. In addition, she runs a faculty devel- opment and leadership program to train and recruit diverse PhD students who wish to pursue academic positions in engineering or applied science after graduation. Dr. Sandekian earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at CU Boulder in 1992 and 1994, respectively. She went on to earn a Specialist in Education (Ed. S.) degree in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Higher Education and Student Affairs Leadership in December 2017, both from the University of Northern Colorado. She is a Founding Leader of the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) Virtual Community of Practice (VCP) for LGBTQ+ Inclusion in Engineering
? What evidence is required to document a successful innovation?Engaging the Community – Our ProcessesA major emphasis of this project has been to engage audiences of the engineering educationcommunity (e.g., engineering education researchers, early adopters of engineering educationinnovations, engineering administrators who will promote propagation). During year one of theeffort, we engaged the community via three primary processes. The first two processes involveda Delphi study with subject matter experts (SMEs) from across the engineering educationresearch and administrative spectrum. The purpose of the Delphi study (conducted during thewinter and spring of 2015) was to identify the most critical unresolved issues facing engineeringeducation
throughout the search process. In addition, she runs a faculty develop- ment and leadership program to recruit and support diverse PhD students who wish to pursue academic positions in engineering or applied science after graduation. Dr. Sandekian earned B.S. and M.S. degrees in Aerospace Engineering Sciences at CU Boulder in 1992 and 1994, respectively. She went on to earn a Specialist in Education (Ed. S.) degree in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Higher Education and Student Affairs Leadership in December 2017, both from the University of Northern Colorado. She is a Founding Leader of the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) Virtual Community of Practice (VCP) for LGBTQ
National ScienceBoard1. Undergoing studies focus on the importance of increasing the diversity inscience, engineering, and technology-related disciplines to attract women for asustainable education2. According to the NCES3, females earned in 2008-09 the smallestpercentages (16%) of bachelor's degrees relative to males in the fields of engineering andengineering technologies. In Canada and in 2010, 17.7 percent of students enrolled inCanadian undergraduate engineering programs were women, up slightly from 20094.Outside North America, in Australia, women engineers reached a low rate of 11% in2002. In France, the proportion of women engineers reached its maximum in 2003 at27% 5.By looking at the other side of the globe, in the Middle East region, a
with interactive learning can increase student motivation, context-based knowledge,improve academic results and lead to the attainment of learning outcomes [1]. For qualitylearning, the textbooks and lectures need to be complemented with innovative tools [2] thatfacilitate interaction, engagement, and communication [3]. Current widespread penetration intechnologies has allowed researchers to develop and test various tools in pedagogy thatsupplement the existing teaching resources for improved learning. Some examples of these toolsare video games [4], [5], mobile apps, 3D modeling tools, virtual and augmented reality [6], [7].Augmented Reality (AR) is a mixed-reality technology that can embed virtual objects in a realenvironment and provide an
standards, the Grinter Report9, 10 and the deliberations that followedhad a major impact on the emergence of baccalaureate engineering technology programs. In itspreliminary form the report proposed a bifurcated engineering curriculum with a professional-scientific and professional-general tracks. Although discussion of this bifurcation was omittedfrom the final report, a later article by Grinter is unequivocal about the intent to propose bothresearch/scientific and more programmatic tracks in engineering disciplines10.The quality of ET programs can be measured using a variety of metrics on faculty, facilities,staff, student, and other programmatic support. Professional accreditation certainly confirms theachievement of a standard according to
been having participants engage in EiE lessons as learners, meaning that participants go through the exact same hands-on activities and discussions that students will experience in the classroom. This alleviates some of participants’ anxiety about teaching engineering, as it provides them with experience with the activities’ materials and their set-up; the format, structure, and flow of the activities; different outcomes and design solutions; and ideas about how to troubleshoot activities in the classroom. Additionally, thinking about the activities from their students’ points of view allows participants to foresee areas where students might have some difficulty
projects. The data consisted of twice weekly reflections of the activities that studentteams engaged in during their design process, as well as open-ended comments about theirdesign progression. This data was then collapsed into Dym’s model from which empiricalassociations were made between the various stages. Coupled with the teams’ open-ended weeklyreflections, we were able to identify educational patterns that potentially lead to higher or lowerquality designs. Based on their final artifact, teams were judged to be innovative or non-innovative. We found that differences exist between those teams innovative non-innovativeteams. This paper reports these findings.IntroductionInnovation is highly important as competition between companies and
opportunity for students to berewarded for learning and teaching their peers. This study lays the foundation for a long-termlongitudinal study to understand further the impact of peer mentorship and socio-technicalprojects from freshman to senior years. The paper will present the benefits and challengesassociated with engaging seniors and first-year students while solving an authentic designchallenge through surveys and focus groups. These results will help develop the framework tobuild vertical integration within the curriculum for effectively teaching engineering design.IntroductionBackground Peer mentorship is a learning model that allows students to learn from one another in acollaborative and supportive environment [1]. The model involves
interests include the educational cli- mate for students, faculty, and staff in science and engineering, assets based approaches to STEM equity, and gender and race stratification in education and the workforce.Dr. Julia M. Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Dr. Julia M. Williams is Professor of English at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Her research areas include technical communication, assessment, accreditation, and the development of change management strategies for faculty and staff. Her articles have appeared in the Journal of Engineering Education, In- ternational Journal of Engineering Education, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, and Technical Communication Quarterly, among
study of a student-producedpodcast surveyed for skill development, education and community, finding ‘community’ was thehighest outcome from the project [17]. For students using podcasts in technical courses, theReduced Instructional Material Motivation Survey has been used to understand motivation levelsfor engaging with podcast-based material [18]. One study found that motivation was highindependent of learning style [19]. Therefore, podcasts have the potential to bring many favorableoutcomes to engineering educators: • to enable faculty to develop curiosity in each other’s work • to allow students to develop curiosity about disciplinary work that informs their education • to promote the pursuit of educational careers to engineering
-expert crowd. So, it is no surprised that there have been numerousexperiments focused on using crowdsourcing to develop or update courses. While some haveused graduating students [2], [7], [10] or online resources [2], [11] to crowdsource, many haveused industry professional (experts) for their crowdsourcing efforts [3], [6], [12], [13]. Notably,Nakayama’s experiment [6] crowdsourced a small group of five faculty members and industryprofessionals to update its engineering safety curriculum. Another large-scale experiment [14]had over 200 crowd experts (including faculty, fellows, practitioners, and leaders) to update itsmedical curriculum.While collecting inputs from a group of domain experts is important, aligning and integratingtheir opinions
designing for internationalstandards, defining needs of a community, using locally available materials, low-tech but game-changing innovations, considering sustainability implications in resource-limited settings,involving stakeholders and engaging the community and 3) Food Security for Health in Low-Income Countries, which focuses on understanding the importance of sufficient, safe, andnutritious food in economically under-developed locations. Each of these courses addressesethical, social, and political concerns as part of the design process.For this study, the focus is on the engineering course, Technology Innovation for ResourceLimited Settings. The course objectives seek to help students identify community needs throughobservation techniques
considerations: theoretical validation, procedural validation, pragmaticvalidation, communicative validation, ethical validation, and process reliability. As one example,we expound upon procedural validation considerations for making data, wherein wecontinuously questioned and revised the flow and structure of the interview by 91) seeking andintegrating internal feedback (i.e., team) and external feedback (i.e., advisory board), (2) creatingmemos after each interview, and (3) continuously discussing interview experiences andprocedural adjustments. We offer the instrumentation (i.e., the interview protocol included as anAppendix) for cultivating conversations on ethics and DEI in engineering classrooms, amongstengineering faculty bodies, or throughout
AC 2010-861: AVS: SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY VIRTUAL MUSEUMCameron Patterson, University of Alabama Cameron W. Patterson is an undergraduate student at the University of Alabama majoring in Electrical Engineering and Mathematics. He is a member of the UA Computer-Based Honor's program, a student member of IEEE and Eta Kappa Nu.Nicholas A. Kraft, University of Alabama Nicholas A. Kraft is an assistant professor in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Alabama. He received the BA degree in mathematics from Indiana University in 2002 and the PhD degree in computer science from Clemson University in 2007. His research is currently supported by three NSF awards, including one
bioreactors. This project also met allthe requirements established at our university for a high-impact practice (HIP). The project hadstudents spend extensive time-on-task in both courses. The creation and optimization of theindustrial grade bioreactors was the focus of the group of engineering students assigned to thisproject. These students were required to generate a pre-proposal and budget, a full projectproposal and a final oral presentation. This collaboration was also part of a semester-longproject in Environmental Microbiology worth 100 points. The final assignments in both coursesinclude both written and oral communication components. Below, in Table 2, are the LearningOutcomes for students involved in the collaboration and the assessment
of the FBD, and have added trusses, centroids, and distributed forces to it, we want to develop 3D problems and friction. This will help us expose our students more and more to the InTEL tools, and hopefully positively impact both their grades in the class and overall satisfaction with engineering.2. As we include more and more online problems into the course, as homework or extra-credit, the impact on grades and learning may be more easily assessed.We propose that our software allows for the possibility of a risk-free environment forexperimentation and practice. Not all students will enjoy the online environment, but the hope isthat by emphasizing “game-like” visuals and the various ways statics is everywhere in everydaylife, we
Departments grant ”Additive Innovation: An Educational Ecosystem of Making and Risk Taking.” He was named one of ASEE PRISM’s ”20 Faculty Under 40” in 2014, and received a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers from President Obama in 2017. Dr. Jordan co-developed the STEAM LabsTM program to engage middle and high school students in learning science, technology, engineering, arts, and math concepts through designing and building chain reaction machines. He founded and led teams to two collegiate Rube Goldberg Machine Contest national championships, and has appeared on many TV shows (including Modern Marvels on The History Channel and Jimmy Kimmel Live on ABC) and a movie with his chain reaction
promises they made upfront.We observed a 232% average improvement of scores between rounds 1 and 2 and this created ameasurable positive impact on learning, despite the physical separation imposed by theCOVID-19 pandemic. Despite this successful experiment most students still prefer in-personlearning such as the traditional “Skyscraper” exercise. The hypothesis that teamwork and projectplanning can be effectively taught in an online environment was, however, confirmed.IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has forced many schools and universities to experiment with newways of teaching and learning in a virtual world. Engaging in active learning and teamwork as avirtual group is particularly challenging [1]. This paper explores the design and execution
practice systems thinking by completing a project that focuses on acurrent issue or need requiring an engineering solution.The course deliverables listed in Table 1 includes: Project Plan and Journal (22.5%),Communication Skills (47.5%) and Technical Merit (30%). Students must take an ill-definedproblem and use a systems engineering approach to implement a proof-of-concept solution. Adetailed description of the weekly deliverables is given elsewhere and will not be described heredue to space limitations [1]. The Critical Design Review (CDR) rubric was also developed tobalance the course weighting between system-level thinking fostered by weekly deliverables andacquired technical skillsets from the MSEE program. The weekly deliverables are guided
also found that their storytelling course facilitated intentionaldevelopment of identity and self-concept [3]. While students did not significantly change theirbelonging or identity in our study, some students’ responses indicated that the process helpedthem find their identities. Based on previous work, storytelling is expected to impact identity [3],and we look to monitor if this metric becomes clearer as the project matures with development ofa story community on campus and more students joining the study. While the freshman writingseminar course was story-intensive, story creation in the CE technical electives was certainly lessextensive than Georgia Tech’s term-long course with multiple rounds of storytelling [3].Additionally, discovering
approaches and engineering leadership concepts within theengineering curriculum, both internally at our own institutions, and more broadly as members ofnational engineering education communities of practice such as the Canadian EngineeringEducation Association (CEEA), the CEEA Sustainable Engineering Leadership and Management(SELM) special interest group, the National Initiative on Capacity Building and KnowledgeCreation for Engineering Leadership (NICKEL), Graduate Attribute Continuous ImprovementProcess (GACIP), Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering (CSChE), the American Societyfor Engineering Education (ASEE) and the ASEE Engineering Leadership DevelopmentDivision (LEAD). We are instructors with both industry and academic experience who
students. Williams’ publications on assessment, engineering and professional communication, and tablet PCs have appeared in the Journal of Engineering Education and IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, among others. She has been awarded grants from Microsoft, HP, the Engineering Communication Foundation, the Kern Family Foundation, and National Science Foundation. Currently she supports the work of the Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (NSF RED) grant recipients. She has received numerous awards including the 2015 Schlesinger Award (IEEE Professional Communication Society) and 2010 Sterling Olmsted Award (ASEE Liberal Education Division).Eva Andrijcic (Associate Professor of Engineering Management)Cara
was boring.Tour guide: Fourteen percent (14%) made comments about the tour guide, with many stating thathe made the trip interesting.Career directions: Nine percent (9%) of the girls made comments regarding the impact of thistrip on their career directions. They expressed the desire to be engaged in similar researchactivities as future STEM professionals.Engineering Education seminar: Four themes emerged from data analysis.Panelists’ experiences: Thirty-six percent (36%) of the girls learnt from the panelists’professional and personal experiences, particularly how they overcame challenges in maledominated careers.Roles: Thirty-six (36%) of the girls made statements regarding learning about engineering roles.Career directions: Twenty-three (23
, reflection tools, and behavioralobservation to assess students’ problem solving achievement and strategies. Behavioralobservation enables us to monitor and observe how our participant teams engage in the E-MEAs, Page 14.502.9noting issues such as team dynamics, decisions, and communication35. Effective assessment willthen enable us to address our research questions on the impact of MEAs on problem solving byanalyzing the various performance data. Table 2: Framework for Adding Ethical Issues to MEAsDilemma Domain Common Dilemmas Example – IssuesEnvironmental Harm to Land/ water/natural
context, this research underscores the importance of inclusive, hands-onlearning environments in broadening participation in engineering pathways. Educational institutions should consider embedding makerspace opportunities acrossdiverse disciplines to foster broader engineering identity development. Furthermore, the designof makerspaces and their programming must be intentional in promoting inclusivity to supportunderrepresented students' persistence in STEM fields. Attention to mentorship structures,recognition practices, and community-building activities within makerspaces can further amplifytheir impact on identity development. The small sample size of this study limits the generalizability of the findings. Futureresearch should
elementary programming concepts: program flow, data types, arrays and memory, logic and arithmetic operations, input/output and functions. 3. Ability to utilize good programming practices to write efficient, clear, and maintainable code. 4. Ability to use an IDE to write, debug, load and run code to solve engineering problems, perform basic calculations, and to input and output meaningful data. 5. Understanding of the operation of basic electronic components, sensors and actuators. 6. Ability to work effectively in teams. 7. Ability to communicate effectively in written and oral formats.In addition to the technical skills, tools, and techniques that are outlined in goals 2-5, we expectto impact students’ attitudes toward the
instructors'interplay with students, the use of adjuncts that are practicing engineers has been successful.Practicing engineers, particularly some of the younger ones, seem to establish credibility quicklyas "real-world" engineers. 3.5 Course ContentTable 1 shows a topical outline of the course content with lecture and laboratory. The 3-hour lab.periods are subdivided into nominal periods of approximately one hour for scheduling, withmore than one activity planned most weeks to provide variety.4. Projects:- the following projects were required in the Fall semester of 1999. 4.1 Project 1 was a paper project that considered the thermodynamics of the humanbody. The topic was an engaging one for sophomores. Students were asked to develop anenergy
being hired to provide support in university-based makerspaces to help students working inthe space complete assignments or accomplish their personal goals. Similarly, in exploring thepotential positive impact of peer mentors, Davishahl et al. (2022) explored the placement of peermentors in roles as Student Engagement Liaisons to support other students in formal andinformal situations to enhance their general engagement and learning success. These researchstudies have focused primarily on the impact of the peer mentors on the success of the studentsthey are mentoring rather than the impact on the students in the role of peer mentors. To addressa gap in the literature, we explored how being a peer mentor in a first-year engineering designcourse
activities orasynchronous class engagement. This includes formal course settings, offered either face-to-faceor online, and time needed to review deliberately crafted lesson content available in the onlinelearning management system (LMS) for asynchronous learning. The Communications coursemaintained standard expectations in relation to traditional offerings available in the past and thetime commitment for the (2) credit hour course matched the standard (2) hours of formal courseinstruction. The laboratory course, in response to capacity limitations, provided an alternatingsystem asking students to attend face-to-face labs on alternating weeks and use the opposite weeksto engage in online lab tutorials. The traditional time commitment of five (5