Conference Session

Patenting & IP Issues for Commercializing University-Developed Technology and Launching Innovative Technical Entrepreneurship Ventures in Universities

Collection

2007 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jeffrey Schox, Stanford University; David Chesney, University of Michigan

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

, I modified the syllabus to reflect how I had learned patent law in law school. Iincorporated the Socratic Method and taught from a law school casebook6. The class includedlively debates over the intricacies and nuances of the law, such as the Festo rule7 (the exceptionto the exception to the exception to the rule of infringement). One of my main goals for thecourse was to teach engineers how to determine whether their invention is patentable andwhether making and selling their invention infringes upon a competitor's patent. Despite thesolid attendance by the students and my detailed explanation, some of my students still confusedthe patentability and infringement tests on the exam. Some of the students applied the

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship Education: Innovation, International Cooperation, and Social Entrepreneurship

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Pritpal Singh, Villanova University; William Hurley, Villanova University; Edmond Dougherty, Villanova University; James Klingler, Villanova University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

observed the presentations was impressed with how well thestudents had really considered the social and physical development stages of thekindergarten children. The teams displayed a lot of creativity in the production of each oftheir commercials. It was clear that all the student teams had done a lot of work. The finalcomponent of the grade was peer assessment on the project teams. The students wererequired to distribute (confidentially) a fictitious bonus to each of their team membersbased on their contribution to the team project, reflecting peer evaluation of how eachmember had performed on the team. In most cases the bonuses were divided evenlybetween the team members, although in a few cases, particular students were recognizedfor

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christian Schnell, Stanford University; Johann Elmar Nordhus gen Westarp, Technical University of Munich (TUM); Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

open-ended whichenabled the interviewer to ask for specific incidents rather than general events. This approachsupports asking follow up questions that enabled probing of certain mentioned incidents. Thequestions were categorized as: introduction and recent professional experience, involvement andinnovative activities, Entrepreneurial Intentions, Entrepreneurial Actions, and reflection. Further-more, the interviewees in our study (as detailed in Section 4) were also asked about factors thatattract them to found their own company at some point in the future; this future-looking stanceprovides additional insights as compared to a retrospective approach [10, 11].The analysis of the interview data is based on the inductive coding strategy

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 11

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael S. Lehman, Lehigh University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

are workingon their own products/services and associated business models, across a variety of industries, the“dedicated model” provides a common platform. Through the dedicated curriculum, the theorycourses were specifically designed to accommodate students from different undergraduatedegrees and real-world experiences. The project courses, tightly integrated with the theorycourses, accommodate the variety of directions the students may take. The dedicated space andassociated 3D printing technologies were designed and continue to evolve to support thecurriculum. And the dedicated faculty are aware of the many moving parts of the program,allowing for “real time” adjustments to reflect what is happening in technical and businessarenas.What

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division – Epicenter Session

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Janna Rodriguez, Stanford University; Helen L. Chen, Stanford University; Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University; Larry Leifer, Stanford University; Qu Jin, Stanford University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

Registrar at Stanford University. She is also a member of the research team in the National Center for Engineering Pathways to Innovation (Epicenter). Helen earned her undergraduate degree from UCLA and her PhD in Communication with a minor in Psychology from Stanford University in 1998. Her current research interests include: 1) engineering and entrepreneurship education; 2) the pedagogy of ePortfolios and reflective practice in higher education; and 3) reimagining the traditional academic transcript.Dr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division – Evaluating Student Behaviors and Attitudes

Collection

2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Laura Atkins, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Julian Ernesto Martinez-Moreno, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Lalit Patil, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Kimber J Andrews, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign ; Maryalice S. Wu, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; Debasish Dutta, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Barbara Hug, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Liora Bresler

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

innovators and asking them to reflect on their education andcareers and their perceptions on what would work and what would not. We believe that thisapproach yields significantly richer information that would be used for this research.3 MethodsThe data analyzed here is based on interviews conducted with 60 innovators over the course ofseven months between April 2013 and October 2013. These data emerge from the broader studyof innovation and education mentioned above. The research methods for the broader studyincluded a workshop held on October 22-23, 2013, at the NAE Washington, D.C. The workshopbrought together over 75 innovators and leaders from several fields to share insights oninnovation and its education in focus-group style sessions

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 8

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Stuart G. Walesh P.E., S. G. Walesh Consulting

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

the last class and the cue is thetelevision. The routine is to turn it on, and the result is to relax and catch up on things.This leads to the next cue, which is hunger and the routine is to go out for a quick mealand the result is feeling good. Late that night, he/she finally gets to work on somehomework and it is probably that which is due tomorrow. The work is difficult, given thelate hour, and the quality reflects neither the student’s ability nor desire. Therefore, youadvise the student to use the method shown in Figure 6 to replace his/her bad homeworkhabit with a good one. Learning a new Habit Recognize cue: conscious mind decides

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship Education: Crossdisciplinary Programs

Collection

2009 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jorge delosRios-Hurtado, Texas Tech; David Wyrick, Texas Tech

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

proceed with the study during the spring semester of 2009.When we combined the strongly agree and somewhat-agree responses in the survey, we realizedthat the student’s entrepreneurial spirit across campus is alive. Students understand that there aremany opportunities to create new businesses in their majors. Also, it reflects that they areconstantly thinking about the creation of new products and business opportunities.Implications for Future ResearchSince very little research has been done that explores interdisciplinary GTEC, we encourageprofessors, and students from different colleges to start analyzing what has been done at theirdepartments and what is taking place concerning entrepreneurship. Further research involvingall the colleges at TTU

Conference Session

Course-based Approaches to Entrepreneurship Education

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Doug Abbott, MT Tech of the U of MT; Lance Edwards, MT Tech of the U of MT; John Evans, MT Tech of the U of MT; Leo Heath, MT Tech of the U of MT; Mike Johnson, MT Tech of the U of MT; Timothy Kober, MT Tech of the U of MT; Mary North-Abbott, MT Tech of the U of MT; Roger Oldenkamp, MT Tech of the U of MT

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

thefoundation of engineering and exposing students to the entrepreneurial side of things is a major piece ofthe puzzle," says Evans. "Historically, Montana Tech graduates were quite adept at the technical side ofthings, but they needed a broader background in the ability to synthesize engineering data from a businessperspective," continued Evans.History of Entrepreneurship Education at Montana TechEntrepreneurial education at Montana Tech came about with the start of a movement by theschool to diversity into programs that reflected the technologically based role and scope of theinstitution. The school has long enjoyed a heritage deeply rooted in engineering and particularlyengineering in the extractive industries. Currently the school would be

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Poster Session

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Rodney Boehm, Texas A&M University; Cameron Wesley Davis, Southern Methodist University; Laura A. Frazee, Southern Methodist University; Jennifer Diane Boehm, Southern Methodist University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

Utilization of Resources Goals and Objectives Physical Space Figure 4 – Top Characteristics of TeamsSubjective AnalysisThe qualitative study for this IDE explored the unique interaction of team development over timeand its ability to predict team success. Through the utilization of the survey tool, three third partyobservers extrapolated significant themes found across the three observation points during theintensive weekend: 10:00 am Saturday, 5:00 pm Saturday, and 10:00 Sunday. Additionally, eachteam completed a team self-report on Sunday at 10:00 am as means to gather data and self-reflection from each team member.The third party observers found that the most significant positive and negative change

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 6

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Michael D. Whitt, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo; Nancy L. Denton P.E., Purdue Polytechnic Institute's School of Engineering Technology; Christopher Heylman, California Polytechnic State University; Rodney Gene Handy

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

Model.Previous studies have demonstrated that engineering students have differing learning styles.According to Kolb each student’s learning style is divided into four distinct learning modes;accommodator, diverger, converger, and assimilator. 4 These learning styles are summarizedas:4,5,6Converger: person who is best at determining how to apply ideas to resolve a problem; oftenchoosing the engineering professionDiverger: someone with a strong imagination who can generate ideas, with a focus on people andrelationships; frequently found in managementAssimilator: describes those who observe, reflect, and effectively develop theory to logicallyexplain conditions and situations; common trait for scientists and mathematiciansAccommodator: person who thrives

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 7

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

J. Blake Hylton, Ohio Northern University; Brock Alexander Hays, Ohio Northern University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

/value. [Accessed: 13-Aug-2018].Appendix A – ONU Expanded KEEN Outcomes (3C’s only)1. Related to Curiosity a. Develop a propensity to ask MORE questions. b. Be able to formulate SALIENT questions. c. Question information that is given without sufficient justification. d. Collects feedback and data from many customers and customer segments. e. Recognize and explore knowledge gaps. f. Critically observes surroundings to recognize opportunity. g. View problems with an open mindset and explore opportunities with passion. h. Be able to self-reflect and evaluate preconceived ideas, thoughts, and accepted solutions. i. Explores multiple solution paths. j. Gathers data to

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Kathryn A. Neeley, University of Virginia; Douglas Muir, University of Virginia; Elizabeth P. Pyle, University of Virginia

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

become a valued resource for business incubator programs throughout Virginia and her success as a business consultant is reflected in the successful outcomes of her clients. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Beyond "The Innovator's DNA:" Systematic Development of Creative Intelligence in an Engineering Entrepreneurship ProgramIn a seminal paper published in the Harvard Business Review in 2009 and titled “The Innovator’sDNA,” Dyer, Gregersen, and Christensen argue that there are "five discovery skills thatdistinguish the most innovative entrepreneurs from other executives." The specific skills theyidentified through their research were (1) associating, (2) questioning, (3

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 3

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

David G. Alexander Ph.D., California State University - Chico

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

form of workshops were delivered to the team duringweekly meetings to develop and enhance skills in team development, communications, projectmanagement, business development, brainstorming, and ideation. In addition, engineeringstudents collaborated with business students during the business management course to providetechnical expertise during market research and analysis and students presented to one another ontopics related to their particular disciplines. This paper describes the workshops that weredelivered, student reflections and feedback, and lessons learned throughout the experience basedon faculty observations and student performance.IntroductionMany engineering programs today include opportunities to work in multi-disciplinary

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 9

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cristi L Bell-Huff, Lawrence Technological University; Donald D. Carpenter P.E., Lawrence Technological University; Andrew L. Gerhart, Lawrence Technological University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

these factors into account and based on input from a myriadof potential customers on the LTU campus, the theme “Accessibility on Campus” was chosen forthe first section of the new studio course. Thus far, this theme has been quite appealing to thestudents.Course AssessmentIn order to assess the efficacy of the course in the development of an entrepreneurial mindset,several methods of assessment are planned. First, students will take a pre- and post- coursesurvey to measure changes in mindset brought on by participation in the course. Also, after eachmilestone review, time to reflect on the learning process is built into the course calendar. Thistime will involve the students writing a reflective essay and participating in a group

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 1

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Benedict M. Uzochukwu, Virginia State University; Coray Davis, Virginia State University ; Ben U. Nwoke, Virginia State University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

spaces for entrepreneurs and students to meet  Encourage schools to offer courses in entrepreneurship that are easily accessible to all students and to integrate innovation into the curriculum  Identify ways for colleges and universities to award academic credits to students for starting a business  Remove unnecessary costs for students starting a businesses in VirginiaWright and Katz (2016) reflected on the article written by Katz, Harshman, and Lund Dean (2000)where the authors advocated for establishing classroom norms for promoting and protectingstudent intellectual property. Why is this important? Universities and other educational institutions

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Alan R. Peterfreund, SageFox Consulting Group; Emanuel Costache, SageFox Consulting Group; Helen L. Chen, Stanford University; Shannon Katherine Gilmartin, Stanford University & SKG Analysis; Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

) engineering and entrepreneurship education; 2) the pedagogy of ePortfolios and reflective practice in higher education; and 3) reimagining the traditional academic transcript.Dr. Shannon Katherine Gilmartin, Stanford University & SKG AnalysisDr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research on engineering education and work-practices, and applied finite element analysis. From 1999-2008 she served as a Senior Scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, leading the Foundation’s

Conference Session

New Tools for Teaching Entrepreneurship and Innovation

Collection

2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cristi L. Bell-Huff, Lawrence Technological University; Heidi Lynn Morano, Lawrence Technological University

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

designprocess, from opportunity identification to ideation to prototype testing, will reflect insights thatare both innovative and responsive to actual user needs and desires.​9 To initiate this user-centered, empathetic design approach, students engage in anaccessibility simulation exercise on the first day of class designed to foster greater understandingof the everyday experiences of people with disabilities. In this exercise, students break intogroups and engage in multiple simulation activities including: 1. Mobility impairment in which students ambulate using either a wheelchair or a walker, 2. Dexterity impairment in which students place braces on both hands that limit range of motion, 3. Vision impairment in which students

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 8

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Cynthia C. Fry, Baylor University; Kenneth W. Van Treuren, Baylor University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

faculty to motivate them to continue to participate [21]. Facilitators must alsocontinually ask the reflective questions that will that will help maintain the focus and keep theseminars in the context of the Baylor University mission [19]. The research does support thatthere is a relationship between faculty attending development activities that focus on teaching andthe willingness of a faculty to use non-traditional teaching methods [20]. As long as the seminarsand workshops continue to fill a need, they will be a part of the ECS culture with improvementsand assessment to be made each semester.References[1] Pro Futuris, Baylor Univeristy, https://www.baylor.edu/profuturis/ accessed on January 31, 2018.[2] M. Khedkar, “Role of Universities in

Conference Session

Approaches to Teaching Entrepreneurship

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Minnie Patel, San Jose State University; Anuradha Basu, San Jose State University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

entrepreneurship amongst engineering students. However, this would be atodds with the feedback received from student surveys conducted by us over the past two years,which indicate an interest in learning about entrepreneurship, as discussed in this paper.Alternatively, and more likely, it reflected the difficulties of attempting to persuade students toparticipate in extracurricular events, given that most engineering students have extremely highwork loads (131-138 units required for graduation for various majors in the college ofengineering). Besides, most SJSU students pay their way through university, and hence, juggleschool with part-time employment.These results imply that if we want to foster entrepreneurial skills amongst SJSU engineeringstudents

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship Teaming and Collaboration

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Barbara A. Karanian, Stanford University; Mona Eskandari, Stanford University; Akshit Aggarwal, Stanford University; Felipe Pincheira, Stanford University; Rebecca Rose Krauthamer; Gregory Kress, Stanford University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

understanding of cultural factors and the regional advantagesof Silicon Valley for breakthrough impact [9,10]. Furthermore, while extensive observations offormal small group learning of design teams in large classes and innovations in lectures havealso been explored, it is unique to consider a knowingly utilized “open process” approach for theteam; a process which by definition is open and available to alternate, change inputs, and addnew perspective— all dependant on the team’s decisions and dynamics (strikingly similar to thatof a startup company). Our original intent for this paper was to consider the commonalities anddifferences of the academic team to the start-up company studied. We planned to explore therelevant factors through the reflective

Conference Session

The Nature of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Session 4

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

James L. Barnes, James Madison University; Susan Kubic Barnes, James Madison University; Michael J. Dyrenfurth, Purdue University, West Lafayette

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

Page 24.393.3metabolisms, biological (cycles of nature) and technical (cycles of industry), provide anunderstanding of systems of nature, how phenomena in nature exist, and how humans think thoseenvironments ought to be. The concept deals with the integrative relationship of how sciencestarts with a problem and is guided by theory and reflective experience, while technology resultsin solutions which in turn help generate new theories, a new way of thinking about complexsocial problems called naturalistic sustainability3. Not infrequently, the solutions in themselvesgenerate subsequent downstream problems that also must be considered. Having students learnhow to construct and use mental models is essential to develop a new way of thinking

Conference Session

Post BS Entrepreneurship Education Needs

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jerome Schaufeld, Worcester Polytechnic Institute; Gretar Tryggvason, Worcester Polytechnic Institute; McRae Banks, Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

interest in the subject matter Figure 5. The results of student assessment of the course for both the first and the second offering.3.1.3 GradesThe grading of the course consisted on several components: Homework (15%); Projectpresentation and report (35%); Quiz (30%) and class participation (20%).Homework, due in every lecture challenged students to reflect on the reading for the upcomingclass. The write-up was limited to one page and had to provide a synopsis of the material readand a few points for the class discussion of the material. The students initially had somedifficulty with the concept, including limiting it to a page, but after the first weeks there was anoticeable improvement

Conference Session

Faculty Development

Collection

2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Angela M. Shartrand, National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance (NCIIA); Ricardo Leon Gomez, National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators Alliance (NCIIA); Phil Weilerstein, National Collegiate Inventors & Innovators Alliance (NCIIA)

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

planning, and responses to questions about workshop use reflected thisemphasis. Namely, many faculty said they expected to use workshops ideas in their futureteaching (12 responses), reflecting their intentions to offer new courses and programs to students.Faculty also said they added new course content (12 responses) and shared information with theircolleagues (11 responses). Conference Curriculum Instructional Workshop Uses Workshops Workshops Workshops (N=35) (N=20) (N=6) Added new class activities 54% (N=19) 60% (N=12) 67% (N=4) Expect to use

Conference Session

The Nature of Innovation and Entrepreneurship Session 4

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Daniel Michael Ferguson, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Senay Purzer, Purdue University, West Lafayette; Matthew W. Ohland, Purdue University and Central Queensland University; Kathryn Jablokow, Pennsylvania State University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

data gathered frominexperienced or non-innovative engineers (15, 16). The models of engineering innovativenessand non-innovativeness that were developed during this study come from the data collected or'grounded' in the interviews and descriptions of engineering innovators and non-innovatorsprovided by engineering innovators, not from any experimentally constructed data sources (15).Study participants described the characteristics of non-innovative engineers as they described thecharacteristics of innovative engineers and describing both innovative and non-innovativebehavior of engineers was a common approach to sharing insights and reflecting on ourinterview questions.Grounded theory was an appropriate methodology due to the confusion and

Conference Session

ENT Division Technical Session: Competitions, Challenges, and Teams

Collection

2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Jared Schoepf, Arizona State University; Stephanie M. Gillespie, University of New Haven; Amy Trowbridge, Arizona State University; Alison Cook-Davis, Arizona State University; Kristen Peña, Arizona State University ; Courtney Argenti, Arizona State University; Daniel J. Laxman, Arizona State University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

reflect on and showcase their accomplishments. Amy earned her Master’s degree in Biomedical Engineering from Arizona State University (ASU), and is currently pursuing her PhD in Engineering Education Systems and Design.Dr. Alison Cook-Davis, Arizona State University Dr. Alison Cook-Davis is Assistant Director for Program Evaluation at the Arizona State University’s Office of Evaluation and Educational Effectiveness (UOEEE). She has a BA in Psychology, MS in So- cial Psychology, MLS Legal Studies, and a Ph.D. in Experimental Social Psychology. Prior to joining UOEEE, she supported the research and program evaluation efforts of Maricopa County Adult Proba- tion Department, coordinated and executed the research and

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 6

Collection

2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Andrew L. Gerhart, Lawrence Technological University; Donald D. Carpenter, Lawrence Technological University; Robert W. Fletcher, Lawrence Technological University; Eric G. Meyer, Lawrence Technological University

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

testing a weekbefore final testing. This turned out to be an important aspect toward “persist through and learnfrom failure,” “act upon analysis,” and “apply systems thinking to complex problems.” Ingeneral, most teams did not appreciate these outcomes during this project, but realized by thefinal project how important they are. This was clearly reflected in the scoring results differencebetween the rainwater car and final projects, details of which are related in the conclusionssection. In other words, the students were much better prepared for interim and final testingduring the final project. The students’ car projects are judged on two tests. For the first test, thecar is to obtain maximum distance; for the second test, the car must land on a

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship and Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 4

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Jocelyn L. Jackson, University of Michigan; Aileen Huang-Saad, Northeastern University; Joi-lynn Mondisa, University of Michigan

Tagged Topics

Diversity

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

to non-Hispanic White or Asian male genderedpopulations [43]. In the United States, among the students enrolled in undergraduate STEMprograms in 2018, only 18% represented racially minoritized populations [46]. Regardingentrepreneurship, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) reported similar negative trendsin 2012 with racially minoritized business owners only making up 22% of all U.S. businessowners [34] despite reflecting 33% of the U.S. population [48]. These disparities look even morestark when examining the representation of racially minoritized or marginalized populations inSTEM entrepreneurship [4], [5], [24]. These inequalities formed by unequal systems of powercan be further examined through the lens of intersectionality [15

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship and Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 2

Collection

2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access

Authors

Barbara A. Karanian, Stanford University; Ville M. Taajamaa, City of Espoo; Mona Eskandari, University of California, Riverside

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

action; and 4) developing teaching methods with a storytelling focus in engineering and science educa- tion. Founder of the Design Entrepreneuring Studio: Barbara helps teams generate creative environments. Companies that she has worked with renew their commitment to innovation. She also helps students an- swer these questions when she teaches some of these methods to engineering, design, business, medicine, and law students. Her courses use active storytelling and self-reflective observation as one form to help student and industry leaders traverse across the iterative stages of a project- from the early, inspirational stages to prototyping and then to delivery.Dr. Ville M. Taajamaa, City of Espoo Ville M. Taajamaa

Conference Session

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation Division Technical Session 5

Collection

2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Chris Carroll, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng.; Scott A. Sell, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng.; Michelle B. Sabick, Saint Louis University, Parks College of Eng.

Tagged Divisions

Entrepreneurship & Engineering Innovation

what theresults mean and how they compared with engineering students. The results showed that thefaculty participants tended to prefer a more reflective than active learning style, a more intuitivethan sensory learning style, a more visual than verbal learning style, and were essentially neutralwith regard to preferring a sequential or global learning style. Comparison data fromengineering students provided contradictory learning styles preferences. Students tend to prefermore active than reflective learning styles, more sensory than intuitive learning styles, and amore sequential than global learning style. The only category where faculty participants learningstyles preferences aligned with engineering students’ learning styles preferences