includessocial justice. This possibility is discussed further in the “Focus Groups” subsection below.Three of the survey questions were Likert scale with selections of “very inappropriate (1),”“neutral (3),” “appropriate (4),” and “very appropriate (5),” to determine the extent to whichstudents felt that consideration of social justice was appropriate. A typographical error in thesurvey eliminated the intended “somewhat inappropriate (2)” response option, so no studentsselected that option. As shown in Table 2, 81% of students responded with “very appropriate” or“somewhat appropriate” to “… how appropriate is it for engineering professors to teach socialjustice concepts in technical engineering courses?” (n=16). In response to the questions
conference proceedings. He has been either PI or Co-PI for numerous grants and contracts, totaling more than $10 million in the past 15 years. NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Texas Instruments and Lucent Technologies have funded his research projects. He is the recipient of the excellence in engineering research award at the College of Engineering at UTSA in 2010; the best teacher award in the College of Engineering at UTEP in 1994 and NASA monetary award for contribution to the space exploration. He has been the General Chair, Session Chair, TPC Chair, and Panelist in several
statistics at AAMU, informal environment statistical data indicated that oneout 36 sophomore (2.7%) student does not have laptop and 1 out of 51 sophomore (~2%) orjuniors does not have Internet at home.Due to limited credit hours, we do not have separate lab sessions. In addition, these labs aremainly used in the junior and senior classes, which do not provide lab hours. If we can providethe lectures online, we may be able to allocate some sessions for our mobile computing labs.Here we introduce the idea of flipping to expose students to the mobile computing laboratory.Allow students to study before the lecture and complete the laboratory.Student-Centered FrameworkThe main theme of these laboratory development focus on the student centered
with practicing engineers calling in to provide students withfeedback and additional resources. As per the project schedules, written report updates weresubmitted bimonthly to both faculty instructors and practicing engineers electronically forcomments and feedback on team progress. The final product for the EnvE 5305 course was awritten report outlining proposed upgrades for the municipal WWTP. The final component ofstudents' course grade included a 20 minute oral presentation given by each team detailing theirproposed plant upgrades followed by a 10 minute question and answer session. Faculty,practicing engineers and students were present for oral presentations. Table 1 describes how thecourse components were weighted for student’s final
four person teams examine projects through the feasibility andconcept design phases to evolve and develop concepts that are not only technically feasible buteconomically, culturally, socially and politically acceptable. Course projects require literaturesearches and regulatory investigations. The technical nature of projects includes biological,chemical, mass transfer, and physical processes studied by the students in previous courses. Alesson on design heuristics is included to facilitate brain storming sessions. The use of decisionmodels to evaluate alternatives is required. Students also analyze the carbon footprint ofpotential courses of action and use this information in their decision models. In addition, allprojects include design of
solutions in aglobal and societal context.The motivation for this work is an approach to student educational development based onthe three dimensions of technological literacy outlined in Tech Tally. This includes thesocial, technical, and ethical aspects of technology. Tech Tally identifies threedimensions of technological literacy as shown in Figures 1 and 2. These are knowledge,capabilities, and critical thinking and decision-making. Engineering educators whoreflect on this perspective will note that most engineering classes focus on the capabilitiesand knowledge dimensions, while the dimension of critical thinking and decision-makingis not well-represented in the engineering curriculum.Figure 1: A Graphical Representation of the Three
. The Mechanical Engineering System Design I and II courses (MAE 480 and 481) are probably the students’ last opportunity to be taught about IL. In order to integrate IL to Mechanical Engineering System Design I and II, the following learning objectives have been added to the course syllabus: Learning Outcome Related to the Information Literacy 1. Search online information using the tools and techniques learned in the class. 2. Locate more traditional technical and engineering resources. 3. Evaluate the validity of resources. 4. Apply critical thinking to choose relevant sources to use in the project. 5. Use the information legally. 6. Cite the used information ethically. 7. Apply the
critical industries of thiscentury: consumer electronics, food, solar & wind power, and advanced battery manufacturing toname just a few.” 1 Educational efforts presented in this paper are closely tied to the latest trendsspecified in "Investing in Next-Generation Robotics" platform by President Obama (June 24,2011) 2. The President has launched the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP), a nationaleffort bringing together industry, universities, and the federal government to invest in the Page 26.1250.2emerging technologies that will create high quality manufacturing jobs and enhance our globalcompetitiveness. One of the key steps being
problem solving.1. IntroductionProblem solving is seen as a desirable skill for recent graduates1, and also for students ingeneral2–5. This paper analyses problem solving strategies of first year students in a newlydeveloped program. The program has been created to focus on developing students for a neweconomic and social reality, in which higher order thinking skills are the driving force. Higherorder skills, such as analysis, evaluation, and creation, are extremely important for criticalthinking and unstructured problem solving. Or-Bach6 indicates “…the retrieval and handling ofinformation; communication and presentation; planning and problem solving; and socialdevelopment and interaction…” (p. 17) are abilities much in demand by the general
mindset important?The Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) foundation has set as its objective toestablish an entrepreneurial mindset within engineering programs. This entrepreneurial mindsetencourages engineering students to combine the technical skills learned in their traditionalengineering coursework with a mindset to “create extraordinary value for others.” This mindsetis comprised of three critical factors, including: Curiosity, Connections and Creating value. [1]Curiosity focuses on the rapidly changing environment in which we live. It is important forengineers to have an “insatiable” curiosity reflected in constantly questioning and wonderingabout the world around them. Curiosity is evidenced through Demonstration and
information modeling (BIM). Theparadigm shift demands a higher level of competencies in sustainability and BIM,which generates a profound impact on college education in design andconstruction related fields. This study explores the effective use of collaborativeproject-based learning to enhance students’ understanding of sustainability andBIM implementation in facilitating green building design.In the fall of 2014, the faculty in the Construction Management (CM) program atCalifornia State University, Fresno (Fresno State) closely examined two existingcourses (CM-132 and CM-177) through a joint course project. CM-132encapsulates BIM principles, modeling skills, and implementation of BIM tofacilitate high performance building design and construction
course, a primary objective was to identify anddesign a set of experiments that provided hands-on exploration in the major fields ofengineering and the engineering design process, which would also work well in a remotelearning setting. A related objective was to identify and source a set of equipment tosupport these experiments with minimal travel to a college campus, withoutcompromising the caliber of technical skillset typically gained in a lab with acomprehensive set of equipment. In addition to exposure and exploration in the majorengineering disciplines, emphasis was placed on fostering general experimentation skillssuch as how to design an experiment, familiarity with lab instrumentation, how toproperly plot, analyze, and interpret data
surveyed again in January of 2015. Red barsIn general, laboratory courses require resources and indicate engineering labs taught by chemicalinstructor effort significantly beyond those required engineering departments, and white barsfor traditional lecture-based courses, particularly indicate general engineering labs or Page 26.1337.3when employed with freshmen class sizes. engineering labs that could not be confirmed toFurthermore, freshmen enter our departments with a be exclusively chemical engineering related.wide range of technical and hands-on skills and need additional training
exercises. A series of experiments in systemidentification augment a pre-requisite, junior-level dynamic systems modeling and analysiscourse (EML 4312), a pre-requisite to the laboratory course (EML 4301L) in the mechanicalengineering curriculum. Experiments in control systems are used to augment a senior-levelcontrol of machinery course (EML 4313), a co-requisite course to the laboratory course asillustrated in Figure 1. Laboratory equipment is utilized by the one-credit, senior-level laboratorycourse (EML 4301L) in system dynamics and control that bridges the junior-level, three-creditcourse in dynamic systems to the senior-level, three-credit course in control systems. Figure 1: Course Relationship DiagramThe
completed prior to and again at the end of theprogram. Students were emailed a link to the survey after they had accepted their lab placement,but prior to the program’s start. At the end of the program, after completing their oralpresentations, students were given the link to the anonymous, online survey followed by an emailreminder.Knowledge of the types of skills needed in performing STEM research and several illustrativeexamples of self-efficacy surveys12 for diverse domains initially led to the consideration of thefollowing 12 items for the STEM research self-efficacy survey. 1. Identify a research problem 2. Ability to conduct literature search and obtain scientific/technical papers 3. Comprehend scientific/technical papers 4
capstone design, including their experiences with mentors, thechallenges they faced, their beliefs about what they learned, and their perceived level ofpreparation for the future. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzedusing an open coding process.Preliminary findings suggest that students perceive a wide range of both technical andprofessional learning gains, many of which align with intended course outcomes. Overall, sixsalient themes emerged in students’ discussion of their learning: 1) development of anengineering identity; 2) knowledge of the design process; 3) connections to the “real world”; 4)project management; 5) self-directed learning; and 6) teamwork skills. While several of theseoutcomes intersect with those
? Significant/ Fair/Margina Insignificant/ Unable to Total# Question Exceptional Good - 4 Average - 3 l-2 Poor - 1 Rate Responses Mean -5 Overall1 Workshop Rating 19 10 3 1 0 0 33 4.15Overall workshop rating was 95 out of 100.Evidence-based LearningBesides the technical content revisions, another challenge faced by the educators is how to forma friendly learning environment for computing courses
Essays, Week #4 and #8As with all classes at my university, the students were required to complete a generic courseevaluation on the final day of class. The appendix contains a summary sheet of the evaluationresponses. The survey consisted of seventeen Likert 1- to 5- scale questions. The questionsranged from “1. The instructor made the course objective clear” to “17. Please indicate theoverall teaching effectiveness of the instructor.” Response rate was 67%, 20 out of 30 studentson the final roster. Fifteen of the scaled questions scored between 4 and 5 (that is, “agree” and“strongly agree”). Two of seventeen questions (twelve and thirteen) scored less than 4 at 3.6.Both of these questions had to do with paper grading—“12. helpfulness of
contemporary engineer – one who isnot only technically excellent but also innovative and aware of the inescapable humanisticaspects of working in complex socio-technical systems [1-4]. This vision of the “UGA engineer”has informed the curricula development for the College’s eight undergraduate programs. In theMechanical Engineering program, this vision led to the implementation of a design sequence thatincludes a compulsory, 3 credit hour, sophomore class that focuses on engineering and society(Engineered Systems in Society: MCHE 2990). In this paper, we describe the development of aset of four empathy modules that we have created as a core and integrated element of this courseand preliminary observations from their implementation in fall 2015. We
StudentOutcomes c, d, e, g, and k 7. Specific course objectives related to these Student Outcomes are asfollows: 1. Students will be able to follow a structured process to design, prototype and test a solution to meet the customer requirements. (ABET Student Outcomes: c, d, e, k 7) 2. Students will be able to generate feasible alternative solutions and select the best solution. (ABET Student Outcomes: c, e, k 7) 3. Students will be proficient in communicating the results of their design work in written and oral formats. (ABET Student Outcome: g 7)Project Description To achieve the aforementioned objectives and outcomes, students are presented withvarious engineering problems to solve through a team design effort. For
Page 26.1110.2(described more fully below) include: (1) Arduino-based air quality monitoring; (2)Arduino-based water quality monitoring; (3) Arduino-based GPS wildlife (dog) tracking;(4) hydroelectric power generation; (5) helium balloon-based aerial photography, and an(6) open source research submarine. This paper has two key sections. First, we describe the idea of Commons-based PeerProduction. It is likely that many readers in Engineering or those with an interest inMaking, Makerspaces or Maker-networks will not be familiar with this concept, except ifwe say that collaborative editing of Wikipedia is a well known example of thisphenomenon. It is also the foundation that the “Maker” phenomenon is grounded upon.In this section we also
Figure 1. Bioengineering cross- vs. uni-disciplinary team comparison.students described conflictsthat can be generalized, as follows: (1) Task conflict: Management of work expectations acrossthe disciplines and (2) Relationship conflict: Exhibition of clique behavior within disciplines.Since the unidisciplinary BIOE students would not have to manage work expectations or havenew students introduced to their established groups, similar conflicts were not reported. Whileunmanaged conflict is not a goal of teaming, coping with conflict can lead to more enduringsolutions and use of more resources when creating a solution17, 18. Therefore, it is noteworthythat the crossdisciplinary BIOE students reported growth in their ability to cope with
underrepresented group particularly theHispanic population. Furthermore, TAMIU generally accept all of the existing students thatcompleted the Foundations of Engineering I course regardless of GPA while the FREE programaims specifically at the high achieving pre-college students. They select students with high ACT,GPA scores. The Summer Transfer Engineering Workshop (STEW)[14,15] is a two-weekresidential workshop held at the Dwight Look College of Engineering at Texas A&M Universityin College Station, Texas. It is designed to increase the number of minority students inengineering. The workshop includes information sessions, field trips, laboratory tours, anddesign projects. This program is similar to the one presented here and actually involves the
the engineering core, 28 credit hours are within the E-Lead department and theremaining engineering credits are taken in other engineering departments in the UTEP College ofEngineering. Students customize their degree plan by choosing 9 credit hours of TechnicalElectives and 12 credit hours of electives in an area of the student’s choice (see below).Technical electives must be engineering courses while the concentration electives providevarious paths for students to pursue a focused path of study that can lead to an academic minor.In general, there are several distinct academic customization options that are available tostudents. These options are summarized below and in Figure 1.Options of elective study contributing towards: • An
on the post andresulted in using a 6”x6” Douglas FirLarch No. 1 wood timber for each of theposts on the bridge. These designcalculations concluded the “number Figure 7. One of the pages from the approved plans used during thecrunching” portions of the project, but still construction of the bridge. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration Copyright © 2019, American Society for Engineering Education Session ETD 455significant work remained to prepare for the quickly approaching summer construction period.Draft construction plans and specifications were produced, which went
Piezo-Ceramics test 10 Solar Cell Materials Solar energy efficiencyThe Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) is charged with thetask of “Quality assurance in higher education” for programs in applied science,computing, engineering, and technology. Institutions pursuing accreditation mustdemonstrate that the program meets a set of general criteria10-11. Of particular interest arethe requirements of Criteria #2, #3, and #5, which are focused on Program EducationalObjectives, Program Outcomes and Assessment, and Faculty. These requirements Page 26.939.3include:1. A process based on the needs of the
).AcknowledgementsThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1323279, “Collaborative Research: Training Next Generation Faculty and Students to Adress theInfrastructure Crisis.” Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed inthis material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation. Appendix A: Summer 2014 Workshop Agenda Infrastructure Education Workshop Wednesday, June 25, 2014 8:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. (Optional) Technical Field Trip (Penn) Meet in hotel lobby Details TBD
outcome Development (SD) situations action(1.) Knowledge and Describe different Describe the general Explain why it is notcomprehension perspectives on what could characteristics of WSPs, possible to find “absolutely be seen as SD and what a particularly in contrast with correct” solutions to WSPs. sustainable society could be. tame problems. Describe how different societal actors may use the SD concept in various contexts. Describe what it means that SD is a political concept
the required skill for the game. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration Copyright ©2019, American Society for Engineering Education Session ETD 475 • Defensive Strategy: In this feature, substantial knowledge is required by the player to be able to efficiently use the tools to defend cyber-attacks in the game. • Attacker Strategy: Here, the learner is adequately trained and equipped with the knowledge of cybersecurity to attack the other players in the game. Table 1. Features of the Existing Gaming
interests fall in design, fabrication and characterization of advanced multifunctional material systems for embedded sensing, structural health monitoring, vibration and solar energy harvesting and storage. His research encompasses micromechanics modeling, materials synthesis, structural characterization and device evaluation. The goal of his research is to develop ad- vance structural materials for the next generation ground, aerial and space vehicles with enhanced safety and energy efficiency. Since 2012, his research has been funded by DOE, DOEd, and DOD with a total of 3 million, of which 1.4 million as PI. He has published or submitted 49 technical articles since 2007 (25 referred journals and 24 conference