between public and private sector, extended managerial capacity- that linkinstitutions as well as faculty, administrators, academic professionals and students to the neweconomy” [7].By 2005, the partnerships have become even further enmeshed, with Prigge adding regionaleconomic development, which most university missions support, as an added benefit [1]. Priggereiterates the risks for universities that the earlier article introduces, and does note that inacademe, concerns are rising that these partnerships are altering the academic norm of opendiscovery and publishing and creating a culture that is more market driven, or “entrepreneurial”[1]. These concerns are especially prevalent in STEM fields, which is also the area identified ashosting the
to get representatives from remaining departments to attend the next offering ofthe workshop.Current Challenges: Addressing GlobalizationThe issue of most concern to our undergraduate programs at this time is how to better prepareour students to succeed in a marketplace being transformed by globalization. Once again theAdvisory Board of the Leonhard Center has played a key role in bringing this question into sharpfocus and in helping us think through how we can address it. From strategic discussions amongAdvisory Board members and the leadership of the College, we have begun to develop plans toapproach this question via two avenues – a new course that emphasizes key organizational andleadership skills for the global workplace and a more
attitudes toward teaching and research. Establishing experience in industry as animportant criterion in hiring new faculty may be fundamental to changing the existing cultureand to placing greater emphasis on teaching.8 Schools are being asked to enrich the educationof students, and this can be done by increasing the numbers of faculty with relevant industrialexperience. Integral to accomplishing our educational goals is having the participation ofpractitioners in the educational process. It cannot hurt to have faculty with practitionerexperience in the classroom on a daily basis. Engineering education must reflect the conditionsof practice.According to many, the cornerstone of building a strong education curriculum is balancingpractical experience
(EF1015 and EF1016). Through these two courses, the Division has a unique opportunity toexpose the 1200+ first-year engineering students to the concerns of green engineering. CurrentlyEF1015 is designed to introduce students to the engineering disciplines and to aspects of theengineering profession. The course uses various types of problems, from multiple disciplines, toengage the new engineering student in standard problem solving techniques. By altering some ofthe problems to include green content, the concerns of green engineering can be presented to thestudents as a common aspect of engineering problem solving, rather than as a separate topic.Through EF1015 and EF1016, the Division is the bridge to all degree granting departmentswithin the
flow over spillways · Water for fire protection (many areas near lakes are not served by public water supplies) · Habitat for both seasonal and residential animals and birds · Public recreation · Community aesthetics & historyThere are clearly benefits associated with maintaining existing dams in the region. If a dam isremoved to reduce the downstream hazard potential in the case of dam failure, then there areother issues that are of concern, including: · Higher peak stream flows due to increased runoff from developed areas, which could cause: o Risk of downstream property damage o Erosion or damage to downstream stream banks, requiring ongoing repair until banks
MechanicalEngineering Technology includes two associate degree programs of studyMechanical Maintenance Technology (MMT) and Manufacturing Technology(MT), taught by 48 full-time faculty members. Last year the department granted150 degrees of which 120 were in MMTP and 30 were in MTP. Both theseprograms have received accreditation by ABET. Proceedings of the 2010 Midwest Section Conference of the American Society for Engineering EducationThe ABET Accreditation Process–Lessons LearnedFaculty members learned from issues during the process of preparing for ABETaccreditation. Without addressing these issues, the department will almostcertainly jeopardize future accreditation efforts.StandardsABET requires that all the criteria mentioned in their manual should be
lessons learnedas the partnership of the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech (Spain);the Dublin Institute of Technology (Ireland); and Purdue University (USA) work toimplement the first year of this innovative and important project. As this implementationproceeded, both anticipated and unanticipated issues and concerns emerged. Manyinnovative practices and considerable time was required to resolve the Memoranda ofUnderstanding, academic governance, accreditation, financial aid, and tuition waiverissues that arose. Some of the lessons the team has learned with respect to Projectadministration, students, language, directed project, transfer credit, and faculty mobilitymechanisms and the identification of potential research
referred to as the “F’s” of studying abroad for minority students, especiallyBlack/African American students: Faculty and Staff (from failing to encourage black students) Finances (black students are more likely to come from families with lower incomes) Family and Community (safety issues and concerns about racism in an unknown place) Fears (student worries about encountering new forms of racism)Of all these factors, financing can be one of the major barriers that increase the disparity instudying abroad. Students often rely on financial aid and cannot afford the additional expense ofthe educational experience abroad. There is a hesitancy to borrow money via loans
, theyprovide an invaluable service in designing and developing new solutions for industrial clients.Second, they complement their academic education with the hands on real engineering practiceby working on projects for paying customers. Their technical education in the center iscoordinated by a faculty advisory committee consisting of one faculty from each department.Their professional training is supervised by experienced engineers who are project managers forthe projects students develop.New student interns are hired every semester from among juniors through anomination/application and interview process. Nominations are made by departmentalrepresentatives on the faculty advisory committee of the center who provide the list of eligiblestudents to the
students, faculty, and others, in the form of new curricula, reviseddepartmental practices, etc. Additionally, as a result of their work on NSF RED projects, REDproject team members also experience a positive impact through their participation in acommunity of practice. A community of practice (CoP), is defined by Wenger as follows: Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. (Wenger 2011) More than just a collection of individuals who possess a shared interest, a community ofpractice is characterized by several distinct features: they are practitioners; they develop ashared repertoire of resources (such as
general education credit, modular courseware of ethics examples and case studies from across the engineering and technology curriculum, and K-12 development experiences.• Sponsor life-long learning functions involving students, faculty, and alumni that support the character development and leadership vision of the college.• Present an annual prestigious, internationally recognized award to a prominent individual, acknowledging exemplary character and leadership in moral and technological issues.• Provide scholarship support to students, based on character and leadership criteria• Confer official academic recognition on students who complete specified requirements in character building, leadership, innovation, and global awareness.Global
required in the heat transferclass. Here such topics as energy generation and nuclear waste have arisen and prompteddiscussion in the classroom. While these three classroom assignments are addressing the topic,none of them is as intentional as they might be in increasing student awareness of global issues.More needs to be done.One result of the assessment process was a recommendation to use the current technical writingclass, ENG 3300 Technical Writing, to address global issues. Engineering, in the past, hasenjoyed an excellent working relationship with the English department concerning topics forstudents writing assignments. Engineering faculty members participate as mentors and helpstudents select topics and professional formats for reports. The
better communication and team accountability measures. • F08: Delayed feedback was a concern, especially over an extended period. • F11: Feedback on reports was not timely, which affected the project flow. • F15: Issues with making last-minute changes and communication difficulties. • F17: Lacked guidance on project design, which is a critical advisory role.Any discussion on the student evaluation of teaching should include a qualifying disclaimeracknowledging the limitations of such evaluation.12,13 Various biases can significantly skewresults, including instructor gender, race, and even perceived attractiveness. Students also tendto rate instructors in elective or “easier” courses more favorably, as well as instructors in
graduate teaching assistants. In addition to being concerned about quality ofthe educational experience for students, participants pointed to training (or lack thereof) as a keyelement to help with extensive workload issues associated to these foundational courses. With ahigher turnover rate of faculty holding instructor kinds of positions (relative to tenure-trackroles), these courses in particular may face this issue more frequently than other courses. • Graduate teaching assistants need intentional training. • Scaffolding training through involvement or more experienced graduate teaching assistants can reduce the burden on faculty. • Offer mentoring and support for new faculty members. • Collate a list of university
campus for an extended amount of time. Researchers withlarge research programs worry how a leave might adversely affect their graduate students andresearch projects. Faculty members with working spouses have to consider the flexibility of thespouse’s job, especially if they cannot also take sabbatical. Faculty with families see all theissues related to taking the family with you or being separated for an extended amount of time.In tight budget times, some universities have reduced or eliminated sabbaticals.While these are all valid concerns and issues, faculty also face challenges, particularly if theyremain at the same institution. Some faculty get caught in a groove of teaching the same classesover and over again. Other faculty get assigned to
musical production, The Music Man, closed on April 19, 1997 to a sold out audience.The students gave their final presentation, the postmortem, to the rest of their Design (EPICS)class on April 30th. The ensuing discussion proved to be informative and insightful, not only forthe students themselves but for the entire class and faculty as well. The postmortem addressedone basic question: What skills did the students learn about project development from the dramaexperience? To answer this question the students divided their presentation into four skills areasbased on the problems and issues they had to overcome.Design: The students admitted they drastically underestimated the many hidden design variablesin producing their musical; namely, in terms
responsibility. However, the survey of programsreveals other underlying issues that engineering programs may wish to consider as they provideinput into the general education programs of their respective institutions, including globalismand diversity, the interconnectedness of learning areas, and attitudes for life-long learning. Theresults of the survey are examined in light of two perspectives, one from outside the profession(Association of American Colleges and Universities, College Learning for a New GlobalCentury) and another from inside the profession (American Society of Civil Engineers, CivilEngineering Body of Knowledge for the 21st Century, 2nd edition, Draft 8).IntroductionIn the 2006-2007 academic year, the University of Evansville, under the
in last place. The results ofthis study, completed in 1918, are echoed in other studies that followed over the next 50 years,including the Wickenden Studies (1930), the Jackson report (1939), the Grinter report (1955),and the Olmstead report (1968), all indicating concern for the lack of integration of liberal artsinto engineering education.4In spite of the importance of a liberal engineering education, the issue is still debated today, as ithas been for the past 100 years. This may be due, in part, to the continual "crises" that portraythe state of higher education. According to Lucas, "If there is an authentic crisis at present . . . itis that the wrangling and contention, the endless disputations and hand-wringing, over the stateof
full period ofcommitment.The selection of regular faculty members to be involved is given special consideration. Sincethis is a totally new program and interdisciplinary in nature, finding faculty with appropriatebackground and interests can be difficult. While the program faculty will grow by acquiring newhires, this fact is not a panacea. Finding appropriate new faculty is not easy. If the new peopleare too practical, they may not be able to be successful in achieving tenure. If they are tooacademic in a traditional field, they may not have the ability to function well in thisinterdisciplinary milieu.How the program is being initiated is an element of great concern. This is due partially to thefact that many universities (including ours) do
continuouslyunfolds. Herein, ethical becoming is less concerned with compliance and duty and more focusedon exploring how one should live, participate, and interact with others along an “experientialcontinuum.” As one enters new experiences, one encounters different potentialities that, throughcare and concern, are selected for actualization or rejected (see Whitehead [20]). Thisactualization or becoming may refer to an individual subject’s fashioning, or even the making ofcontext-appropriate designs to address an identified problem. Following Dewey [21], since oneof an educator’s primary tasks is assembling the most efficient environment for “growth,” thisframework seeks to address: how does the STEM educator transform their pedagogicalapproaches and
response to these pressures and opportunities has been a dramatic rise in the number ofengineering education centers nationally. While these centers provide valuable resources forfaculty and can be a catalyst for scholarly work, they do not address the issue of the pipeline.Purdue University has begun planning for new M.S. and Ph.D. degree programs in engineeringeducation where students with Bachelor of Science degrees in engineering and other technicalfields will be eligible to participate in the M.S. and Ph.D. programs. These programs willcombine advanced courses in engineering and education with research in engineering educationand create a pipeline of engineering faculty and professionals who are be well-positioned forleadership in engineering
studies, universities are increasingly looking for ways to integrateresearch into undergraduate curriculum with undergraduate research activities proliferatingacross the United States and faculty members increasingly engaging undergraduate students topursue research activities.6 The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in theResearch University has called for action towards engaging undergraduate students in researchand emphasized ‘learning based on discovery of new knowledge.’7 There has been a sustainedgrowth in local undergraduate research conferences, symposiums and journals at variousUniversities8 while at the national level, targeted programs and conferences such as “ResearchExperiences for Undergraduates” (REU) funded through the
Session 1332 Experience with an EC2000 Visit: a view from Michigan Tech’s Electrical Engineering Department Leonard J. Bohmann, Warren F. Perger, and Robert H. Bohnsack Michigan Technological UniversityIntroductionIt all started on March 11, 1997. The new Dean of Engineering, Bob Warrington, was attendingour faculty meeting. In addition to announcing that we had hired a new Dept. Chair, he waspromoting the idea that the College of Engineering should be evaluated under the new ABETEngineering Criteria 2000 (EC2000). The Dean had just joined the college the last December.He was an experienced ABET
Session 2513 The EC 2000 System in Chemical Engineering at Washington State University Richard L. Zollars Department of Chemical Engineering Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-2710 In October, 1995 the Chemical Engineering Department at Washington StateUniversity had its regularly scheduled ABET visit. After that visit it was apparent thatthe next ABET general review would be conducted using EC2000. Given that we wouldhave six years to implement and work with this new procedure the faculty
trying to determine the best course of action.Some students also expressed concerns regarding their performance for a variety of otherreasons. Students were often in a new learning environment, being in a virtual environment withothers surrounding them in the room. Concerns with course performance often related to thestudents’ ability to grasp the information being taught online, being motivated to put in a fulleffort, and students’ inability to discuss with peers the concepts being taught. Some studentswere not as willing to ask questions in a virtual environment of the instructor, and their retentionof the material was thus negatively affected. Internet connection issues were also a factor attimes.Related trend was observed for the personal
towards computer science education change over a few weeks of a cybersecurity micro-credential PD? 2. What are the successes and challenges of a micro-credential PD as identified by the K-12 teacher participants? 3. What are K-12 teachers’ concerns regarding the integration of cybersecurity in the classroom? 4. Methods and AnalysisThis was a mixed methods study conducted during a micro-credential study in 2020 that includedqualitative, semi-structured interviews and quantitative, attitude surveys data. The K-12 teachersparticipated in a four-week (Pilot 1) and a six-week (Pilot 2) online self-paced cybersecuritymicro-credential. The micro-credential PD team (i.e., engineering faculty, education faculty,post-doc, engineering
thepublic as stakeholder, spurred by the rise of issues that include results of environmentallydamaging technologies [50] and problems that beset developing countries like lack of cleanwater and need for better sanitation [2], [51]. Moreover, it is becoming increasingly necessaryfor engineers to collaborate with scientists from various disciplines and with teams spanningmany nations [52] to produce socially and environmentally impactful technology, to participatein public policy, and to explain research findings to the public [50], all things that requireempathic concern. This is not new. FDR argued that engineering should be responsive to socialand environmental needs, seemingly presaging a need for STEMpathy in his writing about theimpact of
the 2011 New Jersey Section of ASCE Educator of the Year award as well as the 2013 Distinguished Engineering Award from the New Jersey Alliance for Action.Dr. Stephanie Farrell, Rowan University Dr. Stephanie Farrell is Professor and Founding Chair of Experiential Engineering Education at Rowan University (USA) and was 2014-15 Fulbright Scholar in Engineering Education at Dublin Institute of Technology (Ireland). From 1998-2016, Stephanie was a faculty member in Chemical Engineering at Rowan. Dr. Farrell has contributed to engineering education through her work in experiential learning, focusing on areas of pharmaceutical, biomedical and food engineering. She has been honored by the American Society of Engineering
Paper ID #32989The Impact of COVID-19 on Women Engineers in AcademiaDr. Roberta Rincon, Society of Women Engineers Dr. Roberta Rincon is the Associate Director of Research with the Society of Women Engineers, where she oversees the organization’s research activities around issues impacting girls and women from ele- mentary through college and into the engineering workforce. Before joining SWE, Roberta was a Senior Research and Policy Analyst at The University of Texas System, where she focused on student success and faculty teaching and research award programs across nine academic institutions. Roberta received her B.S
, required internationaldocumentation, etc.).”20EGR330 is co- facilitated by ETHOS administration, engineering faculty, Spanish Departmentfaculty, and University of Dayton Center for Social Concern staff. Course structure issummarized in Table 1. Language sessions incorporate a “crash course” in Spanish, providing a Page 11.1285.4review of, or introduction to, basic conversational Spanish skills. Most collaboratingorganizations and communities are Spanish speaking; thus, the need of Spanish languageinstruction. For students traveling to countries where Spanish is not spoken, appropriateinstruction is arranged. Appropriate Technology class sessions