25.494.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Education Approach in Japan for Management and Engineering of Systems by David S. Cochran and Makoto KawadaAbstractDesigning and managing systems that are sustainable requires a new approach to thinkingand learning about the management and engineering of systems. This paper describes auniversity curriculum in Japan that embodies a new approach to education aboutenterprises systems (and specifically knowledge about the Toyota Production System(lean)). Referred to as Collective System Design, the new learning approach emphasizesthe tone of the system participants and a language for system design to codify
universities and student population, without „drilling in‟ with much depthregarding what mechanisms may be at play from year to year when students decide toleave engineering altogether. One interesting result of such surveys that hasn‟t beenexplored in much depth is the fact that most engineering students take 5 years tograduate, even though the curriculum is based on 4 years to graduation.In contrast, this study seeks to analyze retention rates at a single institution, the GeorgiaInstitute of Technology (GT), from year to year. GT graduates more engineers and morewomen engineers than any other institution in the United States, so the numbers there arelarge enough to provide meaningful data. Also, the College of Engineering at GT iscurrently rated 4th
spaces and developing methods for accessible learning. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Effect of Assessment Structure on Perceived Efficacy in a Rocketry CourseAbstractThis study investigates the impact of assessment structure on student performance andengagement in an academic setting, specifically focusing on an introductory rocketrycourse for undergraduate non-aerospace engineering students. Departing from traditionalend-of-course assessments, the research explores whether implementing a 'chunking'approach by breaking the final assessment into individual quizzes over the last weekyields distinct outcomes. The approach involved comparing two groups of
a crucial tool, reflecting the learner's understandingand competence, and ultimately guiding them towards targeted improvement and development.However, in active learning the content is usually taught for a set amount of time, and a student’saptitude is based on how much they learned in that time. Conversely, mastery learning assumes thatall students, given enough time and intervention, can eventually master the content [4], [5], [6].Learning within mastery frameworks concerns itself with identifying learning trajectories andproviding students with curriculum for gaining knowledge and skills, assessing mastery throughformative assessments, and providing feedback to help students master one set of skills beforemoving on to the next set [7
dynamics, solids mechanics and thermodynamics). It appears thatthe best instructors using grade-based correlations can explain about 25% (0.5 squared) ofthe future grade success in follow on engineering courses.Bibliography1 C.M. Saviz, K.C. Schulz, W.J. King and R.H. Turpin, “Assessment Measures to Enhance Teaching and Curriculum Effectiveness” Proceedings of 31st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, T1A-7, 2001.2 National Academy of Engineering, “Developing Metrics for Assessing Engineering Instruction: What Gets Measured is What Gets Improved” Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2009.3 D.P. Hoyt, “Measurement of Instructional Effectiveness”, Research in Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 4, 1973, pp. 367-378.4 R.A
year the dual degree program graduated students. The results will be analyzed incomparison between the two groups in order to determine whether a disparity exists between jobplacement and opportunities for graduates of both programs. The researchers believe data willshow that the EDDP graduates are more successful in their job search than their peers at IUPUI.In addition, responses to the open ended questions will provide feedback on the benefits of theprogram from graduate perspectives.IntroductionAs the engineering profession continues to evolve, so should the engineering curriculum. It is theresponsibility of the educational program to prepare graduates who are ready to work in the real-world. Engineering students have always been taught to
generation have tended to evolve with thesechanging interests, teaching and research dedicated to the conservation of energy has remainedcomparatively static.From an analytical standpoint, many companies do not possess the in-house knowledge neededto fully assess the impact that simple energy conservation measures can have on their facilities ormanufacturing operations. This knowledge gap can often be bridged when plans for the moreefficient use of energy is correlated directly to monetary savings. Toward this end, theresponsible energy engineer must be fully adept in the appropriate engineering fundamentals andthe associated economics as well.Spurring renewed interest in the development and adoption of both new and existing energyconservation
develops habitual facility in running thesearches and tabulating the results. In addition, it is possible that some sample text strings mighthave gotten more or less source matches on Google near the end of the data collection periodcompared to the beginning of the period, not due to any fault of the researcher, but rather, due toeither more source material becoming available on the web35 or to some sources disappearingfrom the web altogether.53 It is recommended that future studies of this type incorporate a meansof checking the consistency of these types of measurements taken from Google searches overtime.ConclusionFor the engineering students whose work is examined here, it appears that the confusionregarding what and how much verbatim source
automation. Inthis paper, AI is utilized in an engineering economics course in order to assist the instructor withproviding more accurate and timely feedback on written assignments. This automation isperformed using a locally hosted Large Language Model (LLM) to provide feedback based onrubrics developed for the assignments in this course. The outcome of this study is an analysis ofhow accurate the methods used can predict a comparable rating to the instructor’s rating whilereducing the amount of time needed to provide useable feedback that contributes to the student’slearning in the course.IntroductionTarleton State University is a 4-year, R2 classified, public university about an hour southwest ofFt. Worth, TX. Historically a teaching university
education. For example, Alpers et al. adapted this framework tosuggest guidelines for developing mathematical curricula in different engineering programs [12].Tague et al. used this framework to study faculty perceptions engineering students’ mathreadiness. Faulkner and colleagues explored faculty perceptions on what constitutesmathematical maturity for engineering students [5], [6].3. Methods3.1 Research sitesThis study is being conducted at two universities: one private R2 and one public M1 university(based on Carnegie Classification), both located in the mid-Atlantic region of the USA. Theprivate R2 university (referred to as “Large Private University” in the paper) offers, throughdifferent colleges, undergraduate degrees in both engineering and
, we find the framework applicable and valuableas it has analytical weight in studying both faculty experiences being served (or not served) onthe pathway to the professoriate, as well as their experiences serving students of Latine/Hispanicbackgrounds (whether at HSIs or otherwise). The conceptual framework itself identifies fourthemes of servingness, namely [3]: (1) Outcomes: Both academic outcomes such as GPA, graduation rates/timelines, retention, course enrollment patterns, transfers etc.; and non-academic outcomes such as racial identity development, academic self-concept, engagement on campus, civic engagement, and sense of belonging (2) Experiences: Include student experiences with campus racial
Paper ID #48756Aerospace Engineering Education in the Era of Generative AIJulie B. Coder, The Pennsylvania State University Julie B. Coder is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education at Penn State University.Dr. James G Coder, Pennsylvania State University Dr. Jim Coder is an Associate Professor of Aerospace Engineering at Penn State University, specializing in applied aerodynamics and computational fluid dynamics.Dr. Mark D. Maughmer, The Pennsylvania State University Dr. Mark D. Maughmer is a professor of Aerospace Engineering at Penn State University, specializing in
entrepreneurship.Dr. Emily Dringenberg, The Ohio State University Dr. Dringenberg is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Engineering Education at Ohio State Uni- versity. She holds a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering (Kansas State ’08), a M.S. in Industrial Engineering (Purdue ’14) and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education.Dr. Elif Miskioglu, Bucknell University Dr. Elif Miskioglu is an early-career engineering education scholar and educator. She holds a B.S. in Chemical Engineering (with Genetics minor) from Iowa State University, and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Ohio State University. Her early Ph.D. work focused on the development of bacterial biosensors capable of screening pesticides for specifically
their intentions for social impact in CS. We use these findings to suggest that CSsupport programs encourage their participants to form student-led, virtual communities forprofessional development, and engage socially-oriented individuals, respectively. Above all, weencourage facilitators of CS support programs and educational settings to remain strategic in thedesign of curriculums and environments. With an emphasis on changes in systems over students[26], [73], we believe that the field can resourcefully nurture the persistence of students ofdiverse identities, ultimately encouraging a future of equitable innovation in CS.References[1] T. Highfill and C. Surfield, “New and Revised Statistics of the U.S. Digital Economy, 2005–2020”, [Online
AC 2011-1570: PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AND DESIGN EXPERIENCESIN INTRODUCTION TO ENGINEERING COURSES ASSESSING AN IN-CREMENTAL INTRODUCTION OF ENGINEERING SKILLSAndrew L. Gerhart, Lawrence Technological University Andrew Gerhart, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Lawrence Technological University. He is actively involved in ASEE, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and the Engineering Society of Detroit. He serves as Faculty Advisor for the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Student Chapter at LTU, chair for the LTU Leadership Curriculum Committee, director of the LTU Thermal Science Laboratory, coordinator of the Certificate in Energy & Environmental Man
as a part of the strategic P12 STEM initiative, he prepares Engineering/Technology candidates for teacheMs. Adrie Koehler Doctoral Student, Learning Design & TechnologyMr. Shawn Farrington, Purdue University at West Lafayette (COE) Shawn Farrington is a Senior Lecturer in the Polytechnic Institute at Purdue University. He co-coordinates a first-year Design Thinking program and teaches several of his own sections. Shawn is also an Educa- tional Psychology Ph.D. candidate at Purdue. HisElnara Mammadova Elnara is a Graduate Research Assistant in the Technology, Leadership and Innovation program at Purdue University. She is dedicated to her research on fostering inclusivity in the curriculum and ensuring digital
in STEM[5], [10], [11]. This issue is further exacerbated by the frequently studied false dichotomy ofsocial-technical dualism in STEM, where many STEM professionals disregard and devaluesocial and political issues in favor of technical knowledge and experiences[12]. ThisSocial-Technical dichotomy leaves LGBTQ+ individuals silenced and marginalized since genderand sexuality issues—along with myriad other social issues—are seen as entirely irrelevant tothe STEM environment and curriculum [7], [13]. Faced with this climate, students must resolve their LGBTQ+ identity with a STEMprofessional identity that is implicitly and explicitly tied to heteronormativity. This resolution is acrucial but complicated and difficult process of identity
-year community college (Clark College in WA), a public polytechnic institution(Oregon Institute of Technology in OR), a branch campus of a public R1 institution (WashingtonState University Vancouver in WA), and an independently governed Catholic institution (theUniversity of Portland in OR). We included courses from three engineering disciplines (civil,electrical, and mechanical) with one general engineering curriculum. All courses are 2nd yearengineering labs, except MECH 309, which is offered in the 3rd year. CE 376 is offered in the2nd year.Table 1 provides information regarding the major of the courses being analyzed, along with thename of the course, the institution, the term and year in which it was offered, and the number of
teaching lab courses and mentored both undergraduate and graduate students interested in teaching. Her areas of expertise include qualitative and quantitative assessment, STEM curriculum development, and graduate student training. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2023 Piloting a Flexible Deadline Policy for a First-Year Computer Programming CourseAbstractThis complete research paper details our analysis of how implementing a generous flexibledeadline policy impacted student performance across course assignments over one semester in alarge introductory computer programming course. Our goal was to help students stay on track forthe course by posting regular
potential to provide meaningful informationwithout requiring more data collection from students. This is particularly salient in times of crisiswhen contact with students may be inconsistent and when data such as survey results may bemore challenging to obtain.In this study, we analyzed social media data from Reddit towards developing an understandingof engineering students’ attitudes and focus areas around their educational experience before andduring the Covid-19 pandemic. Students’ attitudes were mainly evaluated by sentiment analysisand students’ focuses were explored through topic modeling techniques. Both sentiment analysisand topic modeling are a form of natural language processing. Sentiment analysis is a tool tostudy the feelings expressed
from originally havingfive course outcomes at its inception in AY17-2, to seven course outcomes which nest within theoverall curriculum design. As a foundational course within the program, it serves to introduce abackground in aquatic environments and the skills required to operate as scientists within thefield. Figure 1 depicts the evolution of the course outcomes nested within the EnvironmentalScience Program outcomes in the context of Bloom’s revised hierarchy of learning. In its currentEnvironmental Science Program Educational AY
, thereis a clear need to reduce this gender gap to ensure a balanced workforce. The best time to createsuch awareness is during the middle-school age [2].Since the vast majority of schools in the United State of America do not offer dedicated codingor computer science curriculum, there is a critical need for short computer science camps [3]. Ithas been demonstrated that given the right resources girls can develop a liking for computer © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022 2022 ASEE Illinois-Indiana Section Conference Proceedings | Paper ID 35749science [4] and develop their own identity as a computer scientist [5]. Short camps may increaseknowledge and skills in computer programming [6]. There have been many
University Bozeman Bryce E. Hughes is an Assistant Professor in Adult and Higher Education at Montana State University, and holds a Ph.D. in Higher Education and Organizational Change from the University of California, Los Angeles, as well as an M.A. in Student Development Administration from Seattle University and a B.S. in General Engineering from Gonzaga University. His research interests include teaching and learning in engineering, STEM education policy, and diversity and equity in STEM. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Social-Belonging Intervention in a Computer Science Systems CourseAbstractA brief social-belonging intervention was
Paper ID #34610Investigation on Students’ Educational Experience with HyFlexInstruction Model in Two Engineering CoursesDr. Emine Celik Foust, York College of Pennsylvania Emine Celik Foust is currently an Associate Professor at York College of Pennsylvania. In 2008, she worked as a Postdoctoral Research Associate in Mechanical Engineering Department at Johns Hopkins University. She received her Master of Science and Ph.D degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Lehigh University. Emine Celik Foust’s research interests include design and development of engineering systems using ana- lytical and experimental approaches
University of Texas at Austin and BA in Psychology from Bard College. She is currently Assistant Professor of Education and Department Chair of Core Education at Landmark College in Putney, VT. She consults as a researcher and program evaluator for STEM education programs.Dr. Michelle Batchelder Burd , Dr. Michelle Burd, is Principal/Owner of Burd’s Eye View, an independent consulting firm in Austin, TX, which conducts program evaluation for educational institutions and nonprofits. Current projects examine experiential and active learning, culturally relevant pedagogy, faculty development and systemic reform in STEM. Michelle has a B.A. in psychology with a concentration in mathematics from the University of North
1987. Hedirects the OpenDSA project, whose goal is to provide a complete online collection of interactive tutorialsfor data structures and algorithms courses. His research interests are in Digital Education, AlgorithmVisualization, Algorithm Design and Analysis, and Data Structures. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Towards Designing an Interactive System for Accelerated Learning and As- sessment in Engineering Mechanics: A First Look at the Deforms Problem Solving SystemAbstractRepeated deliberate practice has been shown to be vital to developing mastery in engineeringproblem solving. Online tutoring systems have enhanced learning experiences
Learning Impact Evalulation in the Research Initiative for Teaching Effectiveness at the University of Central Florida (UCF). Since 1996, she has served as the li- aison for faculty research of distributed learning and teaching effectiveness at UCF. Patsy specializes in statistics, graphics, program evaluation, and applied data analysis. She has extensive experience in re- search methods including survey development, interviewing, and conducting focus groups and frequently serves as an evaluation consultant to school districts, and industry and government organizations. She has also received funding from several government and industrial agencies including the National Science Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan
AISES, NSBE, SHPE, and SWE; and a group project with report andpresentations. During the second freshmen semester, the NACME students meet for an houreight times during the semester. Topics include resumes, School and University resources,engineering in industry, consulting, and graduate school. Two particular helps for empoweringthe students were developed: a Check List for the detailed time management schedule10 and aCheck List for an effective resume.14At the beginning of the first semester the freshmen students are given instructions on how theirassignments and extra curricular events (such as attending an AISES, SHPE, NSBE, or SWEmeetings) can earn them points in the course. Since extra credit points can be earned, any
Page 11.356.13design course (2361). It is now up to the faculty to develop and implement the necessaryassessment instruments in the twelve courses. Table 8: Initial Outcomes vs. Course Matrix OUTCOMES* # of Courses a b c d e f g h i j k outcomes 1100 4 2334 4.24 4.17
is within the College of Engineering and NaturalSciences at The University of Tulsa, so my observations are relevant with respect to calculus forengineering students.Much has stayed the same, but the use of technology, student demographics, studentacademic/social support, the curriculum, and the way calculus is taught are some things that havechanged, comparing my calculus experiences from 1967 to those of my students in 2016. Not allthe changes appear to be for the better, and there are tradeoffs. The discussion focuses primarilyon anecdotal examples, although some statistical data are included.1. IntroductionThere are studies on the teaching of calculus at the university level that give detailed histories ofthe pedagogical changes over the