shown in Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3, respectively. Figure 1. Radiation Emergency Response Kit Figure 2. Personal Dosimeter Figure 3. Portal MonitorSeveral experimental sessions and an accompanying comprehensive laboratory manual havebeen developed and introduced into the curriculum. The laboratory activities introduce studentsto various types of detectors used to measure radiations and the general properties of radiationdetection systems. The hands-on equipment operation training can further enhance the students’educational experience. This laboratory module has been infused in the new courses (“NuclearEmergency Preparedness & Exercises” and “Introduction to Nuclear Technology
related research outlines the role of mentorshipin overcoming these barriers. This study builds upon that model, exploring a long-termmentorship program designed to help engineering faculty adopt EBIPs effectively. This programpaired experienced educators with faculty, with a focus on collaboration, reflection, and ongoingimprovement.Over 10–15 weeks, the mentorship program included weekly collaborative sessions thatfacilitated dialogue, resource sharing, and problem-solving. A 1:1 or 2:1 mentor-to-mentee ratiohelped provide a personalized guidance, and faculty teaching core engineering courses such asMechanics of Materials and Circuits were specifically targeted, recognizing the discipline-specific nature of pedagogical challenges in these
circuits courseoffered at a small private, technical teaching four-year institution in the Midwest. According toUS News and World Reports, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology is ranked as one of the topundergraduate engineering universities in the country. The electric circuits course is asophomore level course for non-majors that covers concepts related to DC and AC circuits. Thiscourse was offered online for two subsequent years during the summer session. The motivationwas to allow students who desired to get ahead or stay on schedule in their curriculum to do sowhile on internships, co-ops, or research experiences. It was vital that the teaching andengagement standards were not compromised in the transition to online. This institute has asmall
rising sophomore. At the NavalAcademy rising sophomores have recently declared their majors, but have not yet taken anyclasses in the discipline. The escorts were part of the Naval Academy Summer Seminar team, notnecessarily engineers or even technical majors. Each session was conducted by a primaryinstructor/facilitator plus at least one assistant. The escort was usually drafted to help. While ascript was provided for each instructor, they were encouraged to complete the disassembly andsubsequent reassembly themselves before presenting in order to familiarize themselves with theidiosyncrasies of these machines. The students were divided into fairly arbitrary groups of four tofive students. Facilitators circulated to assist and ensure that every
not only the aims of FYC, but also meet outcomes involving the knowledge andappreciation of literary culture, when delivered within an engineering/problem-solving context.However, the delivery of the course in semester 1 needs further evaluation and redesign tosupport students struggling in a reading-intensive environment. Overall, the practice is promisingin its approach to integrating WOV skill acquisition, engineering concepts, and literature, allwithin the first year of an engineering student’s academic career; therefore, continued study andrefinement of this process would be an important contribution to the non-technical componentsof engineering education. References1. Leydens, Jon A
markers were analyzed. First, results of anonymous surveys were reviewed.Second, anecdotal evidence was reviewed. Third, the success of students in the followup coursewas evaluated. Overall, the findings show that the course is effective in empowering the studentsto be independent designers who have valuable skills to industry.1 IntroductionCreating a practical course is a delicate balance. On the one hand, if it is too practical, studentswill only learn the tools presented and will not be able to generalize. On the other hand, if it is tootheoretical, students will know the foundations of practical tools but will have no practice puttingthat knowledge to use. Most classes in the ECE department at Northwestern University addressthis tradeoff by
progresses to foster social resiliencyAdapting from this, role-playing, public speaking and interpersonal scenarios and practice with aset of positive, coping behaviors that can be drawn upon in many different types of professionalsettings (and to do so in an accepting, low-stress environment) has been shown to be effectivewith shy children and is applied in the seminar. Audience connection is emphasized from theoutset, stressing the notion that the student must convince the audience of their position beyondsimply presenting data, and that can only be done if the student knows the audience.A series of stepped class sessions has been created as a series of modules that build uponprevious material (Figure 1). Each module covers a set of topics
research team implemented the full collaboration model and had every member beinvolved in all aspects of the research process: data collection, data analysis, and publicationwriting.Table 1. Research team member demographics. Pronouns Race Department Position Years taught at Type of courses current institution taught (total years teaching)She/her White Bioengineering Teaching 5 (10) Senior Design, Assistant technical
fulfillingeducational experience for both the students and the liaison. This paper presents a comprehensiveset of guidelines to ensure a positive and productive experience for the students and liaisons.These guidelines are produced through the collection and analysis of insights into provenpractices that contribute to the success of these collaborations. This paper describes a three-phasemethodology for collecting the insights through 1) a literature survey of industry sponsoredengineering courses, 2) interviews and surveys conducted with experienced industry liaisons, and3), student evaluations from two capstone courses from two institutions. Students have diverseexpectations for their liaisons including their consistent availability, honesty, and
MS degree (1999) in Electronics Engineering from Taganrog Institute of Technology, Russia.Dr. Ana M. Djuric, Wayne State University Dr. Ana Djuric, Assistant Professor of Engineering Technology, will be a Co-PI and will bring her ex- pertise in mechanical engineering, more specifically in industrial robotics and manufacturing to the team. She developed new introductory Robotic theory course and two robotic modules with industry grants (Omnibus Fund Support of Instructional Technology and Industrial Equipment Grant from General Mo- tors). Dr. Djuric research areas are Industrial robots, kinematics, dynamics, and control and advanced manufacturing systems.Dr. Petros J Katsioloudis, Old Dominion University Petros J
projects were asked to complete weekly “audio diary” entriesresponding to discursive verbal prompts posed to them during bi-weekly visits by a student-researcher. Youth apprentices were given control of the recording devices, and each recorded“audio-diary” session lasted three to five minutes taking place one-on-one, away from the rest ofthe group. Individual sessions were organized around a selected “set” of prompts (see Table 1.).The student-researcher was able to complete between two and five sessions per visit. Promptswere generally organized around three types themes 1) comprehension of sustainability and/orwicked sustainability problem contexts 2) perspectives on learning (hands-on, schooling, groupactivities, etc.) and 3) interest in or
Fridaysand our annual STEM challenge. We propose that a model similar to this could be successfullyand beneficially implemented more widely, with the goal of increasing both interest andretention in STEM fields.IntroductionThe goal of Bridges to STEM Careers is to increase retention rates and general interest in theSTEM programs offered by the university.1 The name itself refers to a bridge, reaching fromcommunity college, through university, all the way to a successful STEM career. The primarymethod of achieving this goal has been to forge mutually beneficial relationships among faculty,student mentors, and students. We believe that our goals are best effected on a personal levelrather than an institutional level, and that by focusing on
“characteristics” of ideal professional engineers that thestudents identified in four groups: technical competence including creativity; communicationskills for effective teamwork; conscientiousness, diligence, persistence and a drive towardmaximal performance; and high moral standards. The third group is quite similar to many of theattitudes that were listed in the BOK, such as commitment, high expectations, persistence, andthoroughness. The fourth group of characteristics seems similar to the attitudes of fairness,honesty, and integrity.In general, engineering does not seem to readily associate itself with people-orientedattitudes.22,26 The distinction between people-orientation and thing-orientation has been proposedas a potential reason for the low
will be required to take measurements off the physical beam)Table 1. Relationship between assigned modeling exercise and different stages of deliverables Assignment (given) Student generated Part Student generated Assembly Student generated Drawing Reverse modeling exercise 2 1 B 10.00 12.80 B B
about issues of transformation in engineering education; Strategies. Gain immediate insight into how to impact transformation; Methodological and pedagogical ideas. Gain insights into both research methodology and innovative pedagogy.The activities and timeline for the graduate students involved is provided in Figure 1, whichshows that the blended experience consisted of online training workshops, independent researchactivities, and an analysis workshop at ASEE. The monthly online training workshops were runusing Adobe Connect and were based on the pedagogical approach of active learning – somelecture, group discussion, and small group breakout sessions. The research team also provided apre- and post-workshop survey
and teaching courses to satisfy ABET criteria, Journal of Engineering Education, 92 (1), 7-25 (2003).14. Hundhausen, C.D., Agrawal, A., Fairbrother, D., and Trevisan, M. “Does studio-based instruction work in CS1? An empirical comparison with a traditional approach.” Proceedings, 41st ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE '10). ACM, New York, NY, 500-504.15. Studio Based Learning. < http://www.studiobasedlearning.org/>. Retrieved on March 5, 2015.16. Lewis, T. (2013). New York Times, August 22, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/education/obamas-plan- aims-to-lower-cost-of-college.html?emc=eta1
the Maker Movement on college campuses. As an example of that scope,over 150 colleges and universities detailed their contributions to the Maker Movement in reportscataloged by the Executive Office of the White House.8Academic Makerspace Model: Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyThe Massachusetts Institute of Technology does not have a singular academic makerspace on itscampus, but a network of small makerspaces strategically located across campus is a key aspectof MIT’s long range plan.9 This plan details embedding the future spaces within academicvillages that include classrooms, meeting and study spaces, technical and library support, andfood service. The academic villages are based on a concept that “blended learning” requires“blended
DiscussionA summary of the information obtained from the teacher feedback forms is provided in Tables 1and 2 and a summary of the information obtained from the facilitator feedback forms is providedin Table 3. As indicated previously a five point Likert scale was used in the assessment with 5being strongly agree and 1 being strongly disagree. Averaged values obtained from the formsare provided in Tables 1-3 with the standard deviation indicated in parenthesis. Additionally, thedemographics of the student participants is also summarized in Table 1.As can be seen from Tables 1-3, both the facilitators and teachers had a positive response to theactivities and kits. The facilitators generally felt the kits were complete and the instructions wereclear and
standards for a laboratory science course.History and 3 Units Including U.S. History and World History.Social Science World Language 2 Units Of the same language. Physical As required by law “Physical education shall be taught as a required subject in all Education (4 units) grades for all students” (M.G.L. c.71 §3). Arts 1 Unit Additional Core 5 Units Other additional coursework (including Career and Technical Courses Education) or any of the above.Massachusetts has invested in expanding CS opportunities by providing credit-bearingopportunities, teacher licensure pathways and grant opportunities to districts to
the course’srequired competencies.Completion of work and subsequent achievement of competencies was managed throughPurdue’s Open Passport badging platform (http://www.openpassport.org). The badges presentthe challenges to be completed to demonstrate a desired competency. The PPI facultyrequested that the Libraries develop an information literacy badge to complement the badgesrelated to the English and Communications course content. The librarians created a badge withcontent equivalent to 1-credit hour of work, based on a one-credit 8-week course that theLibraries had traditionally provided as a General Studies course.The badge contains five challenges: Exploring a Topic, Searching for Information, EvaluatingInformation, Using and
student willingness toindependently choose Python or R for future courses and projects. The survey responses suggestthat as computing becomes normalized, negative feelings among students become less of animpediment. Comparisons of grades among classes in semesters before and after the computingintegration do not generally show statistically significant differences. Given the lack of relevantdata available, both in our department and in the literature, these survey responses providevaluable insights into civil engineering students' attitudes toward coding for data analysis andproblem-solving, which could assist others considering similar curricular changes.1. IntroductionRapid advances in computational capacity, ability to process massive amounts
games on students’ motivation, an Institutional Review Board-approved survey, adapted from the ARCS Model Approach [7], was conducted among twoclasses: the CAD course (control group) and the Zelda course (experimental group). The surveyevaluated students' motivation based on four factors: 1) attention, 2) relevance, 3) confidence,and 4) satisfaction. The CAD course had 40 students enrolled, while the Zelda course had 27students. Some students in both courses have a background in CAD software or experienceplaying Zelda; however, quantitative data on this was not collected in the survey. A link to thesurvey was sent to both classes during their last session. Students were informed that the surveywas anonymous and participation was voluntary
aircraft engineer. Her research and professional interests include faculty development, innovations in engineering communication education, engineering student learning motivation, and nar- rative structure in technical communication.Dr. Nancy Ruzycki, University of Florida Director of Undergraduate Laboratories, Faculty Lecturer, Department of Materials Science and Engi- neeringDr. Cynthia J. Finelli, University of Michigan Dr. Cynthia Finelli, Director of the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching in Engineering and research associate professor of engineering education at University of Michigan (U-M), earned B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from U-M in 1988, 1989, and 1993, respectively. Prior to joining U
Page 26.1625.8coders then worked together to negotiate consensus definitions for the groupings such that eachgroup was finally characterized by its differences from other categories as well as the similaritiesamong quotations within the group.ResultsThe preliminary data analysis yielded three major aspects that seemed to dictate the meaning ofmentoring within each relationship: context, formation and tone (Table 1). Context reflects thegeneral scope of the relationship, including both its focus and the dynamic between mentor andmentor. Formation represents the way in which the relationship was initiated, and in someinstances how it was maintained. Finally, tone reflects the general attitude of the mentor thatformed the basis of the student
also asked on the Spring 2015 post survey to rate the course delivery methods onwhether they feel that the method would help them outside of the course. Specifically, they wereasked to indicate their level of agreement to the statement “This course component gave me skillsor knowledge that I feel will be very valuable to me outside of this course; for example, insubsequent courses, jobs, technical projects, extracurricular activities, etc.” with 1 = stronglydisagree to 6 = strongly agree. Thus while Figure 12 indicates what methods were most helpful inlearning the course material, this question asks what would be most helpful in other circumstances.The results for both questions are compared in Figure 13. Students felt that most of the
. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-008-9114-7 4. Clewell, B.C., Cohen, C.C., Tsui, L, & Deterding, N. (2006). Revitalizing the Nation’s Talent Pool in STEM. Washington DC: The Urban Institute. 5. U.S. Census. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/20000.html, retrieved 1/27/2015. 6. Kansas State Department of Education. http://svapp15586.ksde.org/k12/state_reports.aspx, retrieved 1/27/2105. 7. Kansas State University Planning and Analysis: Student Reports and Historical Information. http://www.k- state.edu/pa/student/index.html, retrieved 1/28/2015. 8. National Science Board. (2010). Preparing the next generation of STEM innovators: Identifying and developing our
curriculum related to construction contracting and is a past winner of the MANSCEN Technical Training Excellence award. Among his current efforts is being a leader in Project Unlock which seeks to transform advisory boards into partnership boards as a way to transform engineering education programs.Jessica P.M. Fick, University of Wisconsin - PlattevilleDr. Jennifer S Atchison, Drexel University Jennifer Atchison received her Ph.D in Materials Science and Engineering in 2012 from Drexel University. Dr. Atchisonˆa C™s professional interests include nanofibrous textiles, engineering design, engineering education especially active learning, diversity,Dr. Jagadish Torlapati, Rowan University Dr. Jagadish Torlapati is
from aSwedish technical university traveled to Kenya as part of a field study course. Like the studentgroups before them over the past two decades, they enrolled in this course to better understandhow their skills could address the needs of marginalized communities in the Global South.Coming from some of the wealthiest countries in the world and trained at elite universities, thestudents arrived in Nairobi with high expectations. However, just three and a half weeks later,they were forced to return to their home countries as the COVID-19 pandemic began to spreadglobally.Once back home, these students worked to develop online strategies so they could continue theircollaboration with their Kenyan partners. Throughout this process, both the
the environment is virtualand all but eliminates physical risk.In the US, 66.6% of college students are aged 24 years and below (Hanson, 2022). Thus, themajority of constituents being served in higher education are millennials and Gen Z. Differentgenerations are motivated in different ways and prefer to learn in different ways. For the currentmajority demographic it is important to recognize the following: (1) Millenials/Gen Z want to interact throughout Table 1: Instructional Strategies and Mixed Reality training sessions
assessed by allBME faculty and the advisors from ME and Nursing. (See appendix for rubrics used in BME atLTU for 1) needs finding 2) design concepts 3) final presentation during the first semester 4)poster session and 5) final presentation during the second semester)The faculty have started to implement pre and post surveys to assess student expectations andhighlight major hurdles in project execution. Currently, client satisfaction is qualitative andmostly done verbally. However, the faculty are also creating surveys for clients to get concretedata about patient expectations and satisfaction with project outcomes. Previous surveys ofstudents who have worked on developing assistive devices for people with disabilities haveshown that these projects