are judged by industry representatives who provide awardsand cash prizes for Best Project (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place) and Best Poster (1st, 2nd, and 3rd place).Faculty supervise the teams and meet with them twice per week: (1) one-on-one with each teamfor 30 minutes, and (2) with all the teams together for a 75-minute class session, during whichtime the instructor lectures, has guest speakers, conducts group activities, etc. as warranted. Afaculty member usually supervises 5-6 teams (25-30 students) per section of the capstone designcourse, which counts toward their teaching load. Course syllabi, report templates, gradingrubrics, project sponsorship, and judging criteria can all be found online on the LearningFactory’s website (www.lf.psu.edu
Session 2666 Learning By Design — What Have We Learned? Louis L Bucciarelli ECSEL, MITIn October, 1997, ECSEL held a workshop in order to assess, and continue to promote, theintegration of design throughout the engineering curriculum as a means of renovatingengineering education. The workshop was divided into three sessions: A first focused on the useof computers in support of learning by design; the second, on the integration of design intoengineering science courses, in particular, courses in mechanics; the third, on industry drivendesign and manufacturing
advantage of innate potential and to learn easily in either a right- or a left-hemisphericenvironment. The unexpected frequency of mixed and integrated preferences throughout thisresearch series suggests a future line of research to investigate how and why American and Gulfstudents are developing so differently along these lines.Three notable differences occurred between the fall and spring classes: (1) Length of class. The fall class consisted of two 75-minute sessions per week, but the spring class had three 50-minute sessions per week. The shorter classes made incorporating students’ whiteboard activity more difficult. (2) Students’ hemispheric preferences. During the spring, the hemispheric preferences
2016 ASEE Rocky Mountain Section Conference Flipped Classroom Method in Teaching “Introduction to Engineering” Course Online Dr. Jing Guo and Dr. John Santiago Colorado Technical University (CTU), College of EngineeringAbstractThis paper presents a flipped classroom method used in developing and delivering an onlinecourse entitled, “Introduction to Engineering”. The course includes a combination of mini-lectures and labs. Two one-hour chat sessions held synchronously are used where: (1) instructorsneed to hold one chat session for answering the mini-video lectures, reading material andproblem sets, (2) and another hour for
performance(s) are generally assumed rather than examined in most research on theundergraduate engineering experience. Based on interviews with 100 faculty, administrators, andstudent support professionals at five campuses, I describe a variety of faculty views toward theteaching of engineering generally, and toward different demographic groups of students. Idescribe the variety of contexts within which engineering education is conducted, and theirinfluences on faculty attitudes and behaviors. I move from the national level to the university orthe college, which affects faculty life and their views about teaching and students. Locally, Iemphasize the department, in which cultural and organizational factors come together mostimmediately in faculty
Society for Engineering Education, 2016 79 2016 ASEE Rocky Mountain Section Conferenceinterview in order to promote more honest feedback and a less threatening environment. Theinterview was conducted by the College of Engineering Dean and Engineering DepartmentChair. Table 1 are meeting notes summarizing the results from student comments. In general,the overall content and instructional delivery was well received. The content was further refinedand developed during the quarter correcting minor errors identified by student feedback. Fourstudents were able to make the focus group meeting when usually 7-8 students out of 11 are
ranging from“Finding Nano” to robotics to ecology.The development of an extensive partnership beyond Clarkson’s campus has been a criticallyimportant aspect of the success and growth of our outreach programs. Partners include thecounty-wide Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) and other nearby Universitiesthat provide synergistic expertise, including educational assessment. The partnership helps toprovide an umbrella organization and common themes across all individual programs, whichhelp to main continuity for all stakeholders as the specific funding sources come and go. Thecommon elements that have been consistent across all individual programs and that have beenshown to be critical to our success include: (1) hands-on, inquiry and
by Glaser & Strauss16 and refined by Cobb and Whitenack17, to test and refinethe initial hypotheses. This process involves reviewing the previously generated “local”conjectures against the entire data corpus and, for each conjecture, assessing its fit with theremainder of the students’ contributions to the interviews. Ultimately, the result of this analysisis a number of claims about student activity, engagement and learning “that span the data set butyet remain empirically grounded in the details of specific episodes”18.Theme #1: Connecting Students and STEM: Everyone can do math While this project was initially predicated on the goal of helping school studentsconnecting both their interests and popular culture with STEM
for data analysis an interpretation, and aid in the preparation of engineering calculations and reports.Prof. Lance Manuel, The University of Texas at Austin Professor and Associate Chair in the Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental EngineeringZoe E Chen, University of Texas at AustinJoshua Epps ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 1 Session XXXX How Can Managed Retreat Solutions be Just, Fair, Economical, and Environmentally Sustainable? Mari C. Dalton, Zoe E. Chen, Joshua E. Epps, Lance Manuel
have also heard many requests from students forexamples or guidelines to guide the writing of effective annotations. We have also witnessedmany different reactions to the annotation writing (e.g., a dismissive reaction that focuses on “ifit is short, it won’t take much effort”, or an engagement reaction such as evidenced in the quoteabove). A concerted effort to understand what makes an effective annotation will be of value inaddressing the issues revealed by these observations.Ultimately, the issue of annotation effectiveness is an empirical one—since the effectiveness ofan argument, of text in general, is determined by the audience of that text. However, conceptsfrom technical communication and rhetoric can provide a baseline for such an
method of group lab report writing proposed in this study blends individualaccountability with group ownership and collaboration. The I-in-Team submission method seeks tocreate a balance of individual work and teamwork.Methodology The test group for this study included 35 students enrolled in the ABET accredited junior-level Unit Operations Laboratory chemical engineering class at a public state university] Thesestudents were divided into 11 lab groups. The class was held in-person three sessions a week witha mix of both online submissions using Canvas and in-class physical submissions for assignments. The summarized grade distributions for assignments from the course applicable to thisstudy are provided below in Table 1. The final
data and what might this tell us about our values and epistemologies?Journal articles that are qualitative, engineering education, and published in 2019 were identifiedthrough database searches of Engineering Village and Google Scholar resulting in 27 journalarticles from nine journals. The analysis followed a process presented in the book,Reconceptualizing Qualitative Research [1] and involved multiple readings of each journalarticle and considerations of the types and amounts of data, the relationships between researchersand the data, the types of questions authors tried to answer with their data, how authors workedwith and learned from their data, and how data was analyzed.The results suggest a range of types and amounts of data collected
peers in remote and in-person learning settings. The labels were further analyzed byidentifying the patterns among them which helped in generating a broader theme. In the processof generating themes, some labels were combined together to form a comprehensive theme whileother labels remained independent. Finally, the themes were defined and named succinctly forunderstanding the data effectively and were placed into different categories consistent with theconceptual framework (Figure 1). In total, the researchers coded a total of 2005 responses fromtwo short answers provided by 1055 survey respondents. Of these responses, 1214 (57.5%) werefrom remote learning settings and 896 (42.5%) were from traditional learning settings.ResultsThe peer support
level. Referring back to Table 1,one can see that there were 63, 34, 45 and 55 responses for first, second, third and fourth / fifth Page 9.233.12year students for all institutions combined. Even with this relatively small set of responses, wehad hoped to see means that increased with year standing, as we had expected that in general,Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition Copyright 2004, American Society for Engineering Education.more advanced students would have developed more in terms of the factors measured by themodules. The means for all modules broken down by
followingresponses, with some editing by the author who carried out the interviews:1. The robotics material and computers gave another dimension to teaching physics. The students were able to learn by problem solving and using their inquiry skills as they constructed robots that would not fall apart when used. They realized early on that durability of the robot was more important than aesthetics. The unit is taking longer that I figured since LEP students need more time for instruction and more time and help to build the robots. They are less likely to have had experience with computer use out of school. In general, they may not have had the opportunity to play with Lego toys and other toys that require small motor coordination
:30 PM Team-building activity 1:10 PM Mission Briefings 1:40 PM Mission #1 2:30 PM Reflection Questions 2:40 PM Mission #2 3:30 PM Reflection Questions 3:40 PM Preparation for Presentations 4:15 PM Capstone presentations for Mission #1 and Mission #2 4:45 PM Students write in Log 4:55 PM Concluding comments and outlook for next day 5:00 PM Dismissal Figure 3. General itinerary. Not applicable to foundation day or field day/barbecue. The final day was an open house and the award ceremony was held between 5:00 - 5:30 PM
research methodology included two phases. In the quantitative phase all studentsresponded to the Concept Inventory [1] questions. During the qualitative phase 8 novices and 8seniors were interviewed and responded to open-ended questions about their understanding ofelectricity.The two most interesting and unexpected results deserve attention. First, in the novice groupnegative correlation between grades and misconceptions was stronger than in the senior group.Incorrect understanding of electricity in the senior group is frequently disguised by well-developed technical vocabulary. Even the brightest high-GPA students had numerous mistakenbeliefs. The other unexpected result was that, despite significant improvements in understandingof electricity
Session 2630 Challenging the Norm in Engineering Education: Understanding Organizational Culture and Curricular Change Prudence Merton, Jeff Froyd, M. Carolyn Clark, and Jim Richardson Texas A&M University / Texas A&M University/ Texas A&M University/ University of AlabamaAbstractIn the study of organizational behavior, several linkages have been made betweenorganizational change and organizational culture. One link suggests that a “strong”culture is a prerequisite for corporate success, and attaining “excellence” often requiresculture change. In the study of change in higher education, there
Session 3530 A Longitudinal and Cross-Sectional Study of Engineering Student Intellectual Development as Measured by the Perry Model Rose M. Marra, Betsy Palmer, Thomas A Litzinger The Pennsylvania State UniversityIntroductionIndustry leaders tell us that today’s successful engineers need excellent communication, problemsolving, and life-long learning skills in addition to the technical content engineering educatorshave traditionally focused on (Augustine, 1997; Barr & Tagg, 1995). In response, colleges arereforming their curricula to introduce more hands-on, active-learning techniques into
AC 2012-3321: ADULT UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING STUDENTEXPERIENCEDr. Shannon Ciston, University of California, Berkeley Shannon Ciston is a lecturer of chemical and biomolecular engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. She has experience teaching chemical, environmental, and multidisciplinary engineering funda- mentals as well as technical communications. Ciston’s research interests include affective and experiential aspects of student learning, and impacts of nanomaterials on aquatic biofilms.Dr. Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven Maria-Isabel Carnasciali is Assistant Professor of mechanical engineering at the Tagliatela School of Engineering, University of New Haven, Conn. She obtained
; 3) field studieson HM and retrofitting techniques to preserve and upgrade our aging structures; and 4)performance evaluation of various modern structural systems for aseismic design. Keeping thisin mind, in this REU Site following three types of projects were selected: 1) the design ofimproved building systems; 2) the design of improved bridge systems; and 3) manufacturing andtesting structural components used for small-scale models in seismic performance evaluationstudies.3. General Description And Administration Of The REU Site The REU Site was administered each year for eight weeks during the summer. Each yearnine undergraduate students were recruited, who were divided into three teams, with threestudents in each, and each team
Session 2360 Being Political in the Global: How engineers accommodate, resist, and experience ambiguity towards globalization Juan C. Lucena Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityIntroductionCorporations, governments, and the engineers they hire face increasing challenges in the globaleconomy such as mobility of capital and labor, organizational re-structuring across nationalboundaries, development and implementation of more efficient production and manufacturingpractices, among others. Yet we know very little about how engineers understand and
to a more qualitative understanding of the experience of an engineering classroom. Theshift towards qualitative research has been accomplished through incorporating aspects ofsociology, anthropology, and ethnography into the research process [1]. This drive toward moreholistic understanding motivated our research team to try and understand the roleproblem-solving mindsets play in the work of engineering and education faculty. Awareness ofmultiple possible mindsets when approaching problems could help educators be more effective inthe classroom. Further, if educators displayed a noticeable preference for a particular mindsetwhen approaching issues in the classroom, helping them to understand this tendency could helpraise awareness of
) project *ENTC 4xx: Micro/nano manufacturing (elective) ENTC 429: Project/people management TEEL xxx: Technical elective GEEL xxx: General elective Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Copyright ©2005, American Society for Engineering EducationTables 1 and 2 compare the curriculums before and after 2003. The main changes in the programinclude: 1) Streamline technical courses. There are slightly less number of technical courses due to merging of overlapping courses. The
handout was distributed to all students and was reviewedduring one class session of the course in order to set appropriate presentation guidelines.A new rubric featuring descriptive performance level indicators based on an appropriate subsetof the RSVP framework was developed and distributed to the students ahead of thepresentations, as it is important to provide specific information on expectations to both studentsand faculty prior to the evaluation process5. As presented in Appendix B, this rubric focuses onfive specific areas. As this is, ostensibly, a “one minute” presentation, the length of thepresentation is a relevant issue. The four other major evaluation areas are derived from theRSVP framework based on specific items identified as areas
” to students when presented without an integrating viewpoint.As a simple example, a by-pass around a heat exchanger can (1) increase the operating window,(2) improve reliability, (3) improve dynamic behavior, (4) affect process efficiency and (5) be acause of potential process fault that is difficult to diagnose. Teaching operability techniques andshowing students how common process structures and equipment affect operability enables thestudents to learn a structured approach for process operability analysis. Presenting operability techniques for all industries is an impractical objective for thedesign course. However, the course can provide students with the generic concepts required tosolve problems, such as(1) Learning the key
to theclassroom. By using team learning and specifically pairing up students who were observed tohave good people skills and technical knowledge with the weaker students, all of the studentswere challenged to complete assigned problems. The additional task of explaining theircomprehension challenged the stronger students while aiding the weaker students. Studentsshowed a rudimentary understanding of the basic concepts; however, there seemed to be ageneral lack of knowledge concerning the equilibrium condition.For some classroom lecture diversions into group problem solving, a simple count-off method ofselecting arbitrary groups was utilized, while at other times, natural selection was used as theclassroom generally was sectioned by tables of
aprofession, there is evidence that the occupations and activities of practicing engineers have beensusceptible and adapted to changes over time. These might include changes made real throughscientific advances, technical knowledge, shifting economics, regulatory developments andsocietal priorities. The successful engineer will be in a position to not only navigate thesechanges, but to lay the path for their realization as well. To scaffold the learning and applicationof engineering, instructors need to be cognizant of the challenges faced by students, and build aninclusive, accessible environment for all students.MotivationThis research was initiated in response to first-year engineering student concerns regardingworkload at a large public
orremove obsolete material based on strengths and weaknesses on the students’ technicalbackground. It is often the case that students have expectations that do not align well with thelearning objectives of a course, or may not have acquired sufficient technical competence incertain prior courses. Furthermore, the instructor can help individual students, upon their request,to strategize their studying based on their individual background and fill in such gaps.A sample of a recently administered Student Info Questionnaire is shown in Figure 1. Althoughdifferent instructors can select a different list of questions, some questions that are highlyrecommended are: (i) “list of prior relevant courses”, not just the prerequisites, because they helpthe
education” OR “Student performance”).Figure 1 shows the search and screening methodology used in this study. Figure 1. Methodology used for Article Search and Screening (Adapted from Costa et al. [34])Data retrieval was carried out in the four databases, and IJCER. In Step 1, the documents weresearched using the keyword search string in each of the databases and journal which resulted in330 records. In Step 2, the study was limited to technical papers, journal articles, and conferenceproceedings written in English during a 10-year period from 2013 to 2023 which resulted in 285records. Publications including early access, book chapters, editorials, and dissertations wereexcluded from the analysis. Technical papers, journal articles, and conference