College of Engineering Pune (COEP) as the founder head of the innovation Center. Dr Waychal earned his Ph D in the area of developing Innovation Competencies in Information System Organizations from IIT Bombay and M Tech in Control Engineering from IIT Delhi. He has presented keynote / invited talks in many high prole international conferences and has published papers in peer- reviewed journals. He / his teams have won awards in Engineering Education, Innovation, Six Sigma, and Knowledge Management at international events. His current research interests are engineering edu- cation, software engineering, and developing innovative entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs. He was chosen as one of the five outstanding
professor’s legal obligation toprovide accommodations.29 It is not a faculty member’s choice whether or not to provideaccommodations. It is also illegal to call a student out publicly in class and ask to speak to themafterward regarding their accommodations. Singling out students can inadvertently out them totheir classmates, which can lead to harmful comments.28It is important to note that the accommodations have been decided by qualified individuals atthe university who were provided with detailed medical information from a licensed medicalprovider that supported the student’s need for the accommodations.30 If an instructor believesthat an accommodation does not fit the class design, it is important to discuss this with thedisability office on
Paper ID #37025Teach an introductory computer engineering course withMultisim SPICE simulationWei-Jer Han Professor Wei-Jer (Peter) Han has taught sophomore courses at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University since 2017. Prior to Virginia Tech, he was a professor at DeVry University from 2002 to 2016. He is also an electrical engineer since 1995 by designing electrical/electronic equipment for emergency vehicles such as police cars, ambulances and fire trucks. He received his MS degree from Missouri University of Science and Technology. His main interests are in the areas of embedded systems, computer
White, R1 institution. To implement a rigorous and trustworthy researchstudy, mechanisms of trustworthiness were established [22]. Throughout the process, thougheach author had their own lead analysis, the authors worked together to analyze the data toidentify and define emergent themes, and co-construct interpretations and implications. The next two authors were faculty members in the College of Engineering at the sameinstitution and provided supervision in the evaluation and writing of the paper. The next twoauthors were the lead PIs for the Summer 2022 REU program. They were both professors in theChemical Engineering department at the institution. They helped to provide meaningful contextfor the REU program studied in this paper.Data
traditional organizations at the highest organizational levels; however, they oftenreplace the lower levels in the hierarchy with a network of teams. These networks allow for morefreedom and collective coordination [7]. Further, they encourage continuous learning, thedevelopment of expertise in problem solving within their domain, as well as collaborativeproblem solving [7]. This shows that effective support of collaborative learning is potentially amajor opportunity or requirement for agile organizations.Given that learning is constructive and context-driven, providing an environment to supportcollaborative learning for diverse learning-practitioners in a highly social organization is a majorchallenge. CoPs have emerged as viable means for various
engineering senior project sequence, and the ARC 401/405L Architecturalstudio class, students from Architecture, Civil, and Construction Engineering are introduced to aninterdisciplinary framework. The proposed project aimed at expanding the current effort of the CEDepartment at Cal Poly Pomona into offering interdisciplinary learning opportunities at theundergraduate level in an IPD project that fosters collaboration between students in the threetechnical areas. Through this project, 19 Architecture (A) students worked jointly with 12 CEstudents and 8 Construction Engineering Technology (CET) students on interdisciplinary designteams. The teams were assigned a problem statement to develop the design, and simulate theconstruction of an assigned case
(A) students worked jointly with 12 CEstudents and 8 Construction Engineering Technology (CET) students on interdisciplinary designteams. The teams were assigned a problem statement to develop the design, and simulate theconstruction of an assigned case study, specifically a museum building. The project was developedover three stages.Project Stage 1Architecture students led this first stage of the process, developing sixteen (16) architecturaldesigns within constraints set by Civil Engineers in terms of structural/geotechnical designefficiency, and by Construction students in terms of construction feasibility, time, and cost. At thecore of the Architectural class, there was the investigation of methods of repetition and variations,used as an
anemergency mission, see Appendix F. The sudden transition is effective in grabbing the student’sattention and immediately engaging them in an exercise that requires them to pick members ofan emergency field engineering team. A variety of scenarios has been used and typically followsa current natural disaster. Appendix F includes the current scenario and a sample of thecandidates for selection to the field engineering team. The candidate information is routinelyadjusted to ensure conflict in member selection and challenge the diversity issue in teamselection. The ensuing discussion is lively as each team defends their choices and variousdiversity issues are highlighted. The instructor promotes discussion by playing devil’s advocatein challenging the
student studying electrical engineering. Her research aims to investigate the many experiences of LGBTQ+ students at a Hispanic-Serving Institution in order to inform changes within CEC that contribute to students of marginalized identities feeling welcome, comfortable, and accurately represented.Andrew Green, Florida International University Andrew Green serves as the associate director of academic services for the Center for Diversity and Student Success in Engineering and Computing. In this capacity, he supports the center in all aspects of the college’s K-12 programs, pre-college STEM activities, and the student success initiatives. Andrew comes to the center after previously working with the Department of
educators and administrators. Therefore, weask the following research questions:RQ1: What is the internal consistency reliability of the measurement tests used to assesssophomore engineering experiences?RQ2: What is the underlying factor structure of the observed items for scales without sufficientevidence for psychometric properties (EFA)? To what extent do the observed items in well-validated scales accurately measure the theoretically conceptualized construct (CFA)?RQ3: To what extent do scores measuring sophomore experiences vary among differentdemographic groups of engineering students?2. BackgroundThe sophomore year in college often emerges as a period of pronounced dissatisfaction.According to a national report, approximately 25% of students
team member at the Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (ILead). Mike has an MA in Higher Education and a BASc in Engineering Science from the University of Toronto.Ms. Milan MaljkovicDr. Emily L. Moore, University of Toronto Dr. Emily Moore is the Director of the Troost Institute for Leadership Education in Engineering (Troost ILead) at the University of Toronto. Emily spent 20 years as a professional chemical engineer, first as an R&D engineer in a Fortune 500 company, and then leading innovation and technology development efforts in a major engineering firm. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 “Counting Past Two:” Engineers’ Leadership
serve as a springboard for demonstrating to Senior Engineering students the effectiveness and power of a welldefined Design Process Methodology to creatively solve even the most undefined engineeringproblem. It also served as a step by step working example of how the students were toproceed in solving their own design problem; a concurrent design effort to satisfy theAccreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) Capstone Design Projectrequirement. The paper proceeds from Problem Statement through a defined Design ProcessMethodology using contributions from a variety of familiar academic resources. The paper isthus intended to offer a single source (albeit: very brief) of information for Instructors andStudents alike, that describes
Paper ID #32809Critical Analyses of Representation and Success Rates of MarginalizedUndergraduate Students in Aerospace EngineeringDr. Corin L. Bowen, University of Michigan Corin (Corey) Bowen is a postdoctoral researcher in the College of Engineering, Computer Science and Technology at California State University - Los Angeles, where she is working on the NSF-funded Eco- STEM project. Her engineering education research focuses on structural oppression in engineering sys- tems, organizing for equitable change, and developing an agenda of Engineering for the Common Good. She conferred her Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from
Paper ID #22784Gender, Motivation, and Pedagogy in the STEM Classroom: A QuantitativeCharacterizationProf. Jonathan D. Stolk, Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering Jon Stolk strives to design and facilitate extraordinary learning experiences. He creates project-based and interdisciplinary courses and programs that invite students to take control of their learning, grapple with complex systems, engage with each other and the world in new ways, and emerge as confident, agile, self-directed learners. Stolk’s research aims to understand how students experience different classroom settings, particularly with regard to how
individuals (90% PhD students and 10% Master’sstudents) from 26 countries found that graduate students were more than six times as likely toexperience depression and anxiety than the general population, with 39% reporting moderate-severe depression and 41% reporting moderate-severe anxiety (Evans et al., 2018). These globaltrends are also evident among graduate students in the United States. A study conducted at theUniversity of California Irvine revealed that over the prior 12 months, 9.9% of the graduatestudents had considered suicide (Louden & Skeem, 2008). Graduate students within science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines appear to be at an especially highrisk for experiencing mental health concerns (Deziel, Olawo
-based reflectivejournals as assessment tools of undergraduate chemical engineer students’ learning in avertically integrated team design project (VITDP) is the focus of this exploratory study.Participants from a large midwestern university were required to submit a reflectivejournal each week over a five-week period. The reflective journals of 23 participants wereanalyzed to unearth the conceptual descriptions of teamwork held by the participants, todescribe the role of metacognition in reflective journal writing, and to determine howreflective journals facilitate construction of knowledge. Thus, reflective journals weremeaningful as assessment tools because they communicated how VITDP participants learnand supplied valuable information to make
recruitment and retention ofunderrepresented students in STEM fields, including in graduate research degree pathways [2],[20]–[22].Current work in ALPs also includes how ALPs affect underrepresented students and those withsocial minority aspects to their identity, such as sexual orientation, political affiliation, religion,or first-generation status [23], [24]. While there is emerging literature on best practices forintegrating EM through ALPs, there is also growing evidence to suggest not all intervention areequal when it comes to inclusion and equitable outcomes. The social aspects of many of thesetechniques as well as student perceptions have been shown to decrease minority studentengagement with the ALPs [25], [26]. This Work-in-Progress paper
, and technology to include new forms of communication and problem solving for emerging grand challenges. A second vein of Janet’s research seeks to identify the social and cultural impacts of technological choices made by engineers in the process of designing and creating new devices and systems. Her work considers the intentional and unintentional consequences of durable struc- tures, products, architectures, and standards in engineering education, to pinpoint areas for transformative change.Kevin O’Connor, University of Colorado, Boulder Kevin O’Connor is assistant professor of Educational Psychology and Learning Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder. His scholarship focuses on human action, communication
Paper ID #6414Elementary Teacher as Teacher of Engineering: Identities in Concert andConflictPamela S. Lottero-Perdue Ph.D., Towson University Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Science Education in the Department of Physics, Astronomy & Geosciences at Towson University. She has a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering, worked briefly as a process engineer, and taught high school physics and pre-engineering. She has taught engineering and science to elementary children in multiple informal settings, and is a collaborator with the Engineering is Elementary (EiE) program. As a pre-service
diversity.Dr. Jacquelyn F. Sullivan, University of Colorado Boulder Jacquelyn Sullivan is founding co-director of the Engineering Plus degree program in the University of Colorado Boulder’s College of Engineering and Applied Science. She spearheaded design and launch of the Engineering GoldShirt Program to provide a unique access pathway to engineering for high potential, next tier students not admitted through the standard admissions process; this program is now being adapted at several engineering colleges. Sullivan led the founding of the Precollege division of ASEE in 2004; was awarded NAE’s 2008 Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education, and was conferred as an ASEE Fellow in 2011. She has
technology programs.Lori Maxfield, College of St. Catherine Lori R. Maxfield, Ph.D., is the Director of Undergraduate and Graduate Education Programs (Initial Licensure) in the Education Department at the College of St. Catherine. She teaches social studies methods for prospective teachers at the elementary, middle school, and senior high levels. At the college-wide level, she serves as a member of the Curriculum Design Team that is working to create core minors that provide and integrated and interdisciplinary focus across the liberal arts and professional studies programs. Her direct experience with the Parallel Curriculum Model includes serving as a National Cadre Curriculum Writer (2002-2003
the engineering faculty. The resultssuggest a) supporting first-year undergraduate students as they, particularly women, have theirlowest grades in the first year, b) diversifying admission requirements to benefit from the largeapplicant pools in the most populated departments, c) improving international applicants’admission success rate, who are refused admission due to high tuition fees, d) enhancingdomestic students application rate, and e) learning from success stories in the faculty.Keywords: gender equity, gender parity, engineering, graduate studiesIntroductionThe small number of women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), and morespecifically, in engineering, has been well documented during the last few decades [1], [2
: Participants were asked to write down on a sheet of paper the five main categories that emerged from stage 5 and propose solutions for each one. After 10 minutes the solutions were shared among the group.7. Implement solutions in the CE degree program: Participants analyzed how the solutions discussed in stage 6 could be applied to the CE education context.8. Identify high-priority solutions: Participants were asked to select the three proposed solutions that they considered most relevant from the previous stage and to explain their selection process.The information collected in physical form (sticky notes and flipchart) was transferred to digitalformat using Microsoft Excel and Word files. Data analysis was carried out by the
exercises inengineering education laboratories has evolved over the years with technology, but thelaboratory remains one of the most important places where students learn not only technicalskills, but also how to work with people, how to present data properly, and how to developstrategies to accomplish a shared goal. Feisel and Rosa [7] indicate that the objectives oflaboratory exercises are not clearly defined in many cases, but they outline 13 broadly applicableobjectives that may be applied to almost all engineering education laboratories. Their 11thobjective is in the area of teamwork where they suggest that engineering laboratories shouldteach students to “work effectively in teams including structure individual and jointaccountability, assign
Paper ID #19133Career Certainty: Differences Between Career Certain and Uncertain Engi-neering StudentsMr. Bernhard Schadl, Stanford University Bernhard Schadl is a visiting student researcher at the Designing Education Lab of Dr. Sheri Sheppard. Bernhard completed a MSc. in Management and Technology from the Technical University of Munich.Dr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research on engineering
participants. When interviewer andparticipant statements are both given, the participant’s statement will be preceded by a “P:” andthe interviewer by an “I:”. If it is unclear which participant is speaking, her name is put beforeher words (e.g. “Alice:”). Words quoted and in italics without these prefixes are from theparticipant. We added square brackets around words that were not said by the participant, butwere added to include necessary context or conceal information that might identify theparticipants. Verbal ticks, such as repetition of words, are removed. Ellipses (…) are used toindicate that words or sentences are removed. The (L) notation indicates that the participantlaughed.We have gone to great lengths to protect the identities of the
to that conceptual pool of designheuristics.” In addition, one instructor informed students that Design Heuristics can be used bothfor initial idea generation and refinement at later stages of the design process. Instructor C alsoexpanded the use of the cards by having students design subcomponents: “Students werethinking about how they were going to attach the device, when the cards talk about componentsor modularizing or having something be able to be removable I think that definitely affectedsome of the teams in the way that they focused more on how it's going to attach.” Instructors feltthat these variations were effective in helping students generate multiple concepts.C. ChallengesSome issues or questions about implementation emerged in
Paper ID #21542Tracking Skills Development and Self-efficacy in a New First-year Engineer-ing Design CourseJessica DanielsDr. Sophia T. Santillan, Duke University Sophia Santillan joined Duke as an assistant professor of the practice in summer 2017 and will work with the First Year Design experience for first-year engineering majors. As a STEM teacher and professor, she is interested in the effect of emerging technology and research on student learning and classroom practice. After earning her bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees from Duke, Santillan taught at the United States Naval Academy as an assistant professor
applying standard problem-solving procedures, butthey must also have passion, adaptability and an eagerness to learn. Successful graduates need tobe innovators, effective collaborators in interdisciplinary and multicultural environments,excellent communicators, leaders, and lifelong learners1. Engineering education is not alone inneeding to rethink the educational strategies that best prepare students for success. Based uponresearch emerging from the learning sciences, Sawyer’s description of a successful collegegraduate (in any field) has much in common with the National Science Board (NSB) report.Sawyer writes that to be successful in the knowledge age, graduates will need to develop a deepand integrated understanding of complex subjects
, including their capacity-building and school partner- ship programs. She coordinates the Integrated Teaching and Learning Program’s NSF-funded TEAMS Program (Tomorrow’s Engineers. . . creAte. iMagine. Succeed.) which engages more than 2,200 K-12 students in engineering throughout the academic year and summer months. She is also a contributing curriculum writer and editor for the TeachEngineering digital library, also an NSF-funded project. Janet holds a master’s degree in Information and Learning Technology from the University of Colorado Denver and a bachelor’s in Communication from the University of Colorado Boulder.Prof. Derek T Reamon, University of Colorado, Boulder