. Meetings with relevant private (companies) and public (universities) stakeholders,focus group with HEI managers and use of the tool with students from the partner universitieswill be done to develop and validate the toolkit.3. Develop innovative and effective teaching and training strategies for students in highereducation, focusing on curriculum design and making better use of the many already existingopportunities for embedded mobility and collaboration. The output will be a guidebook toenhancing global competence building at HEIs. This guidebook will contain general strategiesfor HEIs, as well as specific suggestions for staff and students, drawing on theory and currentbest practices, in line with the competencies identified above (Objective 1
during their firstyear of college, and apply it to their habits for critical thinking and metacognition. Thisknowledge could inform our guided practice in reflection through essays and other prompts. Ourfirst-year engineering design course at a research institution in the southeastern United Statesalready includes practice in certain professional skills, such as ethics and integrity, teamwork andtechnical communication. It is evident that reflective judgment is another important professionalskill that should be initiated early in the engineering curriculum, both for solving ill-structuredproblems and for retaining knowledge.Our research question is as follows: How well do first year students develop higher level thinking skills through
behaviors such as identifying the problem andunderstanding the goals, identifying constraints, and familiarizing themselves with availablematerial. In addition, Watkins and her colleagues [19] provided evidence of fourth gradersengaging in three phases of problem scoping as naming, setting the context and reflecting.Finally, Haluschak and her colleagues [22] investigated problem scoping in young children (K-2grade) during an implementation of a STEM+C+Literacy curriculum. They found that childrencan participate in meaningful problem scoping in all three phases mentioned by Watkins and hercolleagues [19, 22].While these previous studies provided evidence that children in different elementary grade levelsare capable of engaging in problem scoping
cooperative learning experience –which is part of active learning- to be successful, it isimperative that the following be integrated into the class activity: [9, 12, 13, and 14]. Interdependence- Students should perceive that they need each other to complete the planned activity; Interaction- Students should work together in planning, executing, and arriving at conclusions. They should share the work load equitably and share the credit; Accountability- Students should be accountable individually & as a group. Keeping track of knowledge gained by the individual (through the group) should not be overlooked; Sharing known skills- Students who possess certain knowledge or skills (computer skills
. At times, this results in students dropping out of projects. The students also havefamily, financial or health challenges that may prevent them from continuing their participation.For example, a student’s lack of research experience can lead to underestimating the time requiredfor a project, resulting in missed deadlines and at times, creating real conflicts with students’classes, family commitments, and outside employment. Research projects can have a negativeimpact on a student’s GPA if they are not properly advised and projects are not effectivelymanaged. Finally, community college students do not get any curriculum credit for theirundergraduate research as students do for Senior Design Projects at 4-year institutions.How to Develop an
STEM pedagogy, design thinking, project-based learning and educational entrepreneurship.Dr. Carla B. Zoltowski, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Carla B. Zoltowski is an assistant professor of engineering practice in the Schools of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering and (by courtesy) Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. in Engineering Education, all from Purdue. Prior to this she was Co-Director of the EPICS Program at Purdue where she was responsible for developing curriculum and assessment tools and overseeing the research efforts within EPICS. Her academic and research interests include the profes- sional formation of
collected as part of a larger NSF-funded project thatexplores the link between motivation and conceptual change.The project participants self-selected by responding to an invitation disseminated to instructorsof the identified courses in a partner institution. Requests for participation were also sent to thefollowing ASEE divisions: Biological & Agricultural Engineering, Chemical Engineering, CivilEngineering, Educational Research & Methods, Electrical & Computer Engineering, EngineeringPhysics, Mechanical Engineering, Mechanics, Minorities in Engineering, and Women inEngineering. Recruitment sites were purposefully selected to ensure that instructors from avariety of institutions, and, consequently, teaching and learning experiences
curriculum development. She is passionate about hands-on engineering design for every student, at every age level.Dr. Janet Y. Tsai, University of Colorado, Boulder Janet Y. Tsai is a researcher and instructor in the College of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Colorado Boulder. Her research focuses on ways to encourage more students, especially women and those from nontraditional demographic groups, to pursue interests in the eld of engineering. Janet assists in recruitment and retention efforts locally, nationally, and internationally, hoping to broaden the image of engineering, science, and technology to include new forms of communication and problem solving for emerging grand challenges. A second
ashort definition for each level, a reduced set of key works for each level, and two examples ofactivities that could be assessed. The work in the cognitive domain by Bloom and his colleaguesserved as a seminal work in curriculum development for many years, with a number ofresearchers either developing refinements to the implementation of the taxonomy or deriding thetaxonomy as having only limited benefit in assessing intellectual development, (see the work ofOrmell, Roberts or Seddon [10][11][12]), to mention a few. Major revisions to Bloom’staxonomy did not occur until 2001 when Anderson and Krathwohl proposed a revision to thehierarchy (i.e., by reversing the order of synthesis and evaluation), added a new dimension whichdescribed cognitive
degrees in mathematics at The Ohio State University and her MS and PhD in operations research and applied science from the College of William and Mary. Diane received her Black Belt in Six Sigma in 2011 from Purdue’s Technical Assistance Program. Her current research and teaching interests are in probability, statistics, quality control, and Six Sigma. She has published journal articles in the areas of probability, statistics, statistics education, quality control, and Six Sigma, and has published a book in computational probability. Diane won Rose-Hulman’s Dean’s Outstanding Teacher Award in 2007, was named in Princeton Review’s 300 Best Professors in America in 2012, and was selected as one of Microsoft’s 365 ”Heroes
majors. At thispoint in the semester, the students are to complete the assignment, called Requirements ForEngineering Majors Assignment.The design of the assignment itself was meant as an active learning assignment in the hopes thatstudents would be able to learn where to find degree requirement information on their own, gaina true understanding of course pre-requisites, how pre-requisites fit into the curriculum ofvarious engineering programs, and begin thinking about what the importance of transferringcredits. In essence, we hope to teach the skills they would need to gather the information theyneeded to have meaning interactions with their advisers, or to be able to research and createrealistic educational plans for themselves.The
, learning sciences, and instructional design and technology. His recent research focuses on the cognitive and pedagogical underpinnings of learning with computer-based multimedia re- sources; knowledge representation through interactive concept maps; meta-analysis of empirical research, c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Paper ID #26454 and investigation of instructional principles and assessments in STEM. He is a Senior Associate Editor for the Journal of Engineering Education. He is a Senior Associate Editor for the Journal of Engineering Education.Dr. Prashanta Dutta, Washington State
developers of the Rose-Hulman Sophomore Engineering Curriculum, the Dynamics Concept Inventory, and he is a co-author of Vector Mechanics for Engineers: Dynamics, by Beer, Johnston, Cornwell, and Self.Dr. Amir H Danesh-Yazdi, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Dr. Danesh-Yazdi is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Tech- nology. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Good Strategies to Avoid Bad FBDsAbstractDrawing a good free-body diagram (FBD) is generally acknowledged by mechanics instructorsas a critical step in solving mechanics problems. In this paper we will summarize recommendedprocedures and mnemonics that have been
engineering degree increasedfrom 29% in 2006 to 33% in 2015. The six-year graduation rates were 20% to 25% higher thanthe rates for students who attained a degree in four years. Retaining students in engineeringprograms remains a challenge to all engineering educators. Many institutions are increasinglyfocused on improving retention rates through various programs and services. In 2012 ASEE [3]reported strategies implemented to improve student retention rates in some engineering schools:focus on student learning through tutoring/mentoring, student programs and financial aid, studentacademic enrichment programs, student research/work experience, curriculum and classenhancements, institutional/educational research, and changes to institutional
called TRESTLE.The TRESTLE network includes the two institutions that developed the original SEI model andconvenes a course transformation institute each year as well as a series of online colloquia andconversations across the year and offers course transformation models and resources on itswebsite (https://trestlenetwork.ku.edu/).School of Engineering Context The School of Engineering encompasses 6 departments: Aerospace Engineering (AE),Civil, Environmental, & Architectural Engineering (CEAE), Chemical & Petroleum Engineering(C&PE), Electrical Engineering & Computer Science (EECS), Engineering Physics (EPHSX),and Mechanical Engineering (ME). The School is home to approximately 130 tenure-trackfaculty and 2500
maximize diversity in gender, race and STEMsubject areas. We also considered whether two applicants taught at the same school and whetheran applicant was applying to participate for a second year, as these characteristics were valuedboth by us and by NSF. The choice of research project was not considered in the selectionprocess, except in one case where a particular skill in computer programming was required.Despite this, almost all selected applicants received their first or second choice of project.We note that while there were forty-one positions opened over four years, only twenty-sevenindividuals participated. This is because fourteen of these twenty-seven teachers participated inthe program for a second year. The demographic information
those comments.References [1] G. Pahl, W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen, and K.-H. Grote, Engineering Design: A Systematic Ap- proach, 3rd ed. London: Springer-Verlag, 2007. [2] C. L. Dym, P. L. with Elizabeth J. Owen, and R. E. Spjut, Engineering Design: A Project- Based Introduction, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley, 2009. [3] R. L. Nagel and M. R. Bohm, “On teaching functionality and functional modeling in an engineering curriculum,” in ASME 2011 International Design Engineering Technical Con- ferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2011, pp. 625–636. [4] M. S. Erden, H. Komoto, T. J. van Beek, V. D’Amelio, E. Echavarria, and T. Tomiyama
national STEM initiatives have shifted research focus from the development ofinstructional innovations to the examination of change processes and implementation of researchbased instructional strategies. Emphasis has been placed on adoption of instructional strategiesand how they are implemented, especially in engineering science courses at the core ofengineering curriculum. Unfortunately, little has been done to examine the multivariaterelationship among instructional strategies, active and interactive learning, and studentengagement in post-secondary engineering energy science courses. Successful implementation ofinstructional strategies hinges not only on the how, but also the why and for what purpose. Thecurrent study provides evidence for the
possess certain knowledge or skills (computer skills, laboratory skills, data analysis and reduction skills, writing skills, presentation skills, etc.) should be willing to pass it on, and/ or share it with their group members; Collaborative skills- Groups cannot function effectively if members do not have (be willing to learn) or use some needed social skills. Such as: leadership, decision-making, trust building, and conflict management; Monitoring progress- Groups need to discuss amongst themselves whether they are achieving their set goals. They need also to prioritize the scheduled activities, introduce changes when needed, and solicit advice and assistance with the consent of the
” aspects into the studies of applied science,computing, engineering and engineering technology. ABET’s Engineering AccreditationCommission (EAC) is explicitly linked to acquiring a global skill set, by teaching the “broadeducation necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global economic,environmental, and societal context”. Similarly, ABET’s Technology Accreditation Commission(ETAC) requires “a respect for diversity and a knowledge of contemporary professional, societaland global issues”4. The EAC and ETAC’s student learning outcomes based on the criterion ofglobal competency are that the students:a) “will demonstrate substantial knowledge [or factual understanding] of the similarities and differences among engineers and
, may result in fewer minority studentsas well [1], [6].Fear of racism – research suggests that students who are susceptible to stereotype threat(potential interpretations of ones’ actions through an existing negative lens) often respond byadjusting behavior patterns to minimize or avoid similar situations [11]. Students of color andmore often African American college students at predominantly white institutions are oftenalready vulnerable to such negativism. Since study abroad is rarely required as part of theundergraduate curriculum, they are more likely to decline the opportunity even in the presence ofother incentives [11], [6]. Studying abroad is often marketed as a means to improve ones’ crosscultural experience. For the minority student
-251.27. Burke PJ. The self: Measurement requirements from an interactionist perspective. Soc Psychol Q. 1980:18- 29.28. Jocuns A, Stevens R, Garrison L, Amos D. Students’ changing images of engineering and engineers. In: American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. Pittsburgh, PA; 2008:28.29. Stevens R, O’Connor K, Garrison L, Jocuns A, Amos DM. Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning. J Eng Educ. 2008;97(3):355-368.30. Stevens R, O’Connor K, Garrison L. Engineering student identities in the navigation of the undergraduate curriculum. In: Association of the Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference.; 2005:8.31. Matusovich H, Streveler R
State University in 2002, 2004, and 2007, respectively. Dr. Rhoads’ current research inter- ests include the predictive design, analysis, and implementation of resonant micro/nanoelectromechanical systems (MEMS/NEMS) for use in chemical and biological sensing, electromechanical signal processing, and computing; the dynamics of parametrically-excited systems and coupled oscillators; the behavior of electromechanical and thermomechanical systems, including energetic materials, operating in rich, multi- physics environments; and mechanics education. Dr. Rhoads is a member of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), where he serves on the Design
given a RFP as a source document formission design and required design process. TAMU, however, had their students develop anRFP based on interviews with project customers. The experience was valuable for the studentsand was favorably reviewed during student course feedback. The project, however, took 1-2weeks of effort and resulted in some loss of 1st semester course content. The 2nd semester designinstructor reported no loss of content and was pleased with the overall result. TAMU's test of the SE Design concept on their control station design course producedunexpected benefits. About half the students in the course were aerospace students, most ofwhich had taken or would take aircraft design. The other half was computer science studentswho
engineering andcomputer science and uses a common curriculum across all sections (20 to 21) to achieve thesame learning outcomes. The course includes lectures and four "hands-on" experimental labmodules that enable students to explore mechanical, chemical, and electrical systems in teams of2-3 students. In addition, students complete a fifth project, called the “Choice Project,” in whichthe students are asked to design their own experimental investigation, different from the onescompleted, using the knowledge and equipment from the four required experiments. Usually,teams extend one of the required projects for the Choice Project, for example, doubling theenergy production from a fuel cell. The Choice Project was replaced by the Grand
development advising, capstone projects program, industry partnerships, first-year interest groups, and other special programs.Dr. Mia K. Markey, The University of Texas - Austin Dr. Mia K. Markey is a Professor of Biomedical Engineering and Engineering Foundation Endowed Faculty Fellow in Engineering at The University of Texas at Austin as well as Adjunct Professor of Imaging Physics at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Dr. Markey is a 1994 graduate of the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy and has a B.S. in computational biology (1998). Dr. Markey earned her Ph.D. in biomedical engineering (2002), along with a certificate in bioinformatics, from Duke University. Dr. Markey has been recognized for
, this paper’s primary objective is to present detailsof a construction materials laboratory that has included a notable writing experience for severalyears, but recently incorporated panel evaluations to expose students to presenting andemphasize competition.The laboratory compliments CE 3313: Construction Materials, a lecture course which is arequired part of an ABET/EAC-accredited curriculum leading to a Bachelor of Science in CivilEngineering (BSCE). The laboratory was taught in a non-credit producing manner as part of CE3313 (3 total credit hours) until the 2014 spring semester, and thereafter the laboratory was a 1credit hour producing laboratory (4 credit hours for lecture and laboratory) with the CE 3311
class of a required course for the junior-levelmechanical engineering students. Due to the curriculum structure, students do not enroll in thejunior level course until six to nine months after completing Mechanics of Materials. Studentself-perception surveys were also conducted at the end of the course and students were asked torate their interest in the course material on a five point Likert scale and to indicate if the courseactivities increased their overall material interest.Everyday Examples in EngineeringEngineering students are regularly introduced to new and seemingly unfamiliar topics in theirengineering courses. Students do not readily link what they are learning to the immediate world
change the traditional norms in the institution of engineering education.It is with McIntosh’s challenge in mind that we turn our focus to unearned advantages anddisadvantages experienced by students within engineering education. Scholars have writtenabout engineering education as being a “raced, gendered and classed” institution. This is a wayof saying that the system educating engineers has historically been designed by and for Whitemen, mainly in the upper-to-middle class1–5. Unfortunately, it is this history that hasconsequences even today for the content of engineering curriculum as well as who becomes anengineer3,6,7. Even now, women, students of color, first generation college students, lower
Page 26.651.7appreciated the time spent on lecture topics, and many requested more time allocated to thesetopics: “The lecture material was very useful and gave great insight into how to do researchbetter”; “…more lecture material possibly regarding presentations and data analysis”; and “Iwould increase some focus on data analysis, computational tools, and software methods”7. Two,what makes this course truly unique – the opportunity for students to pursue their own researchideas – was one of the top responses when students were asked what they liked most about thecourse: “The practical experience and the freedom to pick our own project for the lab”; “I thinkproposing our own project is what makes this class wonderful”; “I liked how it was open