-ethanol-beef system in the Midwest. The primary learning outcomes measured during thestudy were student attitudes towards the environment and their capacity for systems thinking.Students in two junior level undergraduate courses completed pre-post-surveys after experiencingone of three treatments: group one – played Preservation, and group two – played Preservationwith supporting lecture. Assessment focused on changes in student attitudes and overallunderstanding of system interactions. Initial findings suggest that the combination treatmentprovided the greatest change in systems thinking, however, no change occurred with respect toenvironmental attitudes. The results of this study will be used to direct the development ofsubsequent games and
Associate Professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Stevens Institute of Technology. He received a Diploma in Applied Mechanics in 1989 from Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany, and was awarded M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at The Ohio State University in 1994 and 1997, respectively. He teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses related to mechanisms and machine dynamics, integrated product development, solid mechanics and plasticity theory, structural design and analysis, engineering analysis and finite element methods and has interests in remote laboratories, project-based learning and student learning assessment. His research is in the areas of remote
and/or ambiguity tolerance; preference for creative work; self-regulation; resilience; or openness to experience [3] – [8]. In order to focus this work, weselected from this list two factors to study: self-efficacy on open-ended problems and ambiguitytolerance. Self-efficacy refers to the belief in one’s own ability to perform a certain task, and astudent who believes they can perform a task are more motivated to do so [9]. Self-efficacy canbe assessed as a general psychometric evaluation of “optimistic self-beliefs”, as with theGeneralized Self Efficacy Scale (GSES) [10]. A typical item in the GSES is “I can solve mostproblems if I invest the necessary effort,” to which the study participant would give a 4-pointLikert-scale response
permanentinstrumentation.The final project included three parts and was used to assess if the course objectives where met.The three parts included; part I which incorporated sensor short answer and example question,part II required the students to complete a lab exercise, and part III consisted of the analyses of afull-scale instrumentation project. The students were required to work on their own for Parts Iand II, and allowed to work in groups for Part III.Part I of the project required students to recall information about sensors and draw and explainhow they operate. It also provided the students with hypothetical examples and asked them todetermine the appropriate location and sensor type to use for specific conditions. Part Iincorporates cognitive learning within
interest, experience, and enthusiasm inaerospace design to a wide audience, presenting STEM studies in an exciting light and providingthe university with an excellent recruitment tool. Not only will the current engineering studentsbenefit from the motion simulator, but the university as a whole will be able to use the project asa representation of the scholastic excellence of the university. With the motion simulator locatedinside the Global Learning Center at ORU, school field trips, university assessments, andprospective student visits will all be able to watch and operate the educational tool beingdesigned by ORU engineering students.FLIGHT SIMULATOR ASSESSMENTIn order to provide a complete assessment for the project, the design team will
Paper ID #22042Development of Students’ Intercultural Knowledge and CompetenceDr. James Warnock, University of Georgia James Warnock is a Professor and founding Chair for the School of Chemical, Materials and Biomedical Engineering at the University of Georgia. He has been a big proponent of self-directed learning and active learning in his classes. James is also the Adjunct Director for training and instruction in the professional services department at ABET. In this role, he oversees the development, planning, production and imple- mentation of the ABET Program Assessment Workshops, IDEAL and the assessment webinar
curriculuminvolves instruction on techniques such as sketching in both isometric and perspective spaces,shading, and ray-tracing.This paper observes the impacts of a modified curriculum in and engineering graphics course onstudents’ ability to sketch, self-efficacy in engineering design, and spatial visualization skills.Impact was measured using pre- and post-course assessments and surveys. The pre-to-postcomparisons of the groups of students taught using different methods showed equalimprovements in the spatial visualization of the students. The improvements in sketching abilityof the students in the modified perspective curricula were found to be significantly higher thanthe improvements experienced by students in the traditional curriculum. These
tostudents in the traditional course.In the following sections we summarize the differences in the content and pedagogy of thetraditional and novel introductory courses, the success rates for both cohorts of students in theintermediate C programming course, the final results of our studies regarding student identity andefficacy beliefs from the two introductory courses, including for students from underservedpopulations, and our plans to develop a technology-driven version of the intermediate class.Pedagogical differences between the twointroductory C courses Table I.A comparison of assessment weights. The two introductory programming courses are Assessment Novel course Traditional coursequite similar in
engineering to promote belongingness or exclusion, respectively.MethodsThis research project utilizes a longitudinal, sequential, explanatory mixed methods study atfour institutions, which represent a variety of institution types (research-intensive, land grant,undergraduate-serving and minority-serving) and geographical regions (southeast, south,Midwest and west), over a period of three years to investigate how students author theiridentities (both normative and non-normative) within engineering and how these studentsnavigate the cultures of engineering throughout their college years.InIce Survey Data CollectionIn Phase 1, we quantitatively assessed students’ identities, motivation, psychological &personality traits, perceived supports and
Professional Engineer in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.Dr. Nicole Martino, Roger Williams University Dr. Nicole Martino is an assistant professor of engineering at Roger Williams University. Her area of expertise is civil engineering, more specifically structural engineering. Dr. Martino’s current research areas include developing innovative tools to improve the learnability of topics in heavy analytical courses, and developing rapid, accurate and efficient bridge deck condition assessment models using ground pen- etrating radar.Dr. Benjamin David McPheron, Roger Williams University Benjamin D. McPheron is an Assistant Professor of Engineering at Roger Williams University. Dr. McPheron received his B.S.E.E. in
, ratherthan students’ capacity to function in a multidisciplinary team.Even though faculty collaboration is necessary in order to achieve success in team-taught andinterdisciplinary academic experiences, few papers describe the challenges and benefits of thiscollaboration from a faculty member’s point of view. In their paper, Leathem et al.7 did describechallenges in faculty involvement during the development of a collaborative studio ofconstruction management and architectural students. Some of the challenges mentioned byLeathem et al.7 included time commitment and assessment, which required faculty to empathizeand understand each other’s discipline needs. Additionally, Hatipkarasulu, Canizaro, andMurphy13 studied a five-year experience in which
Exploration.Dr. Stuart D. Kellogg, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Stuart Kellogg is Professor and Head of Industrial Engineering at SDSMT. His discipline research areas of interest include applied probability and stochastic models but his passion over the last two decades rests with STEM Education and STEM Education research. He has over 30 publications in first year engi- neering programs, broadening opportunities for intellectual diversity, project based learning, technology enabled support models, and assessment methods. He has participated in the NSF Rigorous Research in Engineering Educations and REES symposiums and has directed assessment of a variety of campus and multi-institutional programs.Dr. Jennifer
this class, the Dean of the School of Engineering lamented the lack of hands-onexperiences in freshmen classes and the general decline of hand-eye coordination in engineeringstudents. We have endeavored to correct this with a schedule of class trips such as a visit to alocal blast furnace which has been converted to an industrial heritage site and several show-and-tell projects in class involving working models of steam engines and the Wright Flyer. Our goalfrom the beginning was to make this a different kind of history class with more interactionbetween faculty and students, and between students and machinery.Course assessment included reading quizzes for each chapter administered via Canvas, midtermand final exams, classroom attendance and
Michna Ross Abraham Richard Reid South Dakota State UniversityAbstractAcross college campuses it has long been held that, aside from teaching and research, studentmentoring is one of the primary duties of faculty. For 15 non-consecutive years from 2002through 2018, South Dakota State University (SDSU) was awarded grants from the NationalScience Foundation for undergraduate scholarship/mentoring programs known as ComputerScience, Engineering, and Mathematics Scholarships (CSEMS), or Scholarships for Science,Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM). The literature includes somedescriptions, reviews, and assessment
communication system; designing the mobile app screen for user, firstresponder, and operator; analyzing and assessing algorithmic running times; assessing taxonomicbiodiversity by different methods; studying Alzheimer’s disease; modeling tools as a proxy forweather impacts; detection and fate of low-molecular-weight compounds in post-reverseosmosis; Conway's RATS sequences; Stetson mesophotic monitoring, and other noteworthyprojects.The impact of the “Advancing Student Futures in Science, Technology, Engineering, andMathematics” on students has reached beyond expectation. More than just the financial support,many students have reported personal growths and confidence in their STEM identities. Inparticular, the female and the underrepresented minority
free to choose their work group. While most students collaborated,a few worked alone. Since white boards were not available to display work, groups worked onpaper and submitted answers only to certain aspects of the problem (those that lent themselves tomultiple choice format) via iClicker. The in-class problems used in term 2 were often shorter andnarrower in scope than those used in term 1 because the lecture-style room did not support givingstudents feedback as they worked through a longer problem, and hence it was difficult to keepstruggling students on track.The outside-class and assessment elements of the course had the same structure across the twoofferings. In both term 1 and term 2, homework was assigned approximately weekly and was
example, student agreement/disagreement with “I believe that other students in computerprogramming courses will be welcoming of me” could have a disproportionately large effect onthe number of women deciding to major in computer science/computer engineering.After improving the survey process based on recommendations from the initial study, weembarked on a 5 year program to gather data and assess the gender differences in two sequentiallarge programming courses. Our overarching research question is: Do women and men show astatistically significant difference in their perceptions of their abilities and learning environmentas measured by self-efficacy, intimidation by programming, and feelings of inclusion?This paper will present the first set of
Opportunities and Pro- fessor of English at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. Her research areas include technical commu- nication, assessment, accreditation, and the development of change management strategies for faculty and staff. Her articles have appeared in the Journal of Engineering Education, International Journal of En- gineering Education, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, and Technical Communication Quarterly, among others.Dr. Eva Andrijcic, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Eva Andrijcic serves as an Assistant Professor of Engineering Management at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. She received her Ph.D. and M.S. in Systems and Information Engineering from University of Virginia, where
electronic circuits before? 10 Have you ever programmed an Arduino before? 11 Have you ever used a laser with mirrors and motors to create a light show? Figure 4. Pre and Post Survey given to camp students in 2018Results In the early years of the camp, each portion of each day was scripted and planned withdesigned activities. After assessing interest and response to each activity and the curiosity of thestudents, the activities were left more open ended and had multiple levels of depth so thatadvanced students could experiment while the lagging students achieved basic competency in thetask. The final day is now planned as mostly creative free time for students to
technical training is not a simple undertaking.Stakeholder work can pose particular challenges related to practical project management, toconceptual work, and to the way that students understand themselves. In this paper, we presentpreliminary findings related to faculty and student assessments of challenges related to theprogram’s existing stakeholder engagement curriculum. The research that this paper describes isa baseline assessment of challenges students experience related to the goals of this course and thedevelopment of skills that will support their ongoing development as thoughtful engineers withimplications for future program development in support of these goals.IntroductionThe Design I program at Colorado School of Mines introduces open
- cation from Purdue University (2008). Her research focuses on strategies for design innovations through divergent and convergent thinking as well as through deep needs and community assessments using design ethnography, and translating those strategies to design tools and education. She teaches design and en- trepreneurship courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels, focusing on front-end design processes.Dr. Aileen Huang-Saad, University of Michigan Aileen is faculty in Engineering Education and Biomedical Engineering. Previously, Aileen was the Associate Director for Academics in the Center for Entrepreneurship and was responsible for building the Program in Entrepreneurship for UM undergraduates, co-developing
many industries such as automotive, chemical distribution etc. on transportation and operations management projects. She works extensively with food banks and food pantries on supply chain management and logistics focused initiatives. Her graduate and undergraduate students are integral part of her service-learning based logistics classes. She teaches courses in strategic relationships among industrial distributors and distribution logistics. Her recent research focuses on engineering education and learning sciences with a focus on how to engage students better to prepare their minds for the future. Her other research interests include empirical studies to assess impact of good supply chain practices such as
hydraulic vibration machine at IIT Madras, for Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), Tumba. In US he worked for the R&D departments of Computer, ATM and Railway Industry. He then resumed teaching at several US academic institutions. He spent two summers at NASA Kennedy Space Center as a research fellow. He received awards for academic, teaching and research excellence. His teaching experience ranges from KG to PG. After his return to India, Dr. Malladi taught his favorite subject ”Engineering Mechanics” at a few en- gineering institutions and found a need to 1. simplify the subject 2. create a new genre of class books to facilitate active reading and learning and 3. reform academic assessment for the sure
experimental aerodynamics, aircraft design and engineering education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 2019 ASEE 126th National Conference Flipped Classroom and its Impact on Student Engagement Chadia Affane Aji and M. Javed Khan Tuskegee University, Tuskegee Alabama 36088AbstractThis paper will provide the first-year results of the impact of implementing the flipped approachin lower level math and aerospace engineering courses. A quasi-experimental between-groupsresearch design was used for assessing the effectiveness of this methodology. The control groupconsisted of students who were in the same course
Paper ID #27271Getting Everyone to the Fair: Who Participates in and Benefits from Scienceand Engineering Fairs (Evaluation)Dr. Joni M. Lakin, Auburn University Joni M. Lakin, Ph.D. from The University of Iowa, is Associate Professor of Educational Foundations, Leadership, and Technology at Auburn University. Her research interests include educational assessment, educational evaluation methods, and increasing diversity in STEM fields.Ms. Mary Lou Ewald, Auburn University Mary Lou Ewald is the Director of Outreach for the College of Sciences and Mathematics at Auburn University. She is also the Co-PI for AU-AMSTI and the
institution/department. This contract sets out their requirements to accomplishthe following: 1) Maintain a grade point average of at least 3.0 in all classes taken; 2) Meet withtheir faculty mentor monthly. 3) Meet with their academic advisor at least once each semester toplan their program coursework, assess the need for tutoring or other services, plan graduateschool application or employment strategy, and/or receive referrals to other campus resources. 4)Attend 80% of the monthly LEAP meetings; 5) Participate in the IEEE Student Chapter andComputer Engineering Club; participants will be encouraged to accept a leadership role as theybecome available.LEAP Program AssessmentIn order to assess the outcome of our NSF LEAP program, a study was
language diversity of engineers in Qatar. Her primary research interests are cultural factors in engineering learning, assessment methods, and project-based learning.Mr. Rinith Reghunath, Texas A&M University at Qatar Rinith Reghunath is an Electrical Engineering sophomore studying at Texas A&M University at Qatar, who is expected to graduate in 2021 with a minor in Mathematics. He possesses technical expertise in various programs such as C, C++, MATLab, Verilog, RobotC and Arduino. He currently works with Dr. Amy Hodges on research projects revolving around engineering education and technical communica- tion in the workplace. He has received awards for academic excellence and extracurricular competitions such
. His research in engineering education and learning sciences involves developing young children’s cognitive ability to think and reason during complex problem solving activities. As part of this research he explores new methods to enhance informal and formal learning experiences using technology. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Identifying Computational Thinking in Storytelling Literacy Activities with Scratch Jr. (RTP)AbstractStudents are learning to interact with, design for, and sometimes even program computers atearlier and earlier ages. Teachers and researchers can relatively easily measure progress inlearning programming tasks, but assessing conceptual
, and comprehensive engineering program requirements for learningtechnical topics limits the amount of coursework for explicitly developing technical writingability. To assess strategies to improve technical writing among upper divisions students, wereport the response of three cohorts of engineering students to modifications of a fluid mechanicscourse with a hands-on fluid mechanics laboratory project assignment that involves thepreparation of a technical report. We find that group format instruction on report preparation,with specific examples of good and bad writing styles and a clear standard for the expected levelof performance, is equally effective as small group meetings with more personalized feedbackand is substantially less resource
ISU’s IMSE department had a CURE in their IE271course, it could perhaps mean an additional three female graduate students/year.Lessons LearnedLessons learned from this research undertaking include the following: 1. Implementing a CURE pedagogy is no small undertaking. It requires resources: funding for teaching/research assistants, funding for expendable supplies, faculty time to develop, faculty time to execute, and faculty and staff time to assess. 2. Making surveys easy to complete might increase the return rate – for the Spring 2019 semester electronic surveys were used rather than paper surveys. 3. Asking students to explain answers would allow better understanding of their responses. 4. Putting a plan in place for