involvement in academic and social activities beyond the classroom has been the topic ofmany studies.3,4,5 Zhao and Kuh show that participating in learning communities results in the outcomeslisted above.6 Edwards and McKelfresh, further, demonstrate the positive impact of linking theresidential life component.7The Watson School of Engineering and Applied Science at Binghamton University features a commonfreshman year for all engineering students. Mechanical, electrical, computer, industrial, and bio-engineering students are enrolled in the same freshman engineering courses. During the first semester oftheir freshman year, all engineering students take an introduction to engineering course (WTSN 111:Exploring Engineering I), a Technical Writing
Paper ID #36645A Roadmap for the Design and Implementation ofCommunities of Practice for Faculty DevelopmentVictoria Matthew Victoria currently leads VentureWell’s Community of Practice and social learning initiatives with a focus on providing faculty with the resources, tools and support network needed to integrate innovation, entrepreneurship and sustainability into the curriculum. Prior to that Victoria led VentureWell's collaboration with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s Frontier Set, a network of 31 post-secondary institutions working to close the student opportunity gap, and the NSF funded Pathways
development of concepts and one, or a few, principle solutions,respectively.The Realize stage of this SED Process Model is a purposely broad stage because the“realization” of a design outcome can mean many things. Sometimes the Realize stage consistsof implementing a system, service, curriculum, or other intervention developed in the previousstage. The Realize stage may look like validating a physical product with users and otherstakeholders. Or, the potential solution from the Develop stage may, for example, promptdesigners and/or stakeholders to begin to understand the problem differently or shift priorities;these changes can necessitate revisiting previous stages in the process for more ideating, toredefine the problem, or perform further
includingthose already minoritized groups underrepresented in the major. When we began ourinvestigation, we started out with these questions: How can we cultivate a learning environmentwhere students practice what they’ve learned outside of class?; How can we legitimize andsupport practice institutionally in a way that students find valuable to their future careers?; Howcan we make these opportunities equitable, inclusive, and accessible to all students? Thisdocument outlines our 4-year startup program using a Communities of Practice program (CoPs)as a mechanism for engaging students in inclusive communities in which they can put theirknowledge to practice in the field of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS).One compelling reason to create
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the ASEE. She was the recipient of the 2002 ASEE Chester F. Carlson Award for Innovation in Engineering Education and the 2009 UW David B. Thorud Leadership Award. Dr. Atman holds a Ph.D. in Engineering and Public Policy from Carnegie Mellon University.Prof. Janet McDonnell, Central Saint Martins, University of the Arts London Janet McDonnell is Professor of Design Studies at Central Saint Martins, London where she is Director of Research. She holds a PhD for work on modelling engineering design expertise, an MSc in Computer Science and a BSc in Electrical Engineering. She is the editor-in-chief of the International Journal of CoDesign.Mr. Ryan C. Campbell, University
Paper ID #37335A First-Year Design Project That Encourages Motivation, Curiosity,Connections, and MakingDr. Haolin Zhu, Arizona State University Dr. Haolin Zhu earned her BEng in Engineering Mechanics from Shanghai Jiao Tong University and her Ph.D. in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics from Cornell University, with a focus on computational solid mechanics. Dr. Zhu is an Associate Teaching Professor of the freshman engineering education team in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering at Arizona State University (ASU). In this role, she focuses on designing the curriculum and teaching in the freshman engineering program
participating families? and 2)What was the subsequent action/reaction to those emotional expressions? Through addressingthese questions, we contribute further evidence regarding how adult recognition and reactions tochild emotional responses play a significant role in children’s learning experiences. Further, weargue that emotional responses and parental reactions should be explored and considered whendesigning and implementing programs geared toward family engagement and co-learning ininformal environments.Relevant LiteratureThis study is supported by two primary bodies of literature. The first centers on frustration andfailure and how both can shape student learning and engagement. Much of the scholarship in thisarea focuses on curriculum design
novices. We speculate that becausethe academic experiences of novice designers so infrequently engender iteration, they fail torecognize that downstream design activities, like prototyping, are part of knowledge building thatcan inform reframing of problems, including requirements. Instead, design activities may beengaged or perceived as largely linear input/output stages.From these studies, we see a clear need to further our understanding of how students develop theskills necessary for deriving and working with engineering requirements. The development ofthat skill should extend beyond obvious opportunities, like cornerstone and capstone designcourses. Thus, this research is motivated to identify other places in the curriculum where thisskill
(Coutinho et al., 2017). Another study by Reeping et al. (2018) explored instructorsin an electrical and computing engineering department on their curricular decisions during areform of the program. They found four themes (valuing system thinking, valuing adaptability,seeing students struggle between values of concrete and abstract, and noting students’ lowtolerance of ambiguity) that explain how instructors decide on teaching essential knowledge inthe field. Many other studies explore the topic of teaching decision-making, with some focusingon having instructors adopt certain classroom approaches (Jarvie-Eggart et al., 2021; Moore etal., 2015). Many of these studies inherently lead to understanding of the beliefs behind thesedecisions. Another
[30] and by referring to engineering students as “engineers” throughout their education—which,as Chachra et al [31] observe, is unusual: “students of history are never referred to as‘historians’.” This linguistic habit is also a reminder that engineering is a pre-professionaldegree, with both its curriculum and its academic culture explicitly tied to professional practice.Because engineering workplace cultures value such “masculine” ideals as “a fascination withtechnology, expertise as a tinkerer, and an aggressive style of self-presentation,” McIlwee andRobinson [32] argued that women engineers must both display technical competence and alsoperform masculine norms of attitude and interaction. Dryburgh [30] found that engineeringidentity
, University of Virginia Sarah Lilly is a PhD student in the Department of Curriculum, Instruction and Special Education at the University of Virginia. She holds a B.S. in Mathematics and English and an M.A.Ed. in Secondary Educa- tion from The College of William and Mary. Her research centers on STEM education, particularly using qualitative methods to understand the integration of math and science concepts with computational mod- eling and engineering design practices in technology-enhanced learning environments. Prior to beginning doctoral work, she taught secondary mathematics for four years as well as created and implemented an interdisciplinary, project-based mathematics, science, and principles-of-technology
engineering and technology into the structure of scienceeducation” at all grade levels, including elementary school (Volume 2, Appendix A, p. 3). Thisshift requires not only new thinking about elementary curriculum and pedagogy, but also atransformation in the preparation of new elementary teachers so that they develop the knowledgeand skills necessary to include the discipline of engineering in their classrooms.A number of science education researchers have documented strategies for improving noviceelementary teachers’ competence in inquiry-based science teaching 2, 3, but there is only limitedresearch in the U.S. on how elementary teachers learn to teach engineering design 4, 5, 6. There isa need for new strategies to prepare novice elementary
Page 11.1348.6(e.g. symbols, characters, graphics, still and moving 2-D and 3-D pictures), analog models(system as model for another system), mathematical models (information presented in anunambiguous universal man-made language), and computer models (models of the externalmodels stored and processed in fast electronic form = electronic models).According to systems thinking, the human beings involved in the EE (students, teachers,specialists etc.) are modeled as complex dynamical, parallel, and hierarchical systems. Theyhave a genetically programmed internal control system, which operates according to thegenetic program under the strong influence of the environment and continuously directs thelife of the human being towards internal personal
environmental engineering and science [10]. These authors call forand propose new paradigms, new practices, and new policies, as related to environmentalengineering and science. In this paper, we discuss the transformation of the EE undergraduate degree program atPurdue University. This program integrates a systems-based approach to studying anthropogenicimpacts on the natural environment, helps to embed themes of environmental sustainabilityacross different majors, and incorporates pedagogical innovation. In this paper, we discussspecific courses in the EE program that illustrate innovation of curriculum content. We alsopresent data demonstrating undergraduate engineering student participation and interest inenvironmentally-related courses
- neering Department of Iowa State University (ISU) - also her alma mater. Marlee has been with ISU for nearly nineteen years providing oversight and teaching courses in the civil engineering curriculum. In ad- dition to her role at ISU, Marlee has over twenty-three years of industry experience in the transportation area of civil engineering, working in both the public and private sector. She has functioned as a re- searcher, planner, designer, program manager, project manager, and company president. She has provided management and leadership services in surveying, photogrammetry, program management, transportation research, and transportation operations. Marlee is an emeritus member of the Iowa Engineering and Land
Paper ID #21353A Systematic Literature Review on Improving Success of Women Engineer-ing Students in the United StatesDr. Pradeep Kashinath Waychal, Western Michigan University Dr Pradeep Waychal is a visiting professor at the CRICPE of Western Michigan University, a founder trustee of Guruji Education Foundation that provides holistic support to the higher education of under- privileged students, and an academic adviser to many Indian educational institutes. Earlier, Dr Waychal has worked at Patni Computer Systems for 20 years in various positions including the head of innovations, NMIMS as the director Shirpur campus, and
Paper ID #22589Comparing Peer-to-Peer Written Comments and Teamwork Peer Evalua-tions.Dr. Catherine E. Brawner, Research Triangle Educational Consultants Catherine E. Brawner is President of Research Triangle Educational Consultants. She received her Ph.D.in Educational Research and Policy Analysis from NC State University in 1996. She also has an MBA from Indiana University (Bloomington) and a bachelor’s degree from Duke University. She specializes in evaluation and research in engineering education, computer science education, teacher education, and technology education. Dr. Brawner is a founding member and former
models. We also found studentsenjoyed and wanted more OEMPs given in their classes. Implications include creating moreOEMPs for different types of engineering science courses and implementing a discussion orreflection for students after they turn in the problems.IntroductionCreating and analyzing models of physical systems is a core activity of engineering. In moderntimes, much of this work is done with computer software, yet the backbone of these analysisprograms are mathematical models. Students learn how to use and manipulate these models inthe core technical courses of their discipline, which we call engineering science courses. Inintroductory engineering science courses--such as fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, statics, andmechanics of
; synthesizing the influence of societal and individual worldviews on decision-making; assessing STEM students’ learning in the spaces of design, ethics, and sustainability; and exploring the impact of pre-engineering curriculum on students’ abilities and career trajectories.Mr. Nicholas D. Fila, Purdue University Nicholas D. Fila is a Ph.D. candidate in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. He earned a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and a M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. His current research interests include innovation, empathy, and engineering design. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 The
Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD). Dr. Wood completed his M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in the Division of Engineering and Applied Science at the California Institute of Technology, where he was an AT&T Bell Laboratories Ph.D. Scholar. Dr. Wood joined the faculty at the University of Texas in September 1989 and established a computational and experimental laboratory for research in engineering design and manufacturing, in addition to a teaching laboratory for prototyping, reverse engineering measurements, and testing. During his academic career, Dr. Wood was a Distinguished Visiting Professor at the United States Air Force Academy. Through 2011, Dr. Wood was a Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Design
factors.These factors aligned well with the concepts emerging from the literature reviews.1, 2, 6 Uponcompletion of the pilot study, an additional question emerged: With a larger sample size, are thesurvey’s psychometrics still appropriate? We conducted a larger study with an expanded sample.Expanded StudyStudent perceptions of engineering literacy were examined using a web-based survey. Thesurvey was sent out to a large geography course (2403 students) that was part of the university’sCurriculum for Liberal Education (core curriculum/general education curriculum). Participatingstudents were provided three days to complete the survey prior to a reminder email being sent.Following another 3 days, the survey was taken off line.The participants for the
is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education and affiliate faculty with the Higher Education Program, Center for Human-Computer Interaction, and Human-Centered De- sign Program. His research focuses on student learning outcomes in undergraduate engineering, learning analytics approaches to improve educational practices and policies, interdisciplinary teaching and learn- ing, organizational change in colleges and universities, and international issues in higher education. Page 26.1370.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Sharing the
Paper ID #11881Communication Among Undergraduate Engineers on a Self-Directed TeamDuring a Product Decision MeetingMr. Jared David Berezin, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Jared Berezin is a Lecturer in the Writing, Rhetoric, and Professional Communication (WRAP) team within the Comparative Media Studies/Writing Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Jared teaches in a range of communication-intensive courses at MIT, including Product Engineering Pro- cesses, Computer Systems Engineering, Managerial Psychology, and Science Writing for the Public. He has also been a science writer for Dana-Farber Cancer
University in Educational Inquiry, Measurement, and Evaluation. She received a master’s degree in instructional psychology and technol- ogy as well as a bachelor’s degree and master’s degree in geology. Her current research interests are in educational measurement and program evaluation.Miss Dayoung Kim, Purdue University, West Lafayette Dayoung Kim is a Ph.D. student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her current research interest includes engineering ethics, curriculum development for socially-responsible engineers, and cultural studies for engineers in a global context. She earned her B.S. degree in Chemical Engineering at Yonsei University, South Korea in 2017.Mr. Andrew Katz, Purdue
. However, the limited attention to this core concept from writing studies andtechnical communication in engineering education supports the need for this review of how thefield of writing studies understands a process orientation and what its implementation might looklike in STEM classrooms.To assist STEM educators in implementing writing-as-process approaches in their curriculum,we review some key research from writing studies and science and technology studies that pointsto the tangible pedagogical benefits (Section II). We then offer examples from a facultydevelopment program called Writing Across Engineering [4], [28]–[30] to show how STEMfaculty have incorporated writing-as-process into their courses (Section III). We conclude bydiscussing the
) 7. Computer-aided design: 37% (’93) to 47% (’00)Thus almost all the respondents now work in teams and solve problems, and a half or more of the2000 cohort respondents report that they design and test components and products, and ensurecompliance with codes and standards. We do not know what the percentage is of the 2000 cohortrespondents who do at least one of these tasks typically, but it appears it must be at least three-fourths. These findings are quite dramatic and the trends are rising. Perhaps the relativelymodest rating of the importance of design has to do with respondents being unaware of howmuch knowledge of design methods they could have. There may be a “taken for granted” qualityto their responses, but we do not know and need
as a high school mathematics teacher and two years as a high school science teacher. His research interests include STEM integration, modeling, and computational thinking.Kristina Maruyama Tank, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Kristina is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Minnesota majoring in Science Education with a sup- porting field in Literacy Education. She is a former elementary teacher, and her research interests include improving children’s science and engineering learning and increasing teachers’ use of effective STEM instruction in the elementary grades. More recently, her research has focused on using literacy to support scientific inquiry, engineering design and STEM integration.Ms. Jennifer
provided with curricular examples or classroom-based evidence to guidethem in identifying student learning or progress in meeting performance expectations. Teacherswho are reading the Executive Summary of NGSS learn only that: “If implemented properly, the NGSS will result in coherent, rigorous instruction that will result in students being able to acquire and apply scientific knowledge to unique situations as well as have the ability to think and reason scientifically.” 2Further, teachers are expected to focus curriculum and instruction on “bundles” of performanceexpectations by developing contextualized learning experiences for students. The looselystructured, integrated approach suggests that classroom instruction should not
Paper ID #10683Fusing Green Energy into Manufacturing Engineering Education to Culti-vate Technical SuccessProf. Tzu-Liang Bill Tseng, University of Texas, El Paso Tzu-Liang (Bill) Tseng is an associate professor of Industrial, Manufacturing and Systems Engineering at University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP). He received his M.S. degree in Decision Sciences at University of Wisconsin-Madison and his Ph.D. degree in Industrial Engineering at University of Iowa. His research focuses on the computational intelligence, data mining, bio- informatics and advanced manufacturing. Dr. Tseng published in many refereed journals such
electrophysiology, instrumentation and medical device design. He has published widely on electrical dynamics in the heart and brain, biomedical computing, engineering design and engineering education. Page 24.837.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 K-WIDE: Synthesizing the Entrepreneurial Mindset and Engineering Design It’s winter break at Bucknell University and 23 first and second year engineers are tackling the National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenge, Restoring and Im- proving Urban Infrastructure. They have immersed themselves