and Future WorkThis study presented an alternative approach to understand students' perceptions of engineeringby using visual methods, arts-based data collection methodology. Our results provide anoverview of what students think engineering is at the beginning of their first semester in college.We were able to identify some aspects of their perceptions that we had not been able to identifybefore, after many years of asking them to verbally or through surveys express what engineeringis. Some of the aspects that we could identify that were new included the perception thatengineering is a collaborative discipline that requires interaction among people, and that forsome of them, engineering should care about holistic issues and how the discipline
students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering foster or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clem- son University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. Her research earned her a National Science Foundation CAREER Award focused on characterizing latent di- versity, which includes diverse attitudes, mindsets, and approaches to learning, to understand engineering students’ identity development. She has won several awards for her research including the 2016 American Society of Engineering Education Educational Research and Methods
’ scholarship investigated stu- dent teams in engineering, faculty communities of practice, and the intersectionality of multiple identity dimensions. Her research interests include diversity and inclusion in STEM, intersectionality, teamwork and communication skills, assessment, and identity construction. Her teaching philosophy focuses on student centered approaches such as culturally relevant pedagogy. Dr. Cross’ complimentary professional activities promote inclusive excellence through collaboration.Mr. Joseph Francis Mirabelli, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Joseph Mirabelli is an Educational Psychology graduate student at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign with a focus in Engineering
student recommendations for an engineering curriculum.” J. Engrg. Educ., 84(3), 241-248.10. Koehn, E. (1997). “Engineering Perceptions of ABET Accreditation Criteria”, J. Profl. Issues in Engrg. Educ. And Pract., ASCE, 123(2), 66-70.11. Manual of Evaluation Process: Engineering Criteria 2000. (2002). Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), Baltimore, MD.12. National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE). (1992). “First professional degree survey report.” Publ. No. 059, Alexandria, VA.13. News Release. (2002). Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET), Baltimore, MD.14. “Profession at risk: why four years?” (1995). Background material for the ASCE 1995 Education Conference, ASCE
senior management engagement within a business is one ofthe main drivers of industry-academia collaboration in curriculum design26,27, suggesting thatindustry itself is most poised to affect the changes it requires. Personnel in engineering andengineering technology recognizing differences in their approaches, however slight,collaborating with industry to appropriately modify their curricula, and developing andmaintaining relationships to continue this collaboration would likely result in similar outcomeswithin their respective fields as those seen in computing.Before that can be done, though, a more complete understanding of what students in these fieldsneed and how those needs should be addressed is required. There are several unique
first year college chemistry, physics or calculus instruction.Bypassing the discussion that this current remediation educational practice does or does notprovide the mathematics and science instruction students need, it is clear that anintermediate stage between high school and two year or four year technical and engineeringdegrees is not an efficient educational pathway for producing the 21st Century technicalworkforce. Any effort to alter this current practice requires a shift in the instructionalcontent and instructor motivation in K-12 education. The increased awareness that science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)curriculum represents an innovative approach for education with respect to content for andrelevance to the K-12
resulted in curriculum compression – sometimes to extreme levels.Faced with pressure to add material, reduce time, and satisfy the demands of the (sometimesarchaic) industry hiring practices, academe too often resorted to a balkanization approach incurriculum development.One possible solution to our overall dilemma is to make the entry level requirement forprofessional practice a 5- or 6-year program. This is at best only a partial solution to theproblem. While science and mathematics provide the engineer much of the basic tool andknowledge suite needed for practice, it is design, and more recently its abstraction into systemsengineering, that is the essence of our profession. In educating engineers for our future, we needto think in terms of a
Brunhaver is an Assistant Professor of Engineering in the Fulton Schools of Engineering Poly- technic School. Dr. Brunhaver recently joined Arizona State after completing her M.S. and Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. She also has a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Northeastern University. Dr. Brunhaver’s research examines the career decision-making and professional identity formation of engineering students, alumni, and practicing engineers. She also conducts studies of new engineering pedagogy that help to improve student engagement and understanding.Dr. Adam R. Carberry, Arizona State University Dr. Adam Carberry is an associate professor at Arizona State University in the Fulton Schools of En
in the development of the Enterprise curriculum was to provide a truly uniqueexperience that addressed the educational outcomes previously defined while at the same timesatisfy the degree requirements within any of the engineering degree programs. Fortunately, thiscould be accomplished more easily within the new EC-2000 ABET accreditation criteria that pro-vides more flexibility within degree programs than in the past. Each engineering program in thecollege was able to design a curriculum and a corresponding assessment program in which thegeneral and respective program educational outcomes defined by ABET could be evaluatedwithin the 'required' courses for the degree programs. This, in effect, has to be the case since it isdifficult to
systems.SummaryStudents in engineering and technology programs need laboratory experience with moderninstrumentation to prepare them to use this equipment in industry. This paper has outlinedefforts at Lake Superior State University to build students’ competence and confidence with thistechnology by integrating the use of this equipment throughout the curriculum in bothfundamentals and advanced laboratory courses.AcknowledgmentLake Superior State University acknowledges and appreciates an Instrumentation and LaboratoryImprovement (ILI) grant from the National Science Foundation, “Improving the LaboratoryExperience in Engineering Technology with Modern Computer-Based Instrumentation,” DUE9452284, and grants from the Society of Manufacturing Engineers Education
Paper ID #42061Board 361: Reframing Racial Equity Year 2: Examining Script of WhitenessDr. Diana A. Chen, University of San Diego Diana A. Chen, PhD is an Associate Professor and one of the founding faculty members of Integrated Engineering at the University of San Diego. She earned her BS in Engineering from Harvey Mudd College, and MS and PhD in Civil Engineering from Clemson University. In collaboration with colleagues, Dr. Chen is designing a new engineering curriculum to educate changemakers who understand that engineering is an inherently socio-technical activity. Her passion is studying and encouraging culture
faculty committed to documenting andpublishing educational research, strategies and results for the benefit of the academic communityat large. Page 5.185.9Bibliography1. Buxeda, R.J., and Moore D., Using Learning Styles Data to Design a Microbiology Course. Journal of College Science Teaching, Dec1999/ Jan 2000 Pages 159- 164 (in Press).2. Lamancusa, John S., Jens E. Jorgensen, and José L. Zayas, The Learning Factory – A New Approach to Integrating Design and Manufacturing into Engineering Curricula. ASEE Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 86, No.2, April 1997.3. Morell, l., Orengo,M. Sánchez, A and R. Buxeda, After so
Bio-inspired Design Using C-K TheoryIntroductionThe engineer of 2020 is expected to not only offer technical ingenuity but also adapt to acontinuously evolving environment. The ability to operate outside the narrow limits of onediscipline and be ethically grounded in solving the complex problems of the future will also beneeded. To address the competencies of the future engineer, undergraduate education must trainstudents to not only solve engineering challenges that transcend disciplinary boundaries, but alsocommunicate, transfer knowledge, and collaborate across technical and non-technical boundaries.One approach to train engineers in these competencies is teaching biomimicry or bio-inspireddesign in an engineering curriculum, which offers
. Results suggest that these approaches are successful, resulting in higherretention and higher grade point averages. The attractiveness of this approach with regards tomaterials engineering has been noted in a report from the National Science Foundation,9 whichconcludes that "the attractiveness of chemistry and physics…could be enhanced by greateremphasis on materials-related topics which would help students better relate their studies to the'real world'."With this in mind, we have developed a new course, titled Materials Chemistry. The goal of thiscourse is to provide engineering applications of basic chemistry concepts at the freshman level.This paper describes the role of this course within the engineering curriculum at the Universityof Florida
SpaceAdministration (NASA) offer a joint program for faculty and research development. This programknown as ASEE/NASA Faculty Fellowship program offers opportunities for professional developmentfor Engineering Technology faculty. This paper discusses one such experience involving applied researchat NASA Langley Research Center, which resulted in professional development of the faculty memberwhile enhancing the undergraduate curriculum in Engineering Technology.I Introduction Success in an Engineering Technology programs has been traditionally evaluated based uponthree factors namely, Teaching, Research and Service. While the relative ranking of these factors isarguable 1,2, it is the research (and the associated requirement of publication), which
NSF ATE Regional Center CREATE NSF ATE grant #1002653A. Overview:The California Regional Consortium for Engineering Advances in TechnologicalEducation (CREATE) was formed nineteen years ago as a joint consortium effort ofseven community colleges and over fifty high-tech engineering technology employers todevelop a regional approach to the preparation and training of engineering technicians.Since its formation, CREATE has emerged as a major education-industry partnership andwas selected as one of only forty National Science Foundation Advanced TechnologicalEducation Centers of Excellence funded nationally (NSF ATE Regional Center forRenewable Energy www.create-california.org).B. Goal/Objectives:The goal of this ATE
the technical content of the curriculum, and is consistent with the program educational objectives. Students must be prepared to enter the professional practice of engineering through a curriculum culminating in a major design experience based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple constraints. 54 (a) one year of a combination of college level mathematics and basic5 sciences (some with experimental experience) appropriate to the discipline. Basic sciences are defined as biological, chemical, and physical sciences. The curriculum
students in the areas of RS/GIS, global positioning systems (GPS), datavisualization, animation and analysis, and other related topics. This track or option will providethe student with non-traditional learning experiences in the new courses to be developed andthose to be revised in four SMET programs (Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics andAgricultural Sciences). By doing so, we aim to attract and retain students and provide a focus forpreparing students for careers and graduate studies in these areas. This innovative programintegrates an undergraduate curriculum with hands-on experience provided by exposure tolaboratory activities and undergraduate research that spans the student’s college years. The keyelement in this approach is the
AC 2010-1457: ASSESSMENT-DRIVEN EVOLUTION OF A FIRST-YEARPROGRAMRick Williams, East Carolina UniversityWilliam Howard, East Carolina University Page 15.210.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Assessment Driven Evolution of a First year ProgramAbstractThe general engineering program at East Carolina University (ECU) was established in 2004. Inthe fall of 2007, a major curriculum change was initiated that introduced three new courses intothe first year. These courses are Engineering Graphics, Introduction to Engineering, andComputer Applications in Engineering. Each of these courses contains projects or assignmentsthat directly assess the achievement of
Session XX60 60 Years of Distance Education Experience Claudio da Rocha Brito, Melany M. Ciampi COPEC – Council of Researches in Education and SciencesAbstractCOPEC – Council of Researches in Education and Sciences has conceived and developed theTelecommunication Engineering Program, which contains in its curriculum the so called"Opportunity” - a time that student can spend having classes of other courses in other programs.Added to that they also have the choice of taking classes at distance of engineering coursesothers than the ones that are part of the program. The goal of this new kind
Page 5.95.4type of team approach in the engineering classroom is unique to Rowan Engineering.The CAP Center also provides additional services to students such as the 72-hour drop-off resume critique service. Students get feedback on their resume from a CAP Centerprofessional within 72 hours. The Engineering Internship Coordinator works closelywith the CAP Center and maintains regular contact with the CAP Center staff. Thiscollaboration, in addition to a solid technical curriculum, gives Rowan students acompetitive edge in the marketplace and benefits industry.Industrial Partners: The Rowan Engineering internships are a significant benefit to industry.The participating companies have bright, motivated and highly skilled students
promote student learning and the use of computational tools such as Matlab and ANSYS in the context of fluid mechanics and heat transfer.Dr. Hadas Ritz, Cornell University Hadas Ritz is a senior lecturer in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, and a Faculty Teaching Fellow at the James McCormick Family Teaching Excellence Institute (MTEI) at Cornell University, where she received her PhD in Mechanical Engineering in 2008. Since then she has taught required and elective courses covering a wide range of topics in the undergraduate Mechanical Engineering curriculum. In her work with MTEI she co-leads teaching workshops for new faculty and assists with other teaching excellence initiatives. Her main teaching interests
Session 2325A PEDAGOGICAL CONCEPT OF INTEGRATING MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN AND TECHNICAL COMMUNICATIONRavi P. Ramachandran1, Anthony J. Marchese1, James A. Newell1, Raul Ordonez1, John L.Schmalzel1, Beena Sukumaran1, Harriet Benavidez2 and Julie Haynes2 1. College of Engineering, Rowan University, Glassboro, New Jersey 2. College of Communication, Rowan University, Glassboro, New JerseyAbstract The Engineering Clinic is an eight-semester sequence, based on the medical schoolmodel, taken by every engineering student at Rowan University. In these clinics, students andfaculty from all four engineering departments work side-by-side on
second method that is being implemented in five engineering departments in theCollege of Engineering at Penn State as part of an NSF Action Agenda Initiative Project. Theeffects of problem-based learning approaches in two new courses in Industrial andManufacturing Engineering have been studied using the SDLRS as a pre-test and post-test. Thecourses are IME, Inc. and Designing Product Families. IME, Inc. is a new two-semesterundergraduate course in which multidisciplinary student teams first design and prototype newproducts, and then produce them in volume. Students must design a marketable product andconsider all aspects of manufacturing including process planning, tooling, assembly, andoutsourcing--such that they can produce 100-500 units of
Research Council [5-6].New pedagogical approaches to EC include an increasing focus on topic-specific proceduralwriting; engineering-specific templates and citations; and highly structured assignments withclear applications and a team-based component. Studies have shown that engineering students inparticular respond best and perform better in technical writing tasks with clear deadlines,expectations, peer review phases, and rubric-based assessments [5].EC pedagogy is also changing as a result of the overall importance of engineering technical workrises in industry. Calling it the Communication Coefficient (CC) method, researchers advocatethat engineering students’ experiences in the communication classroom can be improved if theyare advised in
]. Approximately 10 hours ofcurriculum materials were developed to help participants develop their skills in communications,teamwork and leadership – all within the context of collaborative, multidisciplinary science andengineering projects. This curriculum was integrated into a new graduate-level course in theCollege of Engineering at MSU in the Spring of 2019: “CMSE 890: Communications,Teamwork, Ethics and Leadership Training for Multidisciplinary Research Teams.” This courseis a graduate elective designed to equip STEM graduate students with the skills needed tosuccessfully communicate and collaborate within diverse, multidisciplinary research teams. Nosimilar courses exist for STEM graduate students at MSU and the College of Engineeringdecided to
interested in approaches that contribute to a more expansive understanding of engineering in sociocultural contexts, the impact of critical consciousness in engineering practice, and the development and implementation of culturally responsive pedagogies in engineering education. He received the NSF CAREER Award for his work on conocimiento in engineering spaces. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 Powered by www.slayte.com Reimagining Energy Year 4: Lessons LearnedOverviewThis National Science Foundation (NSF) project focuses on the development of a new, requiredenergy course, “An Integrated Approach to Energy,” for second-year
movement toward ergonomic advancement within theworkplace, yet according to Alexander, far too few industrial engineers retain ergonomics as oneof their more commonly utilized tools4.MethodologyA review of the systematic approach for curriculum development in Ergonomics and Safety arearevealed limited information. Generally, curricular design could be grouped into three areas:laboratory design, course design, and program design. Articles on laboratory and course designfocused on many of the same critical issues. This is not surprising in science oriented programswhere many laboratories are treated as separate courses. The major issues revealed were aconcentrated effort to move class instruction from a highly theoretical component
of relevant core engineering disciplines. Studentsusually elect engineering programs because they want to build things, and introductory courses cancapitalize on this interest. In addition, introductory courses provide an early start to the development of theessential skills described in the CDIO Syllabus.Standard 5 -- Design-Build ExperiencesA curriculum that includes two or more design-build experiences, including one at abasic level and one at an advanced levelDescription: The term design-build experience denotes a range of engineering activities central to theprocess of developing new products and systems. Students develop product and system building skills, aswell as the ability to apply engineering science, in design-build experiences
their work into several key categories,including technical problem-solving, interdisciplinary applications, societal impacts, anddiversity and inclusion initiatives. This classification is informed by KEEN cards, whichhighlight innovative teaching methodologies such as problem-solving studios, project-basedlearning, and entrepreneurship in engineering. Our analysis reveals trends in topics, teachingmethods, and content of the KEEN cards, offering insights into how fellows from differentdisciplines (e.g., mechanical, civil, and chemical engineering) bring distinct approaches tointegrating entrepreneurial mindsets in their curricula. We also identify workshops, such asProblem-Solving Studios and Integrating Curriculum with Entrepreneurial Mindset