Paper ID #27217Student Perspectives on the Use of iPads for Navigating Construction Draw-ings: A Case StudyDr. Tom Michael Leathem, Auburn University Tom Leathem is an Assistant Professor in the McWhorter School of Building Science at Auburn Univer- sity where he teaches courses in Estimating, Construction Documents, Scheduling, and Project Delivery. He has 11 years industry experience in commercial construction management, holds a Ph.D. in Educa- tion, an M.S. in Integrated Design & Construction, and a B.S. in Construction Management. His areas of research include construction education, assessment, accreditation
addition to the paper-based survey in fall 2018, students were invited to participate in a one-hour focus group, facilitated by an external assessment consultant. Four students volunteered toparticipate. While the students offered suggestions that echo those from the post-activity studentsurvey – wanting more time for creativity and depth of learning, they also wanted to be clear thatthey were excited to have the opportunity to learn IoT technology in their courses. Details of thefocus group discussions are provided below: 1. Describe your initial knowledge about IoT coming into the course?The students were asked to rank their knowledge or IoT coming into the course. The studentsbrought in some baseline knowledge from their previous work as
and the emerging talent needs of tomorrow. 2. Explore the intersections and relationships between the eight segments of Industry 4.0, including the identification of specific needs related to talent development. 3. Identify the talent centric challenges and opportunities facing industry as they relate to Industry 4.0 and the eight technological sectors. 4. Gain insights into the cultural and generational forces shaping the talent pipeline, and how they relate to current and future employment and job creation. 5. Assess the implications of Industry 4.0 for industry, educators and policy makers.This research will include valuable new insights into the future talent needs related to the eightsegments of Industry
Pathways of Students Continuing in and Leaving Engineering,” in Proceedings of the 2010 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, KY, 2010.[3] M. W. Ohland, A. G. Yuhasz, and B. L. Sill, “Identifying and removing a calculus prerequisite as a bottleneck in Clemson’s general engineering curriculum,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 253–257, 2004.[4] E. Litzler and J. T. N. Young, “Understanding the risk of attrition in undergraduate engineering: Results from the Project to Assess Climate in Engineering,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 319–345, 2012.[5] National Academy of Engineering, Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering
professional development for engineers, employers often lackexperience in creating programs that both effectively develop CAE skills and help theirengineers apply their new skills on the job. Programs specifically designed for workingindividuals can contribute to promoting continuous learning for so that their careers thrive andemployers can remain competitive. This program will be assessed using a well-establishedevaluation framework in order to determine where improvements are needed to meet the needs ofthese adult learners.KeywordsProfessional development, life-long learning, online learning, Computer Aided EngineeringIntroductionDigital manufacturing is comprised of several tools including Computer Aided Design (CAD),Computer Aided Manufacturing
institutions if faculty truly believe that theyshould be providing this type of mentoring [28].2.4. Employability SkillsThe definition of employability skills is broad and includes communication, entrepreneurship,team work, problem solving, emotional intelligence, self-assessment, and analysis, among otherskills [24]. Postsecondary educators recognize employability skills as important competenciesneeded by students to attain employment upon graduation [29]. Educators use variousapproaches to assist their students in gaining these valuable skills, such as the use of STEMoutreach activities in informal learning environments [30], and collaborating with employers toprovide students with opportunities to attain these skills [31].The extent to which
in two areas: a senior capstonedesign option as well as in-class labs and activities at a sophomore and junior level. Seniorcapstone design is one of the most highlighted features to prospective students, and thereforethese two future projects will have sufficient exposure to test the authors’ hypothesis thatintroduction of non-traditional aerospace applications will ultimately improve recruitment andretention, and therefore diversity.2 Research ApproachThe goal of this study is to determine whether introducing non-traditional aerospace applicationsto students affects those students’ perceptions of aerospace engineering. Initially, studentperceptions of the field of aerospace engineering were assessed with a pre-class survey. Towardsthe
project teams).The inventive process of the proposed model has a foundation in the fundamental processobserved in successful inventors. This process has seven steps: 11 1. Observation of a need or difficulty. 2. Analysis of the need. 3. A survey of all available information. 4. A formulation of all objective solutions. 5. A critical analysis of these solutions. 6. The birth of a new idea. 7. Experimentation to test and refine the most promising solution.As previously mentioned, the first step in the inventive process is ‘observation of a need ordifficulty’ followed by ‘analysis of the need’. These steps could also be referred to as ‘marketneeds assessment’ or ‘opportunity focuses’ in standard business plan terms. 12
using this approach [14]. Two other universities havedeveloped engineering curricula using this approach. The University of New Haven developed aspiral curriculum that begins with a conservation and accounting course [15], and the Universityof Western Australia has recently revised their engineering curriculum to emphasize thresholdconcepts and found that the CAP approach aligns well with this framework [16].CAP has shown improved student learningThe mechanics portion of the SEC at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology was assessed usingidentical final exams that were given to students in the SEC and students taking a traditionaldynamics course [17]. The two courses were taught by the same professor using similarpedagogical methods; therefore
academic goals. It can be regardingcareer intentions, internship resources, potential employment opportunities, graduate school, andmost importantly, undergraduate research opportunities. Such interaction will serve not only toestablish a stronger communication channel, but as an assessment tool to determine whether thestudent has the aptitude and desire to conduct undergraduate research. If the student displays anysort of interest in the latter, the proposed model suggests that the faculty member outlines theimmediate and long-term academic and professional benefits of conducting undergraduateresearch. This action is immediately proceeded by the faculty member delineating the type ofresearch efforts conducted in his/her group and extending an
of Communication and Information in the area of educational assessment and information literacy. She is currently Director of Reference and Instruction at the New Jersey Institute of Technology in Newark, NJ.Mr. Joseph J. Mercuri, New Jersey Institute of Technology Joseph Mercuri is a Technical Reference Librarian at New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT). He is the library liaison for the Biological Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Computer Science, Informatics, Information Technology, and Mathematical Sciences departments.Mr. Raymond Patrick Vasquez, New Jersey Institute of Technology Raymond Vasquez is the Research and User Services Librarian at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. He is also the liaison
be due to random chance. However, it is also possible that the lack of establishing astatistically significant difference is due to the small sample size of the female’s population (n =21). Recommendations for future research include evaluating additional students in other CMprograms to assess a larger sample population. This would provide a more accurate assessmentof conflict management trends across genders among students in CM programs. Future researchprojects could also consider characteristics of the CM students other than gender, such as gradepoint average, or the discipline (heavy civil versus general) within the CM program in which thestudent is enrolled in order to determine whether these attributes have any influence on
, we increased the amount of time for project/team ‘speed-dating.’ - By not removing completed posters, students would not know which projects they might be ‘missing out on,’ removing this pressure.We hoped that since the students weren’t generally forming their own teams, they might be lesscritical of their teammates during the process (resulting in higher team peer reviews).Evaluating the ProcessAlthough the hybrid-formed teams are still working on their senior design project, we havebegun to collect data to determine if the process improvement goals are being met. Threesources of data are being collected to assess the impact of the team-forming process on thestudent experience: - A team-forming process survey
have introduced a new course:Online Project-Based Engineering Experimentation. The course is project-based and designed tooperate in both a blended format, online with classroom labs, and fully online.Recently the topic of project-based learning for first-year college experiences delineated how toincorporate project-based learning (PBL) into the classroom and curriculum [2]. Limiting thefield to engineering still involves numerous investigators. The work of Fini et. al. has quantifiedmuch of the PBL assessments in terms of self-efficacy, teamwork, and communication skills inthe civil engineering environment [3]. The work of Han et. al. on Hispanic students showed thatPBL had a significant impact on students who were not at risk, albeit the
lab projects were implemented and tested within three existingcourses over a two-year period—a second-year digital logic design course, a third-yearmicrocontrollers course, and a senior course in advanced digital design. In addition, some of thiswork has been used in our Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) student club.Students were surveyed at the end of the courses to assess the impact of the labs on theirlearning. Results seemed quite positive. Consequently, we were inspired by seeing the benefitsof creating lab projects which can be useful across the ECE curriculum to provide a cohesiveframework (for our courses) and thereby enhance learning. For example, our students areexposed to lab projects using visual feedback
, material propertyselection, and interpretation of model outputs as they relate to model selection and failurecriteria.The primary objectives of this work are to 1) discuss the challenges of learning the numericalmethod versus application of FEA with commercial tools in a single semester and 2) highlightthe importance of covering both topics by providing in-class and laboratory examples ofdeveloping and employing finite element analysis. Future work will be completed to assess theeffectiveness of these activities in enabling proper modeling techniques by students. The long-term goals of these efforts are to improve practical and ethical simulation for engineeringstudents and to further integrate these themes throughout the course.IntroductionThe
should know pertainingto the subject. This paper will explore the use of BIM within the structural design process forArchitectural Engineering programs. It will include a literary search on the use of this method inhigher education, and will detail the process in which it is introduced into intermediate design coursesin steel and concrete, with student assessment of the process.IntroductionThere is a need for advances in technologies used in the profession of engineering to be included inthe educational process in higher education, however the question arises as to the extent of thisinclusion. With the vast number of topics that engineering students must be taught during theireducational career, the addition of new technologies is at times
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Reflecting on #EngineersShowUp: Outcomes and Lessons from Organizing a Campaign among Engineering EducatorsAbstractIn an open dialogue format, participants and organizers of #EngineersShowUp report on theorganizing work, actions, discourse, and reflections emerging from an NSF-funded week ofaction campaign that occurred from February 23rd - 29th, 2020. Participants helping to organizeand take part included students, faculty, administrators, postdoctoral researchers and othersconnected to the world of engineering education. The intention of this week of action (directlyfollowing E-Week) was three fold. First, we aimed to test approaches from social movementsand assess
to creating equitable and accessible public institutions of higher education, including inclusive environments for underrepresented students in STEM.Dr. Catherine T. Amelink, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Dr. Amelink is Director of Graduate Programs and Assessment in the College of Engineering, Virginia Tech. She is also an affiliate faculty member in the Departments of Engineering Education and Educa- tional Leadership and Policy Studies at Virginia Tech.Jeffrey Bokor, University of California Jeffrey Bokor is the Paul R. Gray Distinguished Professor of Engineering in the department of Electri- cal Engineering and Computer Sciences (EECS) at UC Berkeley. He currently serves as Chair of the
: What We Can Learn from the SE3 (Structural Engineering Engagement and Equity) ReportAbstract In 2016, the Structural Engineers Association of Northern California embarked on anation-wide survey of structural engineers to assess the cultural climate in the profession. Thecommittee conducting the report was entitled “Structural Engineering Engagement and Equity”(SE3), and the survey results along with the associated report has been termed the “SE3 report”.The report gave insight into several areas, including pay equity, time management, and careerdevelopment. Since publication of the report, the National Council of Structural EngineersAssociations (NCSEA) has formed its own SE3 committee, with the goal of conducting a
high school experiences that have not prepared themwith social capital or with academic experiences conducive to success as self-directed learners atthe collegiate level [10]. Metacognition refers to reflective processes by which learners becomeaware of and control their thinking [11], [12]. To become self-directed learners, students mustdevelop the capability to assess what is asked of them by tasks, evaluate their knowledge andability relative to the task, plan an approach using an appropriate strategy, and monitor theirprogress while making adjustments as needed [13]. Thus developing metacognitive ability iscrucial for academic success. This paper will present the context for the learning strategiescourse, describe recent changes, and
academically talented students with financial need inearning their 4-year STEM degrees in a timely manner. The grants have recently expanded toinclude collaborations between 2-year and 4-year colleges, in which community college studentsapply for a scholarship which is transferable to the participating four year college or colleges. S-STEM programs are required to add social science as well as external evaluation elements todocument and assess the benefits of the programs, as well as any unanticipated challenges. Thefirst author serves as social science researcher on multiple S-STEM projects. In that role, theauthor utilizes quantitative and qualitative research methods to understand the impact of the S-STEM funds on students in different academic
is a complete evidence-based practice paper. The purpose of pilot study is to evaluate first-year engineering student’s technical confidence and to begin understanding how they experiencetechnical aspects of a hands-on open-ended physical computing design project. A mixed-methodapproach was utilized to explore freshmen (n = 51) learning experiences with the technology andtinkering aspects of the communication and introduction to engineering design course. Atechnical problem-solving and tinkering self-efficacy instrument developed by Baker et al.(2015) was used pre and post to assess changes in student’s technology self-efficacy. Datacollected regarding prior experiences with the Arduino, Raspberry Pi, electronics, laser cutterand 3D printer
have lasting impacts for individuals andcommunity—framing shown to align with women’s career planning.Given the theory behind women preferentially choosing “helping” disciplines, and the suggestedpossibility of increasing the percentage of women in engineering through emphasis on communalgoals, we assess the short-term impact of adding women-associated “helping” disciplines toengineering schools across the US.MethodsWe collected undergraduate enrollment data by gender for US engineering schools from theASEE (American Society for Engineering Education) College Profiles for the years 2005-201715.Data was available from 362 schools, although not all schools had data for all years.We assumed that BME and ENV programs were added to a school in the
group discussion with TA and final presentation for project 3.(4) Creative thinking: Since project 3 encourages students to generate ideas, to predict through simulation, to form hypotheses, to devise alternative scenarios and solutions, and to explore options, we regard it as a project that promotes creativity and innovation.Self-improvement from round 1 to round 2: Assessing creativity level of projectproductThe creativity projects (project 3), swing-up and balance control of Rotary InvertedPendulum in free style, were assessed by a panel of SE experts using Creative ProductSemantic Scale developed by O'Quin and Besemer [24]. Three creativity dimensionsof products are evaluated: (1) novelty (e.g., the product is unique), (2
one year as Associate Dean for Assessment in the College of Engineering. He is a member of IEEE, ACM, and ASEE, and is an ABET Program Evaluator. He has served as Chair of the ECE Division of ASEE, an at-large AdCom member of the IEEE Education Society, a member of the IEEE Committee on Engineering Accreditation Activities (CEAA), and previously served as an Associate Editor of the IEEE Transactions on Education and on the IEEE Computer Society/ACM Task Force that developed the Computer Engineering 2004 report on model computer engineering curricula. He was a co-winner of the 2005 Wireless Educator of the Year award from the Global Wireless Education Consortium for his role as one of the developers of the
compare their scores with otherstudents. Earlier work with our app showed that for some students, this competition wasmotivating, but for the students who struggled more on these problems, the competition wasdiscouraging. Accordingly, we chose not to implement competition within this class.Research QuestionsOur research questions were as follows:Does the addition of student use of the handheld augmented reality app to an existing class basedon “Developing Spatial Thinking” [16] show greater pre-post course improvements on a mentalrotation assessment than a control group who took the course as guided by that text and usingphysical objects as well as paper-and-pencil activities but not augmented reality? If so, whatfactors may influence or moderate
aninterdisciplinary team of faculty at San José State University (SJSU). The minor degreecomprises four courses: Python programming, algorithms and data structures, R programming,and culminating projects. The first ACBSS cohort started in Fall 2016 with 32 students, and thesecond cohort in Fall 2017 reached its capacity of 40 students, 62% of whom are female and35% are underrepresented minority students. Considering ACBSS students’ interest in humanbehavior and society, pedagogical approaches using relevant examples and projects have beendeveloped and integrated throughout the program. Preliminary assessments show that studentsappreciated learning programming skills with which to expand their career opportunities whilegaining confidence in studying technical
project, but are now evolving as some groupshave completed their work and are ready to transition to advance other aspects of the project. Weprovide a brief overview of each of the original working groups below. A more detaileddescription can be found in prior publications [2-6].Capturing the Culture: Efforts to better understand the existing engineering program culture anddynamics were made to assess the catalysts and barriers to fostering a risk seeking culture. Weused Schein's [7] organizational cultural framework as a theoretical framework and focused onthe interplay of the experiences of individuals within the program and the larger socioculturalforces [8].Characterizing the Ecosystem: Concepts from the business model canvas (BMC) [9-11
as the on-campus students. Grades in the course were based on fourassessment categories (shown in Table 1 with the associated grade weightings). Students wereinvited to submit their preferred weighting for each category at the start of the semester. Theinstructor established allowable ranges for each category beforehand. All submissions wereaveraged, resulting in the final weightings shown in Table 1.Table 1: Assessment categories and associated grade weightings for the course In-class Exams (2) 20.4% each Final Exam 18.3% Homework 23.8% Semester Project 17.1%During