Paper ID #39418Engineering doctoral student retention and persistence from anorganizational climate and intersectional perspective: A targeted reviewof engineering education literatureDr. Julie Aldridge, The Ohio State University My background and research interests are in organizational change, innovation, and leadership. My cur- rent work focuses on organizational climate to better support the retention of engineering doctoral students from diverse groups to degree completion.Dr. Nicole M. Else-Quest, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Nicole M. Else-Quest is Associate Professor and Associate Chair of Women’s and
Paper ID #47358Engineering Tools of Scientific Discovery in Popular Culture, Part I in aSeries of Thematic Courses Introducing Non-Majors to Space ExplorationConcepts and TopicsDr. Jason Andrew Roney, University of Denver Dr. Roney is currently the Associate Dean of Undergraduate Studies of the Ritchie School of Engineering and Computer Science and a Teaching Professor of Mechanical and Materials Engineering. Dr. Roney joined the University of Denver (DU) in Autumn 2014. Prior to joining DU, Dr. Roney held both industry and academic positions. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025
. The student commentedthat their calculated value was slightly higher than the value stated in their book; this led to aclass discussion about why that would be the case. (For the calculation, the student did notaccount for the altitude of the orbit and used the radius of the moon as orbital radius.) Figure 1: Example calculation from a student presentation (picture boxed out for copyright purposes)ResultsThe learning objectives of the project were assessed directly (through matching pre- and post-project questionnaires) and indirectly (through conversations with students). The pre-questionnaire (shown in Appendix B) was administered during class within one week of thestudents selecting their book
)One-way ANOVA: Using the data collected, an alpha of 0.05, and one-way ANOVA (assumingequal variances) test to compare means, the researchers rejected the null hypotheses (p-value<0.001) that the mean taxi-out (and taxi-in) time was same across the number of hotspotson small hub airports. Note – there were no small hub airports with 3 hotspots in the data. Taxi-out time: Using the Tukey HSD post hoc and 95% confidence, two significantly different groups (A and B) of small hub airports emerged. The mean taxi-out time was significantly different between the small hub airports in group A (0, 2, or 5 hotspots) and group B (1 or 4 hotspots). There was no significant difference within groups. Taxi-in time: Using the Tukey HSD post
: https://peer.asee.org/23989. [Accessed Feb 22, 2023].[7] L. Howe and J. Holles. "An Undergraduate Research Methods Class: Results andExperiences from Initial Offerings”, 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis,MN, 2022, August. ASEE Conferences, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/41321.[Accessed Feb 22, 2023].[8] B. Liaw and I. Voiculescu, “An Integral Analytical Numerical Experimental Pedagogy for ASystem Dynamics and Control Course”, 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu,Hawaii, 2007, June. ASEE Conferences, 2007. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/1696.[Accessed Feb 22, 2023].[9] D. E. Palmgren and B. B. Rogers, "A Subsonic Wind Tunnel Facility for UndergraduateEngineering Technology
, “Pedagogies of Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 87–101, Jan. 2005, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x.[5] W. C. Newstetter and M. D. Svinicki, “Learning Theories for Engineering Education Practice,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, 1st ed., A. Johri and B. M. Olds, Eds., Cambridge University Press, 2014, pp. 29–46. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139013451.005.[6] A. Johri, B. M. Olds, and K. O’Connor, “Situative Frameworks for Engineering Learning Research,” in Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, 1st ed., A. Johri and B. M. Olds, Eds., Cambridge University Press, 2014, pp. 47–66. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139013451.006.[7] J. A. Henderson et al., “Circle
. exist Document B Code value exists A (# of code values B (# of code values identical in both that exist only in documents) document B) Code value does not exist C (# of code values D (# of code values that exist only in that do not exist in document A) both documents)Results and DiscussionThis section presents the results from the scoring of the concept maps as well as the trends foundby the cluster analysis
have inquired about use of the mobile launcher in support of ongoing research efforts. It is theauthor’s belief that the USAFA program will continue to see ebbs and flows in the program interestand size.The interested reader can find various news articles, pictures, and video segments of the USAFAFalconLaunch program online, which may be of some utility for those desiring to pattern a similareffort. Some representative pictures from the program are included in Appendix B of this paper andshow possible futures for the UAF rocketry program. Hands-On Aerospace Engineering – Learning By Doing: RocketryUAF Program. The University of Alaska’s Rocket Systems Design course is expected to accomplishmuch the same as was done with the
) Advisors/Instructors Support, 2) Project Selection, 3) Structure of Class, 4)Feedback and Communication, 5) Lectures and Presentations, 6) Team Dynamics, 7) ProjectScope and Feasibility, 8) Peer Evaluation and Grading, 9) Industry Relevance, and 10)Effectiveness of Feedback. The faculty also requested examining research topics of A) FacultyAdvisor Technical Guidance, B) Industry Sponsor or Mentor Technical Guidance, C) IndustrySponsor Relationship, and D) Mentor Relationship. Figure 5 has a table that shows the numberof comments by academic year, and a bar graph that shows the probability of each of these topicsappearing in a given comment sorted by the old course and new course designs
facilities used for this project include 3D printers, CAD software,and other fabrication facilities. These and other required facilities are available in the AERO(Aerospace Education and Research Organization) lab at the host institution. Nine undergraduatestudents work on this interdisciplinary project under the guidance of one faculty member. Studentsworking on the project are from Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Mechatronics andComputer Engineering programs. The research team is divided into three main groups: a) AvionicsGroup, b) Structures Group, and b) Systems Group. The avionics group includes students fromMechatronics and Computer Engineering. The systems groups include students from Mechanicaland Civil engineering. The structures
designs andcapabilities in response to hazards, environments, and user performance [8] [9]. The projectyielded three key findings, including the implementation of standardized user interactions fordata discoveries and recommendations, the integration of complex systems and decisionstrategies to assess risk under operational conditions, and the exploration of rotorcraftperformance through standardized data collection methods to investigate flight parameters. Thethree (3) finding offered this project the ability to: a) Implement the capabilities and functional designs to standardize the user interactions regarding data discoveries and recommendations; b) UAS integration of complex systems and the decision strategies for mission driven
: Synthesizing a human-centered engineering design framework,” in The 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. Baltimore: American Society for Engineering Education. https://peer.asee.org/43626[5] S. Goldman, M. P. Carroll, Z. Kabayadondo, L. B. Cavagnaro, A. W. Royalty, B. Roth, S. H. Kwek, and J. Kim, “Assessing learning: Capturing the journey of becoming a design thinker,” in Design Thinking Research, H. Plattner, C. Meinel, and L. Leifer, Eds. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, 2012, pp. 13–33, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_2.[6] R. Razzouk and V. Shute, “What is design thinking and why is it important?” Review of Educational Research, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 330–348, 2012.[7] D. P. Crismond and R. S. Adams
/03085140701760841.[5] D. A. Cook and A. R. Artino, “Motivation to learn: an overview of contemporary theories,” Med. Educ., vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 997–1014, 2016, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13074.[6] H. M. Matusovich, R. A. Streveler, and R. L. Miller, “Why Do Students Choose Engineering? A Qualitative, Longitudinal Investigation of Students’ Motivational Values,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 289–303, 2010, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168- 9830.2010.tb01064.x.[7] Q. Li, D. B. McCoach, H. Swaminathan, and J. Tang, “Development of an Instrument to Measure Perspectives of Engineering Education Among College Students,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 47–56, 2008, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00953.x.[8] B
specifics and organizing upward [20, 21]. The use of ontology provides aframework enabling classification (e.g., alpha, beta, and gamma levels), consistency checks, andgap identification in Aerospace systems engineering [22, 23], supporting more structured andreliable processes in systems design and analysis [24, 25]. Similarly, structured visualizationframeworks in engineering education have demonstrated effectiveness in helping studentsunderstand complex physical concepts such as deformation and stress in aerospacestructures [26].Since the fundamental idea of ontology is to define relationships between entities in the form of“A is a B,” the ontology-based approach facilitates the modeling and analysis of relationshipsamong various systems
students. The interviews were conducted virtually using Zoom® platform and transcribed usingZoom® transcribe. The transcripts were stored in a safe folder per the IRB requirements andwere only accessible to the research team. Transcripts were then uploaded to NVIVO® softwarefor analysis. Two researchers read each transcript twice to verify accuracy. The first read helped theresearchers familiarize themselves with the participant responses. In the second read, theresearchers developed preliminary codes (Appendix B) based on the research questions. Thecodes were revised to develop the final themes. The following seven themes emerged from thecoding process.Theme 1. Motivation for pursuing aviation as a career Motivation for
Paper ID #42804Design of an Aerospace Industry-Informed Technical Writing and CommunicationCourseGlen Roderic Coates, Pennsylvania State University Glen R Coates received his B. S. degree in Environmental Engineering from Penn State University. He then went on to receive an M. S. degree in Mechanical Engineering at Penn State and a second M. S. degree in Management of Technology from Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute. Working in the Aerospace industry as a Senior Analytical Engineer for the past 45 years, he also has taught undergraduate mathematics and physics at several institutions as an adjunct professor. These
responded to the modified Rydell-Rosen Ambiguity Tolerance survey(RRAT) (Appendix A, [21]). Of the 154 respondents, 116 were freshman while 38 weregraduating seniors. The survey has 20 true/false items. The Godwin [22] Engineering Identity(EI) (Appendix B) survey was also administered to the students. The EI survey which measuresthe responses on a 5-point Likert scale (Strongly Agree (SA) =5; Agree (A) = 4; Neutral (N) = 3;Disagree (D) = 2, and Strongly Disagree (SD) = 1) has 11 items that measure three dimensionsnamely, Acceptance (3 items), Interest (3 items), and Competence (5 items). A total of 292freshmen and 35 graduating seniors responded to the EI survey. The data was collected usingGoogle forms. The surveys were administered to freshmen at
discussed above, a selection of B, C, and D motors were tested as possiblecandidates. After testing in the field, the Estes C5 motor was determined to be the best fit for thecourse. This was mainly due to its unique thrust curve (Figure 4).The thrust curve in Figure 4 displays a graph of thrust vs time. To overcome the limitations of aheavy rocket takeoff, we looked for engines with a high thrust in the beginning that would ensurea safe takeoff (if the rocket comes off the rail slowly, it is unstable). What also needs to beconsidered is the delay charge (time between thrust and parachute deployment). Afterconsidering the range of payload mass for the rocket, the optimal delay charge for all rockets wasthe best at around 3 seconds, therefore we use
nickel-cadmium (Ni-cd) batteries which have values in the range of 10-25 volts and 10-50 Ah values.However, lithium-ion (Li-ion) or lithium-polymer (LiPo) batteries can have values of 200V to600V or more. The ampere-hour (Ah) rating of these batteries can vary from a few tens toseveral hundred Ah. The values can vary from one aircraft to another depending on the aircraft'srequirements. These higher voltages require additional personal protection equipment to handlethe equipment. OSHA 1910 includes requirements for those working with high voltages [11].These requirements include the following: a. 1910.269: If the voltage is more than 600v there should be at least two employees present. b. 1910.269: The technician
from the ground were received by the telemetry payload and relayed to the visualpayload via a local Bluetooth network using HC-05 modules. After executing the command, thetelemetry system transmitted confirmation back to the ground, enabling the next command to beissued. (a) Internal view of primary robotics payload (b) Command processing unit Figure 2: Overview of HAM’s 2015 internal components and control systems configuration The updated configuration will feature streamlined circuitry through printed circuit boards(PCBs), along with a reduction in overall payload weight. Additional upgrades include dual GPStracking systems for improved accuracy and redundancy, an onboard venting system for precisecontrol of ascent and
FMEA,steps, and standards regarding PFMEA and have seen an example of using PFMEA to analyze anHAA accident, they will approach their capstone project by querying the CAROL database andselecting an accident. Then, the students would present a summary of the findings in the NTSBfinal accident investigation report, including: 1. Factual information 2. Probable causes a. History of flight 3. Findings b. Personnel information 4. Recommendations c. Weather information d. Organization informationAfter the presentation, the students and the instructor would discuss the probable causes of theHAA accidents as found in
Paper ID #47687Design and fabrication of Bioinspired UAS by Junior Engineering StudentsDr. Adeel Khalid, Kennesaw State University Adeel Khalid, Ph.D. Professor Industrial and Systems Engineering Office: 470-578-7241 ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Design and fabrication of Bioinspired UAS by Junior Engineering StudentsAbstractThis study involves a high school student, a sophomore, and a junior-level engineering student inthe design, development, fabrication, and integration of a bioinspired Unmanned Aerial System(UAS) that mimics the shape and features of a bat. The UAS, still under
University.References[1] S. Caldwell, “11.0 ground data systems and Mission Operations,” NASA, 16-Oct-2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nasa.gov/smallsat-institute/sst-soa/ground-data-systems- and-mission-operations. [Accessed: 24-Feb-2023].[2] C. Simpson, A. Burjek, W. Patton, E. G. Hackett, and Charles O’Neill, “Ground Station and Infrastructure Development at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa,” The International Astronautical Federation (IAF)., 2019.[3] F.-B. Hsiao, H.-P. Liu, and C.-C. Chen, “The Development of a Low-Cost Amateur Microsatellite Ground Station for Space Engineering Education,” Global Journal of Engineering Education, 2000.[4] C. Davenport , “NASA looks to private sector for successor to the International
Writing Rubric for Engineering Design,” International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), vol. 8, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.3991/ijep.v8i1.7728.[17] Y. Karlen, “The development of a new instrument to assess metacognitive strategy knowledge about academic writing and its relation to self-regulated writing and writing performance,” Journal of Writing Research, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 61–86, Jun. 2017, doi: 10.17239/jowr-2017.09.01.03.[18] S.-J. Cindy Lin, B. W. Monroe, and G. A. Troia, “Development of Writing Knowledge in Grades 2–8: A Comparison of Typically Developing Writers and Their Struggling Peers,” Reading & Writing Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 207–230, May 2007, doi: 10.1080
regional contexts and help support equitable progress toward global decarbonizationgoals. Figure 2 shows the “Fixes that backfire” system archetype, which illustrates how genericaviation education that fails to take into consideration important aspects such as epistemologicalframeworks and socio-economic disparities leads to well-intentioned but superficial educationalsolutions to sustainability issues in aviation education, which in many cases result in undesiredconsequences. Figure 2: Fixes that Backfire System Archetype Diagram Illustrating the Impact of GenericSustainability Education on Persistent Challenges in Achieving Aviation Decarbonization Goals. Note: B denotes a balancing loop, and R denotes a reinforcing loop. Plus (+) and minus
o Associate Professor of Electrical & Computer/Aerospace Engineering o Program Director, Aerospace Engineering o Associate Director of Education, ACUASI • Dr Denise Thorsen, dlthorsen@alaska.edu o Professor of Electrical & Computer Engineering o Chair, Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering o Associate Dean of Academics, UAF o Director, ASGPAppendix A: Aerospace Engineering FlowsAppendix B: AcronymsA&D Aerospace & DefenseABET Accreditation Board for Engineering and TechnologyAC AircraftACUASI Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration (UAF)AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics & AstronauticsASEE
Heritage MuseumVincent Burnelli Burnelli CBY-3 New England Air East Granby, CT MuseumJim “Slug” LTV A-7B San Diego Air San Diego, CAKidrick Corsair II and Space MuseumLindell Hendrix Consolidated B-24 National Museum of Pooler, GA Liberator the Mighty Eighth Air ForceBen Rich Lockheed F-117 Museum of Aviation Robins AFB, GA NighthawkF-8 pilots Vought F-8 National Naval Pensacola, Crusader Aviation Museum
piloted systems or platforms where a human is a merepassenger, rather than a pilot.Figure 4: Comparison of a typical electric motor for a drone (A) and a standard layout electricmotor (B)The Bachelor of Science in Uncrewed & Autonomous Systems uses Computer Aided Design(CAD) in courses, such as UNSY 318 - Uncrewed Aircraft Systems Robotics to introducecomponents of aerial robotic platforms and the associated electric propulsion. Figure 4 shows thedifference between typical electric drone motor and a standard electric motor used in industrypurposes in CAD models.The design principles used for larger and more complex drones merge the foundational conceptsof traditional aeronautical engineering with cutting-edge, digitally driven robotics
Paper ID #48072Preparing Aviation Students for the Hydrogen-Powered Future: Key Competenciesfor Safety, Efficiency, and SustainabilityMr. Favour Ocheja, Purdue School of Aviation Transportation Technology Favour Ocheja is a graduate student pursuing a Master’s degree in Aviation and Aerospace Management at Purdue University, with a strong background in aerospace engineering and software development. He holds a Bachelor of Engineering in Aerospace Engineering from the National Aerospace University in Ukraine, specializing in engines and aircraft power plants. With hands-on experience as a Space Research Engineer at the
]. Efforts to better understand andreduce airport taxi times may potentially improve airport capacity and reduce fuel usage, costs,and emissions. Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) is a surveillancesystem that provides location and movement information of aircraft and vehicles on the airport toair traffic controllers [9]. ASDE-X was developed to reduce the Category A and B runwayincursions at airports by providing continuous information of aircraft and vehicle location onairport movement areas. This equipment was implemented at 35 major U.S. airports [9].The FAA defines U.S. airports as Large, Medium, Small, and Non hub airports. In National Planof Integrated Airport System (NPIAS), the Appendix A: List of NPIAS Airports provides