An Examination of Early Elementary Students’ Approaches to Engineering Jason Michal Kahn, Marina Umaschi Bers Tufts University A five-week interactive workshop gave us the opportunity to study the engineering learning processes of early elementary children, allowing us to gain a sense of their innate engineering abilities and the processes they could be taught in the context of the Project Inter-actions study at Tufts University Department of Child Development. Forty children participated in the research, split into four groups of 10 each, each group participating in 5 workshop sessions of 2 hours each
interdisciplinary approach with an overall objective of improving ecosystem understanding, health and management, and provide a mechanism by which to bring research expertise into the classroom. Dr. Meadows has taught upper level environmental ocean dynamics courses as well as the college’s Introduction to Engineering course, which combines a team project with technical communication material, environmental consciousness and ethics. Her most recent contribution to this course has been the development and implementation of a service-learning curriculum and the inception of an engineering education research program to explore the service-learning pedagogy in engineering
practice. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 A Principlist Approach for Framing Conversations with Diverse Stakeholders About Engineering PracticeAbstractA recent report from the National Academies of Science and Engineering with the Institute ofMedicine highlights an emerging shift in thinking about the process of technology development.The report, commissioned by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, focused newattention on the conversation about social contexts and impacts of engineering, particularly thedesigning and implementation of new technologies. This report suggested a need for changes inthe content of the conversation about social impacts of engineering
. Mizuno, M.L. Neilsen, and G. Singh, “A structured approach to develop concurrent programs in UML”, In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Unified Modeling Language (UML 2000), pp.451- 565, Oct 1-3, 2000. [11] M.L. Neilsen, D.H. Lenhert, M. Mizuno, G. Singh, N. Zhang, and A.B. Gross, “An interdisciplinary curriculum on real-time embedded systems”, 2002 ASEE Annual Conference, Session 1526 [12] T. Yavus-Kahveci, and T. Bultan, “Specification, Verification, and Synthesis of Concurrency Control Components”, will appear in the Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2002
of the college.While such publishing activities certainly seem secondary to the primary goal of integratingcommunications instruction into the engineering curriculum, they still help support that goal. Asstaff learn even more about the context in which they are teaching communications skills,students see the high value placed on communicating engineering’s ethos and achievements byfaculty and staff. These publications are a visible symbol of the importance of communicating toboth technical and non-technical audiences, often at the same time.IV. The Writing Center Approach to Integrating Communications InstructionThe Professional Communications Center model of the writing center approach to integratingcommunications instruction into
statements represents one keyway that engineering students can communicate and compare the design problems that they haveidentified [9], [12], few studies have explored how engineering students may approach needsstatement development in practice as part of their projects. The goal of this study was toinvestigate undergraduate engineering students’ conceptions about needs statement development,how their conceptions were impacted by training and practice related to developing needsstatements, and challenges encountered by students while developing needs statements.2. Background2.1 Recommended practices for developing needs statementDesign textbooks [3], [9] and design guides [7], [8], [14] provide several recommendations forneeds statement development
to design challenges. This approach enabled students tocomprehend both the engineering problem and the biological system, which could serve asinspiration for design solutions. The curriculum aligned with state and national engineeringstandards, and this was the first unit in which students engaged during the Fall semester.The curriculum was divided into two parts: the Launcher and the Design Challenge. Thelauncher presented an introductory design challenge to introduce students to the EDP and theconcept of BID. Each step of the EDP was demonstrated through the design challenge, whichfocused on solving the problem of dirty shoes. In this challenge, students explored the lotuseffect and learned about the water-repellent properties of lotus
Paper ID #9564CAREER: A Study of How Engineering Students Approach InnovationDr. Senay Purzer, Purdue University, West Lafayette S¸enay Purzer an Assistant Professor in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. In 2011, she received a NSF CAREER award, which examines how engineering students approach innovation. She is also a NAE/CASEE New Faculty Fellow. Purzer conducts research on aspects of design education such as innovation and information literacy.Mr. Nicholas D. Fila, Purdue University, West Lafayette Nicholas D. Fila is a Ph.D. student in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University
the RPDC deliverables capture student performance against the RPDC Learning Objectives ● assessing transference by identifying and partnering with design courses situated later in the curriculum, and mapping the rubrics used in those later courses to the RPDC rubrics ● assessing changes to the RPDC activity through methodologically rigorous, year-over- year comparisons of student performance and both student and teaching team perceptions.References[1] Ernst von Glasersfeld, “Constructivism in Education” in T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite, (eds.) (1989) The International 114 Encyclopedia of Education, Supplement Vol.1. Oxford/New York:Pergamon Press, 162–163.[2] Nigel Cross, Engineering Design
board of the National Society of Black Engineers chapter located at NJIT. He also serves on the executive board of NJIT First Fellows, an organization focused on aiding and guiding first and second-generation college students.Dr. Jaskirat Sodhi, New Jersey Institute of Technology Dr. Jaskirat Sodhi is interested in first-year engineering curriculum design and recruitment, retention and success of engineering students. He is the coordinator of ENGR101, an application-oriented course for engineering students placed in pre-calculus courses. He has also developed and co-teaches the Fundamen- tals of Engineering Design course that includes a wide spectra of activities to teach general engineering students the basics of
for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education and Practice (ISTEP), Director of the Collaborative Specialization in Engineering Education, a 3M national Teaching Fellow, and a mOliver Pan, University of Toronto Oliver Pan is an undergraduate student at the University of Toronto, studying finance with a double minor in statistics and economics. He exhibits a deep enthusiasm for data analytics, driven by a curiosity to unveil analytical insights spanning multiple sectors such as financial technology. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Engineering Students’ Engagement and Learning Outcomes: A Typological Approach Qin Liu, Greg Evans, and Oliver
or university level.The objectives of the project were outlined as follows: 1. Create a standard yet innovative curriculum and assessment for the “Introduction to Engineering and Technical Design” course by sharing existing knowledge and resources while developing new curriculum and applying new methods of delivery. 2. Combine resources and knowledge from the drafting portion of Skilled and Technical Science Education (USOE) with the drafting portion of Technology and Engineering Education (USOE) to enhance the students’ career options while strengthening USHE and USOE technology and Engineering programs. 3. Develop the curriculum in such manner that math or engineering credit can be given for this
in a variety of industry sectors and the ‘lessons learned’ andtakeaways from the course and reported over time. This longitudinal approach to course alumnisurveys can be adapted for and implemented in other courses and environments for purposes ofcurriculum refinement and quality improvement in order to accommodate the needs of keystakeholders including the faculty and teaching team, alumni, and current and future students. 1. BACKGROUND/LITERATURE REVIEWIt is well recognized that the engineering degree prepares graduates to work and thrive in adiverse array of fields within and beyond engineering [1-3]. These decisions about what joboptions to pursue often occur again and again throughout one’s professional trajectory, from thefirst job
branch off in a new direction, we shouldsurvey leaders in industry and research to understand their perspectives on professionalpresentations. Likewise, we should survey engineering faculty to discover how AE can beincorporated into engineering curriculum. Additional surveys of students and recent graduatesshould also be conducted in order to measure for statistically significant differences and to gain aneven better understanding of experiences using AE in professional settings, the resistance theapproach elicits, and new ways to spread the approach.Appendix A: Survey Question Tree Two question trees shown Figures A-1 and A-2 were developed to conduct surveys in aneutral manner so that respondents volunteered information, as opposed to
MSAs and their impact on quality of life metrics, to find multiplealternative hypotheses to pursue, and find ways, both engineering and non-engineering, toimprove such metrics. This should help place engineering solutions in the broader scope ofthings and their impact.We hypothesize that, by providing scaffolding with ’executable’ narrative case studies andinteraction with students in other disciplines, we can help mainstream engineering students tostep out of their comfort zones and reflect on broader societal issues. We also hypothesize thatthis would help non-mainstream engineering students to find a new awareness and strength inbecoming engineers.Our approach is derived from two theoretical models with strong emphasis on studentinvolvement
Session 2225 Teaching Electrical Engineering Design Using the Modified Decision Tree Approach Domingo L. Uy Fort Valley State UniversityAbstractThis paper presents the Modified Decision Tree Approach (MDTA) for teaching design in the contextof Electrical Engineering. The salient feature of this method is that it facilitates the generation ofalternative courses of actions, such that one can easily see the big picture, and at the same timeputting the design in proper context. The method is illustrated by designing a simple one
internship and co-op experience play inhelping to deliver the real life, active learning components of the course is also discussed.The paper first briefly summarizes the results of work that was completed on modeling studentsatisfaction and motivation in industrial engineering education. The results of this work led tothis current effort of studying this new approach in industrial engineering course delivery. Thepaper goes on to explain the current and ongoing work being carried out in an engineeringeconomy course to upgrade the curriculum, while also improving student satisfaction in thecourse by improving course delivery.MotivationWhen discussions about changing the course curriculum of an engineering economy coursebegan during the 2011-2012
Paper ID #15013Investigating the Effectiveness of New Geotechnical Engineering Problem-Based Learning Modules for Student Comprehension and Attitude at TwoUniversitiesDr. Adam J. Lobbestael, Lawrence Technological University Dr. Lobbestael is an Assistant Professor at Lawrence Technological University in Southfield, Michigan. He received his PhD in Civil Engineering from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, specializing in geotechnical engineering. His research interests include dams and levees, slope stability, numerical mod- eling, geotechnical earthquake engineering, soil liquefaction, and engineering education. Dr
designed to compare measures of creativity of projectsproduced in two distinctly different problem-solving environments: a linear (DEAL) approachversus a more open-ended, choice-based approach.The DEAL method, currently used in some areas of the North Carolina technology education curriculum, is a somewhat linear approach, requiring that students: 1. Define the problem and goals for the problem-‐solving task; 2. Explore possible strategies and new information for accomplishing those goals; 3. Anticipate the outcomes of those strategies in order to decide which to Act upon; and 4. Look back and Learn. DEAL functions as a precursor to more
design-based learning approaches: a search for key characteristics,” International Journal of Technology & Design Education, vol. 23:3, pp. 717–732, 2013, doi: 10.1007/s10798- 012-9212-x.[8] E. M. Silk, C. D. Schunn, and M.S. Cary, “The impact of an engineering design curriculum on science,” The Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 18:3, pp. 209-223, 2009.[9] K.E. Rambo-Hernandez, R. A. Atadero, and M. Balgopal, “The impact of group design projects in engineering on achievement goal orientations and academic outcomes,” Educational Psychology, vol. 37:10, pp. 1242-1258, 2017, doi: 10.1080/01443410.2017.1330947.[10] T. Brown, and J. Wyatt, “Design thinking for social
and improve college teaching. Pete believes that excellent teachers continually grow, develop and learn from one another. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 A Connected Course Approach for Introduction to Engineering Problem SolvingIntroductionThis Work in Progress paper summarizes preliminary results of a new college-wide first-yearengineering problem solving course. Using computer programming as a vehicle, the goal of thecourse was to enhance students’ ability to solve novel real-world problems. Students learneddesign-thinking, opportunity recognition, and customer discovery in collaboration with theInnovation and Entrepreneurship Institute, housed in the College
Session 3675 What You Need to Know about Becoming an Academic in Engineering: A Woman’s Point of View Mary R. Anderson-Rowland Arizona State UniversityAbstractAn academic career offers many advantages: choice of research area, choice of teaching style,flexibility in scheduling, a new start each semester, options on how the summer is spent, workingwith really great people, and after tenure, job stability, to name a few. Academia is anopportunity to help people directly, to be able to see the “light bulb turn on,” to be a mentor, tobe a role model.The academic
discipline-focused initiativesfall short in terms of providing a more holistic experience of Engineering as a unified discipline.The main reason for this is that the inherent complexity involved in integrating multipledisciplines into a project over a relatively short period of time is a major challenge. Socolloquially speaking, oftentimes students don’t get to see the forest for the tree. As a resultmany students lose their curiosity to learn more about the engineering profession and decide tochoose a different career path.To address these concerns, an innovative teaching model based on a structured curriculum isproposed to not only introduce students to multiple engineering disciplines but also allow themto be part of a unified engineering
. 26.995.1-26.995.13.[12] C. B. Kromann, M. L. Jensen, and C. Ringsted, “The effect of testing on skills learning,” Med. Educ., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 21–27, Jan. 2009.[13] A. Nimunkar, S. Bernardoni, T. Lark, and W. Tompkins, “Student Initiated Supplemental Training Curriculum For Support Of Bme Design Projects,” presented at the 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition, 2009, p. 14.1083.1-14.1083.9.[14] S. Bernardoni, A. Nimunkar, J. Murphy, and S. Courter, “Student Initiated Design And Implementation Of Supplemental Hands On Fabrication Training Curriculum In An Introduction To Engineering Design Course: A Tqm Approach,” presented at the 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition, 2008, p. 13.1108.1-13.1108.23.[15] R. Layton, M. L
-enabled frequent feedback. Prior to her role and Director of Instructional Effectiveness, she worked as the Education Project Manager for the NSF-funded JTFD Engineering faculty development program, as a high school math and science teacher, and as an Assistant Principal and Instructional & Curriculum Coach.Dr. Ryan J Meuth, Arizona State University Dr. Ryan Meuth is a Freshmen Engineering Senior Lecturer in the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, and also teaches courses in Computer Engineering for the School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering at Arizona State University.Dr. Brent James Sebold, Arizona State University Dr. Brent Sebold is an expert faculty designer and administrator of
supported by the Automotive Partnership Consortium, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, Ford, Toyota, Cominco as well as others in the transportation and manufacturing sectors. Dr. Grygu´c has also spent half a decade in the automotive industry as a structural analyst focusing on non-linear FE modelling, for structural, NVH, crash and dura- bility objectives. Furthermore, he leverages his industrial experience to enhance his research program and teaching curriculum at both an undergrad and graduate level. In 2018 Dr. Grygu´c was the recipi- ent of the Toyota Automotive Safety Award and was the Interim Director of an Academic Makerspace heavily utilizing
Bell Laboratories, General Motors Laboratories, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and SPAWAR Systems Center. Page 12.582.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Effective “Writing to Communicate” Experiences in Electrical Engineering CoursesAbstractTo help develop essential communication skills that engineering graduates need, engineeringfaculty must find ways to incorporate writing into the curriculum. There have been reports ofimpressive work integrating writing centers or technical communication professionals withengineering courses. However, most engineering programs do not
hundreds of new and experienced engineers. His research interests include; design education, product architecture, mechanical reliability, design for manufacture and quality. Mark graduated from Rensselaer with a B.S. in mechanical engineering in 1978 and a Ph.D. in 1987.Mr. Kurt Stephen Stresau, University of Central Florida c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 A Case Study Approach for Understanding the Impact of Team Selection on the Effectiveness of Multidisciplinary Capstone TeamsAn important ingredient for capstone project success is teamwork. Most, if not all, capstoneteams will deal with issues such as poor communication, social
) and a Master of Science in Curriculum and Instruction from Penn State University (2010). He is course coordinator for the Senior Capstone Design program. He has directed project-based programs for undergraduates with an interest in space-related fields as well as service-learning programs for those interested in community service.Ms. Mary Lynn Brannon, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Page 23.540.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Enhancing the quality of senior design projects: The introduction of a coordinated sequence of design courses to
Session 2793 Communication and Civil Engineering: An Integrated Approach to Senior Projects Marilyn A. Dyrud Oregon Institute of TechnologyFor the past year, Oregon Institute of Technology’s Civil Engineering and CommunicationsDepartments have been developing a creative curriculum venture: a unique senior designexperience that would combine the content of what had previously been three distinct classes:engineering design, technical writing, and group dynamics. Students would work in teams on areal design project, and the nine faculty