Institute of Technology HOWARD KIMMEL is Professor-Emeritus of Chemical Engineering and Retired Executive Director of the Center for Pre-College Programs at New Jersey Institute of Technology. Dr. Kimmel is currently providing his services on a part-time basis as a Special Assistant for Teacher Training and Curriculum Development with a focus on alignment of teaching practices with the Common Core State Standards and the Next Generation Science Standards. He has spent almost forty years designing and implementing professional development programs, curricula, and assessment of student learning for K-12 teachers in STEM. At the college level, he collaborates on projects exploring teaching methodologies and assessment
implements curricular modifications. She directs and man- ages the instructional delivery, student registration and scheduling logistics and collection of assessment data for all core courses in the undergraduate engineering and science programs. Sandra teaches courses in Entrepreneurial Thinking and Innovation at Baruch College, Lafayette College, and Stevens. Before coming to Stevens, Sandra worked as a consulting engineer with Stantec and T&M Associates special- izing in Urban Land Redevelopment and Municipal Engineering. Sandra holds a B.S. Degree in Civil & Environmental Engineering, an A. B. degree in Art History from Lafayette College and a Master of Engineering degree in Engineering Management from Stevens
University. He teaches in the areas of introductory materials engineering, polymers and composites, and capstone design. His research interests include faculty development, evaluating con- ceptual knowledge change, misconceptions, and technologies to promote conceptual change. He has co-developed a Materials Concept Inventory and a Chemistry Concept Inventory for assessing conceptual knowledge and change for introductory materials science and chemistry classes. He is currently conduct- ing research on a large scale NSF faculty development project. His team is studying how workshops on strategies of engagement and feedback with support from internet tools and resources affect faculty be- liefs, classroom practice, and
. 1, a small number of students, as many as 17people, stated that the support from institutions in online learning was to a small extent or a verysmall extent. One of the unique dominant barriers from the view of aviation maintenance trainingstudents in Indonesia is the power outage experience (barrier no. 67) while undergoing onlinelearning. Fifty students experienced a power outage at least once during the online learningperiod at the beginning of the pandemic, 29 of whom experienced this more than twice. Anotherbarrier that is a concern for students is barrier no. 66 Rules and regulations identified fromquestion 5. A total of 56 students answered that shifting learning mode affects their purpose to alarge extent and a very large extent to
responses(Lertbanjongngam et al. 2022). For example, specifying a programming language in theprompt not only ensures that the model generates code in the required syntax, but actually canimprove system output (Jayachandran and Blum 2024).General or zero-shot prompting refers to prompting where the large language models areprovided with a task without examples or advanced strategies. For some time now, modelsthat have been fine-tuned with examples relevant to the desired task often perform well withzero-shot prompts (Wei et al. 2021). Moreover, when these prompts are sufficiently detailed,the LLMs can often meet precise requirements (OpenAI 2024). However, if these promptsare unsuccessful, prompt engineering guidelines suggest that users utilize
curriculum integration.2 Strong Version: In its stronger version, curriculum integration is a pedagogical approach to help students build a small set of powerful, broadly applicable concepts/abilities/skills instead of a large set of weak, narrowly applicable concepts/abilities/skills. Weak Version: In its weaker version, curriculum integration is a pedagogical approach to help students build connections across disciplines.The goals of curriculum integration in this paper refer to the strong version with respect tobuilding powerful, broadly applicable concepts/abilities/skills and refer to the weak version withrespect to building connections. However, the connections here are within the discipline ofindustrial engineering.Integrated
, struggling with syntax, debugging, and understandingcoding logic. Students may perceive it as difficult to navigate, which hinders their learning process.ChatGPT provides instant feedback, helping students refine their code, understand errors, andgrasp fundamental programming concepts. By offering real-time assistance and explanations ofcoding structures and commands, ChatGPT serves as an effective tool to enhance students'comprehension of the coding process and improve their problem-solving skills in MATLAB.Supporting this approach, King et al. [9] successfully incorporated Large Language Models(LLMs), including ChatGPT, into a graduate-level bioengineering course, where students criticallyevaluated AI-generated solutions alongside their own
/ Mohsen Garshasby, Mississippi State UniversityAbstractThe Building Construction Science (BCS) program at Mississippi State University is a studio-based program. Course learning objectives are assessed in studios through traditional gradedwritten assignments and tests, and through face-to-face critique sessions in which studentsexplain the details of their in-progress assignments and projects verbally prior to submitting theirwritten work.During critiques, student explain their designs or thought rationale in verbal presentations whichoften include substantially completed written draft summaries of their work used to outline theirpresentation. When students present a project, their peer students are present, and these peerslearn from each other
different methodologies could be considered: either a single group with pre- and post-tests,or an intervention and control group to evaluate the impact of AR on learning STEM contentcompared to traditional teaching methods. Longitudinal studies could also be conducted to trackthe experiences of female Hispanic users and create a model to guide users in implementingdifferent concepts. Finally, exploring the learning curve of female Hispanic users with ARdevices could help assess usability.AcknowledgmentThe research team is very thankful for the support of the Texas Education Service Center ofRegion 20, the Charlotte Independent School District, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.This research was supported by the intramural research program of
, Clarkson University Ms. DeWaters is a PhD candidate in the Environmental Science and Engineering program at Clarkson University. Her research focuses on assessing and improving energy literacy among middle and high school students.Mary Margaret Small, Clarkson University Dr. Mary Margaret Small is the program coordinator for the projects described here. She has experience as a classroom teacher and school administrator and currently works for Clarkson University's Office of Educational Partnerships.Gail Gotham, St. Lawrence-Lewis BOCES Gail Gotham is the Administrator for Program Planning and Development for the St. Lawrence-Lewis BOCES, Canton NY. She has experience as a classroom teacher and
of Personality/Behavior/Motivation Assessment in the Design of a Good Group Project Team o Teaching in Large Classes: Ensuring Student Success and Engagement o What Makes a Good Assessment? o Collaborative learning in the Classroom o Technology in the Classroom: What works and what does not o How and where to Incorporate Active Learning into Courses o Learner-Centered Teaching o Grades and Learning: Expectations, Assessments, and Accountability o Developing Cross-Disciplinary Learning Experiences for Students o Incorporating and Teaching Global Perspectives o Promoting Learning through WritingInnovation and Creativity o Teaching Innovation in Design Courses o Benefits of/Best Practices in Integrating Innovation
Proteges Proteges Figure 1. Structure and components of the Peer Mentor program and the SPM studentorganization. Traditionally, the problem with student leadership organizations is a lack of participationacross the overall membership. Additionally, large organizations generally lack a sense ofcommunity4. The main purpose of SPM was to create this sense of community, therebyincreasing the interest in the organization overall, and increasing the number of students involvedin the peer mentor program. The community building events are discussed and planned by theofficers of SPM and are offered to the entire student organization as well as prospective mentorsin the peer mentor program. The interviews are organized and
promises in large research grant applications to entities like the National Science Foundation, as part of their broader impact. However, they struggled to reach and onboard these students. Our program aimed to simplify this process. We proposed that the labs use a small portion of their grant funds—where they promise research outreach to underrepresented students—to cover the stipends for the interns they hosted. This proposal faced significant pushback. Some faculty were confused by the idea of compensating interns, while others cited lab expenses as a barrier. When it became clear that faculty PIs were not interested in this model, we continued searching for other resources. Ultimately, we pieced together over $25,000 in
and retention standpoint. This model is offered as an example, not necessarily as aprescription. Because, from the outside, the work of a women or minority engineering programdirector can be largely invisible, this model allows the visualization of aspects of the work thatare not generally articulated. Only one of the eight regions that the model defines includes theexternally visible work that others generally see. A practitioner of diversity programming can usethis model to consider other aspects that may help them meet their own goals on behalf ofstudents, hopefully leading to greater persistence and success for a more diverse engineeringprofession.This work-in-progress suggests a way of articulating the various aspects of work in one
Paper ID #25510Engineering Leadership Styles Used in Industry TodayMichele Fromel, Pennsylvania State UniversityMatthew BennettMr. Lei Wei, ELIM program, Pennsylvania State UniversityDr. Meg Handley, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Meg Handley is currently the Associate Director for Engineering Leadership Outreach at Penn State University. Previously, Meg served as the Director of the Career & Corporate Connection’s office at the Smeal College of Business at Penn State University. Meg completed her PhD in Workforce Education at Penn State, where she focused on interpersonal behaviors and their impact on
mini-project consisting of a modal test, finite element analysis, model correlationand validation of a small test structure; a research project that results in a conference paper andpresentation. A picture of two students taking data on a frame structure is shown in Figure 2.The goal of this program is threefold: 1) toencourage these students to attend graduate schooland specialize in fields related to the NationalNuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) mission,2) to recruit the top students to return to LANL infollowing summers as graduate research assistants,and 3) to subsequently hire the best of these studentsas LANL staff upon completion of their graduatedegrees. Over the last seven years, 111 studentsfrom 34 academic institutions have
results.Mentoring Mentoring is a promising approach for developing leadership capabilities and promotes culture, increases knowledge sharing, drives performance, and expands the global network of relationships that drive innovation and interconnectivity [34]. Mentoring at Micron embraces new and inclusive approaches that are scalable, powered by mentees and celebrate mentorship moments small and large, in environments that are more casual and often virtual. These mentorship opportunities include: Micro mentoring; One-on-one mentoring; Group mentoring; Peer mentoring; and Reverse mentoring.Leadership 360 degree leadership assessments can be an
design process at TCU isbased on these criteria. A 3-semester, team-oriented, industry-funded, electrical/mechanical,interdisciplinary design sequence, beginning in the second semester of the TCU studentengineer’s junior year, is described.introductionEarly in their engineering educational process, students are typically forced to select a specificdiscipline (mechanical, electrical, civil, etc.). They then dutifully follow a program of studiesthat embraces the requisite technical courses (thermodynamics, solid mechanics, circuits, etc.) tosupport this discipline. While laboratory courses may provide an opportunity to stimulate groupinteraction, success in the majority of their engineering courses is typically assessed based uponindividual
awareness in industryworkforce by introducing dedicated courses, tracks, and degree programs into their curricula [3-9]. Although this is a substantial step in the right direction, some problems arise when observedcarefully. Cybersecurity degree programs develop experts in the field, but not at a high enoughrate to benefit the large gap that exists within the cybersecurity workforce. Cybersecurity coursesare efficient at raising awareness to the students who enroll in them, but offered as senior-levelelective courses in many CS/CE programs. There is a lack of “bridging” in programming coursesthat would allow students to understand how programming and cybersecurity are intertwined withone another. If students were given the opportunity to learn the
engineers. Moreover, duringthe period 2009-2014, civil engineering is the only engineering discipline to have a majoroverall drop in enrollment. This enrollment trend, if continued, paired with the projectednear-term need for the profession, suggest a looming civil engineer shortage, if not a crisis forthe profession. The enrollment data further suggest that this undergraduate “recruiting problem”is largely – if not entirely – specific to civil engineering. Low enrollments result in logisticalchallenges pertaining to individual course enrollments. Since resources (including facultypositions and staff support) received by units in a university are often tied to undergraduatestudent numbers, this does not bode well for CE programs and for the
Page 15.799.2collection, processing and communication of environmental data which in turn can be used toteach sustainability concepts6. The proposed LabVIEW Enabled Watershed Assessment System(LEWAS) is an attempt in this direction.The rest of the paper is organized as follows. First, we briefly review the programming activitiesin EngE1024 prior to LabVIEW. Then, we discuss the gradual integration of LabVIEW and itsapplications into the course. This is followed by the discussion of current status of developmentof LEWAS. Analysis of assessment data from LabVIEW instruction modules is presented next.Finally, we discuss our future plans that facilitate learning about energy and environmentalsustainability.Programming approaches used in
in oppositedirection near the top part of the container. All figures show a stable and symmetrical fluidflow for the corresponding Reynolds number. In terms of teaching important features of the PIV system, measurement set-up wasassessed. Once the velocity is calculated, students were requested to focus on thephysical meaning of their results. In practice, every pair of recorded images gives avelocity field, and the students have to explain if their results were physically correct.For instance the detection of the particles depends on the separation time ( t) betweenimages. If t is very small the camera cannot detect a displacement of the particle tracersbetween the two images; conversely, if t is very large the camera loses the
Paper ID #39924Qualitative Study of Women’s Personal Experiences of Retention andAttrition in Undergraduate Engineering ProgramsElle Ann Kreiner, University of Maryland Baltimore County Mx. Elle Kreiner (they/them) is currently an interdisciplinary research assistant to Dr. Jamie Gurganus (she/her) in the Engineering and Computing Education Program (ECEP) at University of Maryland, Bal- timore County (UMBC). Elle graduated from UMBC with a double major in Cultural Anthropology and Sociology, and are currently pursuing a M.A., in Applied Sociology. Elle specializes in ethnographic research and analysis, as well as
educational assessment best practices. She focuses on building and evaluating academic programs that promote inclusive excellence for all learners. Currently, Dr. Cullington serves as the Associate Provost of Academic Programs at Sacred Heart University. Previously, she was the Founding Co-Chair of the Honors Program at SUNY Farmingdale and Associate Director of the Research Aligned Mentorship (RAM) Program where she designed, implemented, and evaluated academic programs to engage students from historically minoritized communities in undergraduate research opportunities. She has served as a principal investigator and educational researcher on number grant initiatives, including grants from the National Science Foundation
stage andresponsibilities of these personnel, they were not likely to be willing, or able, to pursue atraditional university Ph.D.A thought-leading team of Polytechnic faculty from diverse departments was assembled toresearch and conceptualize what such a degree might look like and how it might be bestdelivered. The team launched two parallel research efforts, one to ascertain what precedentsand experiences with similar goals existed around the world, i.e., an international review ofother doctoral programs addressing similar needs, and the second was to conduct an interestand needs assessment of a sample of high probability individuals. The findings of bothstudies were positive, and their key features incorporated in this paper.This paper
completed individual worksheets and then met in small groups todiscuss and record responses to particular questions regarding undergraduate program issues,such as departmental strengths and recommended changes to the curriculum. After the smallgroup sessions, students discussed their responses as a large group and proceedings were latersummarized by the facilitator. As one portion of the study presented here, anonymous studentfeedback obtained from sessions from the past eight years (2003 – 2010) was analyzed. Theresults allowed us to gain insight into the strengths and challenges of our program from theperspective of the students and clearly identified potential areas for optimizing their educationalexperience. For instance, although seniors
their work.Most of the difficulties they report, discussed in the next section, are related to creating a betterenvironment for helping students and teachers learn engineering. More formal assessment ofSTOMP students, and teachers is being implemented this year through surveys and interviews.Difficulties While overall the STOMP program has successfully operated for nearly twoyears, there are still areas to be improved upon. One of the main problems is the infrequency andinconsistency of sessions. While it is understandably difficult for teachers to schedule anadequate time block three to five days per week for engineering education, it is also hard to makethe program worthwhile with only one weekly 45-minute session. Another
authentic experience and give studentsthe opportunity to develop process-driven problem-solving skills. A large focus of these classes isdeveloping algorithmic thinking skills, and an introduction to computer programming has beenused to facilitate meeting this objective. In addition, with the ubiquitous use of microcontrollersand platforms such as Arduino, faculty now can integrate hands-on experiences with hardware tomotivate student learning. This paper presents the results of qualitative and quantitative analysisof two ways to introduce programming concepts and the use of microelectronics in a first-yearengineering course. In one approach, students are first taught algorithmic thinking andprogramming in C++ in a traditional sense, without an
lab, biomedical lab and wood working labAll classrooms are multimedia classrooms with online teaching capabilities. Computersin all labs are equipped with the latest software for teaching and research. Although mostlabs are dedicated to undergraduate programs, graduate students have full access to all thelabs to conduct research and project work.Engineering Technology graduate students have access to a great deal of academicsupport services at ETSU. The Charles C. Sherrod Library, ETSU’s main campus library,offers a large variety of journals, texts, and other educational material that students canaccess. The library performed an assessment of the holdings related to the Technologyprogram, their report is provided in Appendix J. Educational
. The DoE allows programs to operate largely autonomously with the license toadjust the program to the needs and culture of their university. Programs vary in the amount ofinformation they provide to the DoE. Some report the minimum information required, and others reportmore detailed information about specific activities and events [19].Until recently, studies regarding the education and employment outcomes McNair program have beenrare, with the latest publicly available analysis of the program from the DoE dating back to 2008 [18].Renbarger and Beaujean's quantitative meta-analysis of the program remains the only comprehensiveimpact study conducted in its 32-year history [19]. While more comprehensive measures of the program'simpact are