AC 2010-2104: A MULTINATIONAL 1+2+1 ELECTRICAL ENGINEERINGPROGRAMEsteban Rodriguez-Marek, Eastern Washington University ESTEBAN RODRIGUEZ-MAREK is an Associate Professor in the department of Engineering and Design at Eastern Washington University. He did his graduate work in Electrical Engineering at Washington State University. He worked as a research scientist at Fast Search & Transfer before transferring to the Department of Engineering & Design at Eastern Washington University. His interests include image and video processing, communication systems, digital signal processing, and cryptographic theory and applications.Min-Sung Koh, Eastern Washington University MIN-SUNG KOH
AC 2010-2073: EXPERIENCE WITH USING THE XO-1 (OLPC-ONE LAP TOPPER CHILD) TO JUMP START PRE-ENGINEERING AND SCIENCEEDUCATION IN RURAL UGANDAFrank Duda, Grove City College Frank T. Duda, Jr. obtained his Ph.D. degree from the University of Pittsburgh in 1975. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Pennsylvania and is currently a professor of electrical engineering at Grove City College, Grove City, Pennsylvania Page 15.551.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Experience with Using the XO-1 (OLPC-One Lap Top Per Child) to Jump Start Pre-Engineering and Science Education
Paper ID #7017Seven Years of Success in Implementation of a 3 + 1 Transfer Program in En-gineering Technology Between Universities in China and the Unites StatesProf. Scott I. Segalewitz, University of Dayton Scott Segalewitz, P.E. is a Professor in the Department of Engineering Technology at the University of Dayton (UD). He also serves as Director of Industrial and Technical Relations for the University of Dayton China Institute in Suzhou, China where he is responsible for establishing corporate training programs for US partner companies in the Suzhou Industrial Park, and for developing opportunities for UD students to
of Dar es Salaam I’m a Chemical and Process Engineering Lecturer at the University of Dar es Salaam. I Lecture two courses: (1) Heat and Mass Transfer; and (2) Quality Assurance in Chemical and Food Industries. I also coordinate gender issues at the College level. Apart from Lecturing I do research ad consultancy. My research interest is on areas related to: 1. Bio-energy 2. Food Value Addition 3. Environment American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Tanzania Field School: Place-Based Learning for Portable SkillsWe present a program developed through collaboration between engineering and anthropology faculty that focuses oncontextualized
teaching and doing research. She is on the USD team implementing ”Developing Changemaking Engineers”, an NSF-sponsored Revolutionizing Engineering Education (RED) project. Dr. Lord is the 2018 recipient of the IEEE Undergraduate Teaching Award.Mr. Mou Deng Riiny, SunGate Solar American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Learning about Solar Power in South Sudan: An International CollaborationAbstractMore than 1 billion people in the world currently live in energy poverty. Solar energy has vastpotential for South Sudan but there are challenges to implementing it. How can students andothers such as technicians learn about the context of South Sudan and the particular
where she currently teaches Unit Operations Laboratory, Capstone Design, and Conservation Principles. She also developed and has run, for 8 years, a month long faculty led international summer program to Brazil which focuses on Sustainable Energy Technologies. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Lessons Learned Developing and Running a Virtual, Faculty-Led, International Program on Sustainable Energy in BrazilGlobalization in engineering education has become increasingly important, especially whendiscussing innovating sustainable designs and technologies to help relieve the climate crisis [1].However, in 2020 the COVID-19 pandemic has
on a combination ofselected online and mostly offline activities to develop students’ skills based on the DQ Institute’sDigital Literacy Framework. Details of the program content, results of the program and thesuccesses and challenges of this international education program will be shared in the paper.IntroductionThe impact of the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to be studied for years to come given thedisruption to our daily activities and its impact on the world’s economy and public health [1-3].While government and health authorities continue to reduce the large death rate suffered in thepast year [4] through vaccination plans, several developed countries will start to lift restrictions incoming weeks and months[5, 6]. On the other hand
in 2009; Brazil in 2010; China in 2012; Costa Rica in 2013; New Zealand in 2014; Italyin 2015; and Chile in 2016. Over 280 students and seventeen different faculty members haveparticipated.This study abroad program was initially designed to address ABET General Criterion 3(h) whichnotes that graduates must have “the broad education necessary to understand the impact ofengineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental and societal context.” Specific ABETeducational outcomes for the program include: 1) the broad education necessary to understand theimpact of engineering solutions in a global and societal context, 2) recognition of the need for, andan ability to engage in, life-long learning, and 3) knowledge of contemporary issues
engineering/CS students studied abroad.Data for 2015/2016 are not yet available in the IIE's Open Doors report and in the NCES Digestof Education Statistics.Calculating Participation at Our InstitutionTo determine participation of our students in study abroad programs, the number of allengineering undergraduates, including computer science students, in a given graduating classwho study abroad for a minimum of four weeks is divided by the total number of students in thecohort. Participation by graduating class is given in Table 1: Table 1: % of Engineering/CS Graduating Classes Studying Abroad Class of % Studying Abroad 2012
solicitfeedback from participating students about their experience in the course, a focus group wasconducted at UNSW and written feedback from small groups of students was obtained atASU. Last but not least, some lessons learnt will be reflected by the course instructors withrespect to, for example, how to design the course schedule constrained by the time andcalendar difference, how to divide responsibilities between the collaborating instructors, andhow to grade assignments in consideration of different grading policies. .1. IntroductionThis work describes a new international joint course on the subject of the National Academyof Engineering (NAE) Grand Challenges for Engineering (GCE), collaboratively developedby Arizona State University in the USA
and careers in this field [2, 3]. As part of the changes occurring inengineering education to facilitate this, it is important to understand how different level of internationaland development experiences in curricular and non-curricular engineering undergraduate design projectseffects engineers’ preparedness to work globally and in international development. At Colorado StateUniversity, a mixed-methods study is being undertaken, to compare and contrast six different curricularand co-curricular model of engineering design teaching, with a mix of international engagement, as shownin the figure below.Figure 1- Different Engineering Design Project learning opportunities contained within this studyThis matrix, illustrates the difference between
development of competencies required by industry. More specifically, they willbe used as a starting point for developing and implementing curriculum elements aimed atenhancing competency levels of students at a Dutch university of technology and itsEuropean partners in the European project funding this research.Keywords Transversal competency level, preparing for practice, engineering education,questionnaireINTRODUCTIONThe globalization and the great change in technology of the 90s have posed differentdemands on the engineering profession. This shift has resulted in the industry seekinggraduates equipped with both technical and non-technical competencies [1]. In this study,the latter is named transversal competencies and defined as "skills, values
worked for nine years in the manufacturing and service industry as an Industrial Engineer prior to her academic career. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Understanding competencies transfer during internships in undergraduate industrial engineering students: a case study at the [blinded]IntroductionDespite engineering programs designing curriculum with the goal of preparing students forindustry demands, there is still a disconnection between industry expectations of the workforceand the preparation of engineering graduates [1-3]. One way to prepare engineering students tomeet industry expectations is by involving them in real world experiences where they cantransfer some of the knowledge
. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Novel University-Industry Engineering Education Cooperation Program: Open Summer School co-organized by SEU, Xilinx and ICisCAuthors: Yongming Tang1, Joshua Lu2, Yanfang Deng3, Susan M. Lord4Author Affiliation:1. School of Electronic Science and Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, China, tym@seu.edu.cn; 2. Xilinx co., Shanghai, China, joshua.lu@xilinx.com; 3. ICisC, Nanjing, China; 4. University of San Diego, slord@sandiego.edu;AbstractPartnerships between universities and industry can help provide engineering students witheducation, hands-on experiences, and skills needed to become successful professionals. Thispaper describes a summer school
with course learningobjectives, can be categorized as: 1) engineering focused (i.e., visiting companies), 2) academic(i.e., visiting universities), and 3) cultural (i.e., visiting a range of sites while emphasizingrelationships with engineering). In this paper we explore how students’ learning experiencesvaried across those different kinds of visits. Results can inform leaders of similar short-terminternational experiences of engineering students as they make learning-centered decisions abouthow to best plan and balance program itineraries.Related Literature on Study Abroad ProgramsThere are several examples of institutions developing international engineering programs to helpdevelop global engineers. Jesiek et al.4 studied three such study
associatedopportunities, challenges, and risks associated with this growth are presented. Impacts andprogram significance will be presented in the form of data collected from over 60 programparticipants over the course of four years.literature reviewStudy abroad programs provide unique experiences in new and unfamiliar environments,improve cultural awareness, expanded worldview, and enhance critical thinking and globalcompetence. They offer an opportunity for students to gain diverse academic and life experiencesin and out of the academic environment as well as expand employment opportunities for futurecareers [1]. In addition to providing unique experiences, findings reported by the GeorgiaLearning Outcomes of Students Studying Abroad Research Initiative
commonlyaccepted method of showing such contributions. With this in mind, we set out to design anddeliver a study abroad program composed from learning theory that would specifically appeal toengineering students, overcome their typical barriers to participation, and contribute to ABETstudent learning outcomes.This paper describes the motivation, key development elements, and outcomes for this course,titled Engineering Rome, which was delivered for the first time in 2013. Course outcomes aremeasured by student surveys and feedback comments and analysis is specifically tailored toaddress the following three questions: 1. To what extent did the framework of this course (time frame, subject matter, location) address issues that often impede students
) Page 26.1136.2and second time (2014) the program was run.Major 2013 2014Engineering 14 14Business 3 2Biology 2 1International Affairs 2 0Cultural Anthropology 1 0Environmental Science 0 7Total # Students 22 24Table 1: Table comparing the number of students per major for each year the program was runThe Alternative Energy Technology CourseDevelopment and First Time TaughtThe alternative energy course was specifically developed for this
program. The program was offered during the summer, but no academic credit wasoffered in lieu of a stipend and travel expenses. One of the few requirements imposed on thestudents was that they would commit themselves completely to this design and researchexperience. We employed a multi-faceted pedagogical approach that included three distinctelements. These elements were: (1) hands-on design-build-test-refine, (2) total culturalimmersion, and (3) allowing students the independence to define goals and manage their owntime.Hands-on experiences enhance learning and satisfaction for students.1-4 The need to teach designhas traditionally been addressed in capstone courses, but there has been a push to introducedesign earlier in engineering curricula
enhance thecultural experience7, and utilize graduate students in active mentorship of visiting students.In the School of Engineering Technology capstone projects are one of the most effective avenues tosynthesize an engineer’s education and therefore present themselves as an opportunity to insert globalawareness. Accreditation bodies including ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)require such an experience in the curriculum particularly in (h) the broad education necessary tounderstand the impact of engineering solutions in a global, economic, environmental, and societal contextand “j”: “a knowledge of the impact of engineering technology solutions in a societal and globalcontext.”1 In the School of Engineering Technology, a
involves more disagreements, ifnot arguments. Next, in addition to the peer-peer interactions among team members, everyonemust now interact with a variety of Information and Communication Technologies, which serveas the means and mediator to link members physically located in different places of the globe.Last but not least, some team activities (e.g., team meeting, social gathering) that can be easilyorganized by local teams become very difficult, if not impossible, for the global teams undermore boundaries and constraints (e.g., time difference, geographical separation). In the past, thestudy of distributed teams has been approached from both social dimension (e.g., organizationalscience [1] and psychology [2]) and engineering dimension (e.g
that remain as well as new challenges that arise as each collaboration continuesto evolve will be discussed.IntroductionThere has been an explosive growth in multinational collaborations in higher educationrecently, with a number of UK universities engaged in programmes around the world. Therewere approximately 571,000 students outside of the UK, enrolled in a degree programmeawarded by a UK higher education institution (HEI)1. More than 50 UK universities havepartnerships in Singapore with over 52,000 students enrolled in undergraduate andpostgraduate degree programme2. UK HEIs are similarly active in transnational education(TNE) in China. Slightly more than 25% of all Sino-foreign undergraduate programmesinvolved a UK HEI as of 20133.The
Cooperation in RunningSchools.1 In 2010, promoting international collaborations and introducing quality internationaleducation resources was stated in the National Long-term Education Reform and DevelopmentPlan.2At the same time, in anticipation of the impact of globalization on higher education, universitiesin the United States have been developing various forms of educational offerings in othercountries including China. Influence abroad for the country and international reputation for theinstitutions are the obvious benefits among others. The forms of US education abroad includebranch campus, partnership with a local Chinese university, distance education, and consultationto universities and governments.3It became natural for educational
was decided that the students study freshmen and junior years at ITUand sophomore and senior years at SIUE. This implementation required ITU to openadditional sections of Industrial Engineering courses to be taught in English in the junioryear. Faculty who were assigned to teach these classes received substantial overloadpayments.It is noted that SIUE required completion of 128 credit hours for graduation, whereasITU required 142. It was agreed that ITU would teach 37 credit hours in freshmen and39 in junior year for a total of 76 hours, whereas SIUE would teach 32 credit hours insophomore year and 34 hours in senior year for a total of 66 hours.The enrollment and graduation statistics over the years are shown in Table 1. Enrollmentnumbers
recognizes that post-secondary education is only one of several importantphases of that development process, and the initiative will endeavor to provide support,innovation and inspiration throughout Qatar’s educational enterprise to promote students totheir greatest potential to become engineering leaders. Page 24.80.2The initiative’s activities included several building blocks such as: (1) partnering withschools in Qatar to enhance science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education toimprove students’ readiness for university studies; (2) offering enrichment programs topromote STEM studies among middle- and high-school students and to attract
active in many professional associations in the engineering and science education, teacher education, distance learning, program evaluation and special education fields. She has been the principal investigator on several federal grants through the US Department of Education, the National Institute of Health, and the National Science Foundation. Page 24.827.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 iPodia: “Classroom-without-Borders” Global Engineering Education1. IntroductionIn light of the recent development of Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)1-3, there aremultiple key
perception remains that it creates anenormous logistical barrier that only a tiny highly motivated minority is able to overcome. Thisis certainly a primary reason why the percentage of engineering graduates in the U.S. with astudy-abroad experience remains stubbornly low, less than 4.0%1 .Infrastructure costs. From an institutional perspective, the cost of developing and maintainingthe infrastructure necessary to reduce the logistical challenges deterring engineering studentsfrom international training remains a central challenge. Although some institutions have madestrong commitments in this area, the costs are substantial in terms of both personnel time andrelated expenditures. Most efforts are centered on the development of multiple
higher engineering education, and has led to theformation of two accreditation networks of engineering educations: the Washington Accord(WA) and the European Network for Accreditation of Engineering Education (ENAEE).Global engineering education accreditation shows the future development trend ofresult-oriented, international connection, continuous improvement, and industry-academiacooperation [1].Program accreditation of engineering education has become an internationally acceptedquality assurance system for engineering education. The program accreditation ofengineering education takes quality assurance and quality improvement as the basic guidingideology and starting point. The education evaluation of engineering education program inChina
increasing globalization, issues regarding international mobility of (often licensed)professionals in a host of disciplines have gained importance. Basic considerations of fairnessand economic efficiency prompt questions about restraint of trade, unnecessary barriers toprofessional practice, and policies that can facilitate domestic and international mobility oflicense holders in different occupations. Positions can be extreme. In the United States, achanging political climate has made libertarian ideas questioning the necessity of professionallicensure itself more prominent.1 Licensed professions in the United States, including engineering, have been concerned and,in some cases, felt threatened in the aftermath of the 2014 Supreme Court decision