineering; engineering habits of mind, how engineering knowledge is created and shared and how it is learned especially outside the classroom. Over the past 30 years, he has conducted field research on the practice of engineering design, new product development and innovation in variety of industries, in large and small firms with an emphasis on design thinking, most recently in relation to sustainability. He also studies
Because of State Funding Cuts √ √ 2 E 35. Small Teaching Schools versus Large Research Schools. √ √ √ √ √ 5 A 36. Provide Continuing Ed Credits √ 1 A 37. Increase Faculty Rewards √ √ √ 3 A 38. Develop Outreach Programs √ 1 B 39. Provide Early Mentoring √ √ √ 3 A 40. Change Culture at Conferences √ 1 A 41. Teach
. Dinse 1 and Vahid Motevalli 2,3 Penn State HarrisburgAbstractAt Penn State Harrisburg, veterans and military personnel constitute between 3-6% of studentenrollment. About 26% of these students are enrolled in engineering majors and another 8% areenrolled in other STEM fields. To serve this population with intentionality and purpose, as wellas enhance student success, we find it essential to explore the social and academic gaps for ourstudents, and what types of programming could best address those needs. Past and currentsurveys of this student body have proven to be effective due to a higher than usual response rate.Questions assessed a range of topics, including recruitment pathways, experiences with a
-service teacher program. The MSP is apartnership between The University of Texas at Austin's School of Engineering, Collegeof Education, and UTeach Natural Sciences program and the Austin Independent SchoolDistrict. These partners are collaborating to develop and deliver an innovative design-based curriculum for preparing secondary teachers of engineering.The participants in this study were high school teachers in the first cohort of the UTeachEngineering Summer Institutes for Teachers (ESIT) program. The 23 participants had anaverage of six years classroom experience teaching mathematics or science. While someof the teachers were also teaching engineering or engineering-related courses, most werepreparing for their first experience in an
, as well as facilitate access to the data files. At the same time the shared officespace – two small offices with four desks for about six students will make each student meet theothers and observe their work. The programming experience shared by the students in thisfashion is essential to the progression of the students as productive researchers.Students do not just report to their project supervisor, but interact with all researchers. At leastevery other week the collaborators and the students meets and discuss progress, new challenges,changes, upcoming student presentations, changes in personnel, the direction of the work etc.Students are recognized as researchers and treated similarly to faculty or staff members, which inturn helps them
assess thebuilding’s energy use and load profile/patterns. Schools are very different from residentialhomes in that they are primarily used during the day. They also tend to have peak loads thatcoincide with daytime hours when solar energy production is at its maximum. However, schoolscan vary considerably. For example, universities, colleges, and high schools typically havemuch higher nighttime energy consumption than elementary schools. This is especially true fortechnical and community colleges that tend to offer a large number of night classes for workingadult students. Seasonal differences in energy consumption should also be examined. Collegesand universities that offer summer terms may see fairly high energy consumption during thistime of
on things that had gone wellin the course. Most often mentioned were the usefulness of the software they had used, the fieldtrips they had taken, and the Readiness Assessment Tests.Students also had an opportunity to suggest areas for improvement in the course. Typicalcomments dealt with the timing and quantity of assignments, and the desire for more field tripsand more time for hands-on instruction on using the software. Interestingly, several studentsrequested even more design practice, in the form of “mini designs” included in homework.This section of the questionnaire also provided a place for the professor to ask program-relatedquestions, such as reasons for taking the course, related courses taken, and the area ofengineering the
has beenoptimized such that it is large enough to provide specialization in separate and credibledepartments, yet small enough to permit the creation of a truly multidisciplinary curriculum inwhich laboratory/design courses are offered simultaneously to all engineering students in all fourdisciplines. Indeed, the hallmark of the engineering program at Rowan University is themultidisciplinary, project-oriented Engineering Clinic sequence.The Engineering ClinicThe Engineering Clinic is a course that is taken each semester by every engineering student atRowan University. In the Engineering Clinic, which is based on the medical school model,students and faculty from all four engineering departments work side-by-side on laboratoryexperiments
its course of study in January 2016). This program is derived from the SystemDesign and Management Program/Product Development Track at the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology (MIT), and was developed in parallel to similar programs at Rochester Institute ofTechnology (RIT), and the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) through the collaboration efforts ofPD21 - the Educational Coalition for Product Development Leadership in the 21st Century.PD21 engaged four educational institutions (MIT, RIT, NPS and UDM), plus six corporate andgovernment leaders (Ford, IBM, ITT, Polaroid, Xerox and the United States Navy) to develop aprogram aimed at future leaders of product development within large and small organizations.11 (University of Detroit Mercy
empowerstakeholders to develop a shared vision for change?” We find that the RED teams have pursueddifferent paths to engage their respective stakeholders, from building strategic partnerships withexternal stakeholders such as industrial advisory boards to initiating structural changes to shiftinternal culture in their institutions. We envision that these results will 1) demonstrate practicesfor initiating change in engineering and computer science departments, and 2) help otherorganizations understand how different types of stakeholder engagement can propel or deceleratea large-scale change project.IntroductionWithin the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education community,there are repeated calls for changing the way we educate our