developing interdisciplinary project-based learning experiences, building networks between university, industry, and community sectors, and expanding engagement in science, engineering, arts, and design. McNair’s current projects include building the Interdisciplinary Projects (IDPro) program and a 3D manufacturing module series in undergraduate engineering at Virginia Tech, framing the da Vinci Cube innovation model, and co-designing tools with communities for collaboration on Alaska housing issues. She earned a PhD in Linguistics at the University of Chicago, and an M.A. and B.A. in English at the University of Georgia.Rubaina Khan, University of Toronto Rubaina Khan is a research associate in Queens University and a
technicians, learn about the context ofSouth Sudan and the particular engineering challenges for utilizing its abundant sunlight toprovide energy?In the USA, one way that engineering faculty attempt to engage students in learning about othercountries is by having them interact with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals [1]which may lead some students to learn more about South Sudan [2]. Other programs promotecollaboration between the USA and other countries, including South Sudan, via disaster reliefand photovoltaic (PV) solar projects such as the solar suitcase [3] from We Care Solar [4].Researchers have compared undergraduate civil engineering programs at the University of Jubaand the University of Florida [5]. Others have described the
inclusive, engaged, and socially just. She runs the Feminist Research in Engineering Education Group whose diverse projects and group members are described at pawleyresearch.org. She received a CAREER award in 2010 and a PECASE award in 2012 for her project researching the stories of undergraduate engineering women and men of color and white women. She has received ASEE-ERM’s best paper award for her CAREER research, and the Denice Denton Emerging Leader award from the Anita Borg Institute, both in 2013. She was co-PI of Purdue’s ADVANCE program from 2008-2014, focusing on the underrepresentation of women in STEM faculty positions. She helped found, fund, and grow the PEER Collaborative, a peer mentoring group of early
initiative to develop STEM curriculum resources with a focus on engineering projects to engage students in learning (the “FRAME” model copyrighted in 2009). 5) Massachusetts Science and Technology/Engineering Curriculum Framework5 — a 2006 document outlining the statewide guidelines for teaching science and engineering in the early grades and continuing through high school. 6) Engineering and Technology (Hacker, et al.)6 — a 2009 NSF-sponsored textbook using “informed design” activities to expose students to various technological areas.Although identified by a common loop graphic, each of these six sources identified adifferent set of steps associated with the engineering design process. Table 1
work was to provide students theopportunity to develop their problem-solving strategies as well as their metacognitive awareness,while building a sense of community in an online class that could otherwise feel isolating. Figure 2: Screenshot of a shared whiteboard that was captured during a problem-solving sessionVirtual Classroom Observations and EvaluationTo gauge the impact of this initiative on student learning and to capture student experience withthe collaborative tools, carefully designed evaluation activities were conducted by an externalevaluator. Evaluation methods included virtual classroom observations, in-class focus groups,and a post-course survey. Using multiple methods in this way provides for methodologicaltriangulation
. Non-work based activities, which arein focus in this study, include e.g. case studies, role play, scenarios and projects. When itcomes to the design of work related learning activities, Hills et al suggest identifying learningoutcomes in terms of skills as well as required knowledge and understanding sought after byemployers.16Several approaches aiming at improving engineering education, e.g. the CDIO (Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate) initiative, have been initiated to put more emphasis on the skillsstudents need to be able to work as engineers.17 To ensure that students learn the desiredskills, a number of active and experiential learning methods are recommended since “activelearning methods engage students directly in thinking and problem
Foundation Difficult Dialogues, NSF ADVANCE, and Susan G. Komen (the last in collaboration with MU’s Medical School). She has held 2 national interdisciplinary fellowships: she has been a Kellogg National Fellow (leadership training and interdisciplinary research), and a Carnegie Scholar (scholarship of teaching and learning). In 2011, she attended a summer institute at the Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science. Since then, Suzanne has conducted communicating science workshops using actor- training techniques to enhance presentation skills; and collaborated on an MU NSF grant: "NRT-IGE:A test bed for STEM graduate student communication training,” 2015-2018. Suzanne is co-author with Bill Timpson, a member of her Kellogg
theUniversity and in the local community (https://www.mtu.edu/provost/programs/partner-engagement/).”Q1: Associate Professor in Dual Career couple (Nelson)From my perspective, universities have much to gain by attracting dual-career applicants. Havingboth partners employed at the same institution very likely improves overall satisfaction andincreases the likelihood that both partners will remain with the institution and the institution willsee the benefits of the start-up investment. When upper administration offers support for dualhires, units/departments can benefit by adding tenure lines and increasing the size of theirfaculty. While one could suggest that hiring a “subpar” faculty member is the main disadvantageof dual career accommodations, I have
anentry-level engineer would be required to demonstrate for Engineers Australia. As can be seenfrom Table 1 below, many of the Student Outcomes stipulated by ABET have their parallels inparts of the Stage One Competencies. However, the Engineers Australia Stage OneCompetencies are a super-set of ABET’s Student Outcomes. Those competencies that areparallels to the ABET Student Outcomes are shown below in the column to the left.6 Table 1.1: Similarities of ABET Student Outcomes and IEAust Stage One CompetenciesStudent Outcomes-ABET Stage 1 Competencies and Elements of Competency-IEAust(a) an ability to apply knowledge of 1.1 Engages with the engineering discipline at a phenomenological level
],illustrated below (Figure 1). Figure 1. Northeastern University's fourteen-point framework for leadership development [17]Similarly, Iowa State University’s Engineering Leadership Program developed a LeadershipModel via a collaboration between engineering faculty, staff, and students [18]. It includes eightlearning outcomes: 1. An ability to function on interdisciplinary teams 2. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility 3. An ability to communicate effectively 4. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context 5. A recognition of the need for, and the ability to engage in, life-long learning 6. An ability to create a
, creating and applying imaginativeapproaches that employ technical concepts can ignite students’ passion for learning anddiscovery. For example, by sharing the building blocks and societal benefits of his graduateresearch, the principal author of this paper has made elementary school students engaged in thiseffort keenly aware of his fascination for working in the field of soil mechanics. Similarly, one ofthe co-authors, who is an elementary school teacher, has shared his passion for technology byengaging students in the use of 3D modeling, 3D printing, and LEGO-based laboratory activities.The students have found the excitement of the graduate student and teacher for their chosendisciplines to be highly contagious
using the additional data from our co-participants collected to holisticallydocument the experience, and provide recommendations to be shared at academic research forums, such as theASEE Annual Conference.A “research for impact” approach was taken throughout the research process, whereby the authors created a theoryof change and a communications plan for making this present study impactful [44]. Network factors andstakeholders were identified from the start of the process and the authors engaged with organizers and participantsin identifying key areas of interest for the questions. Of interest was in identifying areas that would be most usefulto organizers, cohort members, study authors and ultimately engineering educators, in building on the
” engineering research during the summer, and (2) support teachersin integrating their research experiences into their academic year, pre-college classrooms. Theoverarching theme of the research projects - “Green Technology” was selected to engage the in-service mathematics and science teachers in the Green Revolution.During the 2011 summer, seventeen math and science teachers (RU RET-E Fellows) engaged in“green” research alongside faculty and graduate students (description of research activities inTable 1). Teachers were required to apply to the program in pairs as one math and one scienceteacher from the same school. The rationale was that the team would develop interdisciplinarylessons and that teachers would have a colleague at their school who
students.Students therefore often struggle to identify with the profession and are not ready for theworkforce when they graduate. This NSF PFE: RIEF project examines a unique experiencewhere a student-faculty-industry integrated community is created to help bridge the gap betweenindustry needs and the competencies developed within chemical engineering programs.The project's main goal is to better understand how implementing contemporary industryproblems into one of the sophomore chemical engineering courses impacts students’ engineeringidentity formation and self-efficacy development. To analyze the impacts of the intervention, thisproject employs design-based research (DBR) approach to guide the development,implementation, and evaluation of materials and
student awareness ofengineering careers, the TECT project was developed with the following goals in mind:GOAL 1: Improve STEM educational programs and career guidance counseling in high schools within the Charlotte region through enhanced STEM-based teacher professional development workshops focused on engineering.GOAL 2: Enlarge the pool of technical and diversity trained teachers and counselors within the Charlotte region by recruiting and training mentors to conduct TECT-based training within their own school districts.GOAL 3: Broaden the diversity of students engaged in STEM educational programs and opportunities in high schools within the Charlotte region.The key component of the TECT project is a one week
clarity around potential outputs (and the alignment of a problem statement to theseoutputs) was resolved in productive ways through student engagement in research. Students’research skills had been strengthened in previous semesters with nominal growth34, but in thisnew semester, students were beginning to see how this additional awareness of complexity mayrequire work prior to making artifacts (which was their area of comfort). Joel illustrates thisawareness of the impact of research on the design process, and the need to execute theseelements to get to an appropriate problem that could be solved in the following quote—hereveals the shift in mindset that came with utilizing user research to foster a better understandingof the problem he was
supports other research projects on science pedagogy.Mia Lettau, University of Notre DameKimberly Marfo, University of Notre DameScott Pattison Scott Pattison, PhD, is a social scientist who has been studying and supporting STEM education and learning since 2003, as an educator, program and exhibit developer, evaluator, and researcher. His current work focuses on engagement, learning, and interest and identity development in free-choice and out-of-school environments, including museums, community-based organizations, and everyday settings. Dr. Pattison specializes in using qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate the processes and mechanisms of learning in naturalistic settings. He has partnered with numerous
Demo Classes, and the 10Demo Class instructor (an experienced ETW staff member) would fully engage the participant-students per the ExCEEd Teaching Model. Over the years, some ETW participants reportedfeelings of anxiousness and discomfort on being “called on” as a student as early as the first dayof the workshop. The newly added workshop-level learning objectives for the three DemoClasses made it clear that the three Demo Classes could be scaffolded in a way to maximizeworkshop goals and minimize ETW participant anxiety and discomfort.Thus, the first Demo Class was scheduled to occur much earlier in the workshop, allowing it toserve as a
only assistiverobot competition in 2009-2010 [7].The TCFFHRC and the RoboWaiter contest that emerged from the planning process arecompatible, mutually supportive, and strongly coupled events. They share many goals—tostimulate creativity and to encourage students of all ages to engage a project that has societalbenefits, for example—and both encourage development of new technologies. Both take placein scale-model arenas outfitted to the contest theme, and both require participants to solveengineering design problems spanning several disciplines. The scoring equations for both eventsemphasize reliability over speed. Persons who enter either competition have the opportunity toparticipate in other events on the contest weekend—a theoretical test
1 devised a clever way to involve freshman engineering students in designthrough the design/redesign of paper clips. Using minimal resources and with minimalprerequisites, students were exposed to the compromises involved in the design of a real product 1 .In another example, Latcha and Oakley 2 describe a Capstone course where students design andconstruct toys or games. This course exposes students to the severe economic constraints oneffective toys and gives them the opportunity to have their designs presented to industry.Both of these project examples involve teaching practices that are recognized throughout thegreater community of educators as high-impact practices 3 . Design project work, especially withconstruction, requires that
: Excerpt from Foundations of Teamwork. Please see SupplementaryMaterials 2a for the full comic deck.Figure 3. Sample Page: Excerpt from What is Computational Thinking?. Please seeSupplementary Materials 4 for the full comic deck.4: Discussion and Conclusion4.1: Impact on Engineering EducationVIVID Storytelling was developed as a pedagogical tool and practice with a primary goal ofmeeting engineering students where they are. That is, VIVID Storytelling leverages whatengineering students already know and are familiar with (i.e., information portrayed throughvisual graphics, such as diagrams and charts) in order to communicate new information.While the authors recognize that words are important as they are essential forconceptualizing
humanitarian engineering program at Villanova is presented with anemphasis on lessons learned during the provision of technical support to international non-governmentorganizations. A qualitative review of success and failure is discussed based on program partner feedback,discussions with faculty, students, and communities. Conclusions from this paper raise some importantethical questions about the role of academic institutions when engaging with community partners. Inaddition, program design that employs the ethical engagement framework is described wherein, theimportance of contextual awareness and humility is highlighted. Next steps associated with this paperinclude the need to formally establish research-services with partner organizations
community of practice focusing on engineering lab writing education. Thispaper presents the content, delivery, and results of the professional development workshop onengineering lab writing.2. Workshop Content and DeliveryThe workshop was designed for the participants to conduct the following in a small groupsetting: 1) develop engineering lab report assignments; 2) improve engineering lab reportassessment; 3) guide students in navigating writing with generative AI (ChatGPT-4); and 4) trainlab teaching assistants or lab report graders. Participants accessed the guides (available atengineeringlabwriting.org) to design and develop sample labs, discuss issues related to labwriting and how to deliver lab writing expectations, and provide feedback to
, tea-bag messages, cartoons, and many product packages communicate the message, "your choicescan change the world." Over the past decade, it has been observed that student populations aredrawn to related “energy and environmental” issues. Many colleges and universities haveadjusted program offerings and content to reflect the students’ interest. Just as “Space” inspiredlearning in the 1960s and beyond, the energy and environmental issues inspires learning today[2]. The authors are involved with several USDA funded projects at UMES that address theseissues. In one of these efforts supported by USDA(AFRI) - the National Bioenergy andBioproducts Education Program( NBBEP) led by Cornell University UMES partnering with fiveother universities to
and K-12 levels. Dr. Realff is the founding director of the Effective Team Dynamics Initiative (ETD) which delivers on the vision that Georgia Tech will be a community where everyone’s unique contributions are recognized. ETD cultivates a supportive, productive, and harmonious learning community grounded in strengths-based collaboration. Her operational leadership and strategic oversight has resulted in the initiative impacting 6500 undergraduate and graduate students and 1600 post docs, faculty, and staff in just the past five years. The initiative partnered with the Center for Teaching and Learning to develop the curriculum and train faculty and staff as certified facilitators to deliver its content. Dr. Realff
surprisingly well; some aspects,such as the mathematics courses, required significant adjustment to fit the Chinese system; someare more complicated that the institute is still struggling with, e.g. the limited undergraduatestudent quota. Those successful and innovative attempts now become the characteristics of theinstitute that include autonomous management, interdisciplinary curricula, internationalizedprograms, and faculty engagement in teaching and research.Administration ModelOn the one hand, JI as a part of the public Chinese university is not a legal entity. It has tocomply with the basic regulations of the country and the university, such as student admissionprocess, student quota, ideological education, financial rules, etc. On the other
things may or may not have. This decision was furtherreinforced by our use of liberative pedagogies in creating the course. While liberative pedagogyprimarily focuses on the interactions between instructors and students, as we transferred thisframework to an engineering design course, we also had to consider the mediation andinteractions between design teams and community members. Therefore, liberative pedagogiesadded to the importance of addressing issues of engineers and stakeholders, and others power (orlack of power) in the course.Case AnalysisIn this section we describe each of the three cases or pedagogical strategies we used to getstudents to engage with the notion of power and how it may affect their engineering work anddecisions. For
limited influence on program objectives and outcomes [1]. Project Unlock envisions not advisory boards, but Industry Partnership Boards (IPBs; emphasis ours). Unlike traditional advisory boards, IPBs engage partners as Figure 1 - Conceptual Development active participants in engineering programs. Beyond for Project Unlock providing advice, IPBs work collaboratively withfaculty and students to create projects that directly impact engineering education.To facilitate this transformation from IAB to IPB, a group of faculty across various
student autonomy. Her research has been sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Dr. Lord is a fellow of the ASEE and IEEE and is active in the engineering education community including serving as General Co-Chair of the 2006 Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference, on the FIE Steering Committee, and as President of the IEEE Education Society for 2009-2010. She is an Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Education. She and her coauthors were awarded the 2011 Wickenden Award for the best paper in the Journal of Engineering Education and the 2011 and 2015 Best Paper Awards for the IEEE Transactions on Education. In Spring 2012, Dr. Lord spent a sabbatical at Southeast University in Nanjing, China
instead of purchasing expensive test equipments for theirlaboratories. The universities especially engineering education departments increasinglyincorporates such industry standard programming environment tools mostly in laboratorypractices but more frequently also in the research and the classroom education. Inengineering education, the demonstration is the most common utilization and operation.Taking engineering education into account, demonstration mostly engages processmodeling, testing and simulation, imitated data acquisition and process control. For thedemonstration purposes high level graphical user interface is required for providingefficient communication. The virtual applications may enhance both theoretical andhands-on experience of