Paper ID #25413Defining the Aims of Engineering Literacy with Lessons from a PioneeringAttempt to Measure Engineering Ability of Pre-University Students.Dr. John Krupczak Jr., Hope College Professor of Engineering, Hope College, Holland, Michigan. Former Chair of the ASEE Technological Literacy Division; Former Chair of the ASEE Liberal Education Division; Senior Fellow CASEE, Na- tional Academy of Engineering, 2008-2010; Program Officer, National Science Foundation, Division of Undergraduate Education 2013-2016.Dr. John Heywood, Trinity College Dublin John Heywood is professorial Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College
Engagement: Classroom-Based Practices,” 2005.[5] W. Newstetter and M. Svinicki, “Learning Theories for Engineering Education Practice,” Cambridge Handb. Eng. Educ. Res., 2011.[6] P. Blikstein, Z. Kabayadondo, A. Martin, and D. Fields, “An Assessment Instrument of Technological Literacies in Makerspaces and FabLabs,” J. Eng. Educ., 2017.[7] B. Bevan, “The Promise and the Promises of Making in Science Education,” Stud. Sci. Educ., 2017.[8] S. Vossoughi and B. Bevan, “Making and Tinkering: A Review of the Literature,” 2015.[9] R. Seo-Zindy and R. Heeks, “Researching the Emergence of 3D Printing, Makerspaces, Hackerspaces and Fablabs in The Global South: A Scoping Review and Research Agenda on Digital Innovation and
different reasons. At one end of thespectrum will be issues for the taxpayer and investors: at the other end will be thoseimmediately affected by the failure such as the injured or bereaved. In the case of B737 Maxdisasters there will be millions who through no fault of their own will have to fly on B 737Max aircraft, and some will be afraid. Since the primary purpose of an inquiry, unlessotherwise stated, is to make recommendations that ensure that such accidents do not occuragain, there is an obligation on society to ensure that its citizens are in a position to verify theveracity of what is recommended. Here, that skill is called “technological competence” thesuccessful exercise of which is to be technologically literate. In this sense
, we briefly review how design methodologies can be categorized by three dis-tinct conceptions of logic. In so doing we also intend to portray some of the common narratives onrationality of engineering and design.2.1 Classical logicThe first category of design methodologies are those committed to three axioms of classical logic,namely, a. the law of identity which states everything is identical to itself, b. the law of contradiction (or non-contradiction) which states that contra- dictions are not acceptable, c. and the law of excluded middle which states if a proposition is not true its negation must be true.In the following we first review two major developments in this domain
differentapproaches to algorithmic evaluation display trends comparable to by-hand assessment by aninstructor. Given that the software used in this work utilized unmodified versions of the basicalgorithms, it might be expected that agreement will improve as the algorithms are modified tobetter detect features most prevalent in diagrams of technological systems. Additional testing isplanned with both engineering students enrolled in an introduction to engineering and non-engineers in a general education engineering literacy course.References: 1. B. Richmond, The ‘Thinking’ in Systems Thinking: Seven Essential Skills. Waltham, MA: Pegasus Communications, 2000. 2. L. B. Sweeney and D. Meadows, The Systems Thinking Playbook. White River Junction
). Leagility: Integrating the lean and agile manufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1-2): 107-118.Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage Publications.Reed, S. K. (1992). Cognition: Theory and Applications. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Stevens, R., Johri, A, & Connor, K. (2013). Chapter 7 - Professional Engineering Work. In A. Jorhi, & B. M. Olds (Eds.) Cambridge Book of Engineering Education Research. (pp.119-138), Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Tjahjono, B., Ball, P., Vitanov, V .I. , Scorzafave, C., Nogueira, J. ., Calleja, J., Minguet, M., Narasimha, L
) Generator Internal Combustion Engine (convert energy of motion (convert chemical energy of into electrical energy ) fuel into energy of motion )1. Which of the diagrams on the next page shows the flow of energy in this system ifthe vehicle is in use (ie: being driven) after the battery has been depleted.(a) Diagram 1(b) Diagram 2(c) Diagram 3(d) Diagram 4(e) None of the Above (a) Diagram1 Battery Electric Motor Wheels (b ) Diagram 2Battery Electric Motor WheelsFuel Internal Combustion Engine Generator (c ) Diagram 3 Battery Generator
-year graduates ashaving “Excellent” critical thinking skill. Obviously, a more concerted effort must be made incurricula and educational practices to achieve a more measurable outcome to close the skill gap infresh college graduates.Active learning, with its strategy especially in the computer-based classroom 5 , is ideal to blendpertinent curriculum elements to help students develop the highly-sought abilities. The issuesnow become: a) identifying the proper problem to provide context and motivation; and b) findingthe technical vehicle for student engagement and assessment.For the first issue, Kahlen et al. 6 and Benner et al. 7 show that providing accurate and timelydiagnosis for system failures or malfunctions embodies the culmination of
AC 2011-2044: DESIGN AS A METHOD OF INSTRUCTION IN CHINASteve Macho, Buffalo State College Steve Macho is currently an Assistant Professor of Technology Education for SUNY at Buffalo State College. He completed a BS at St Cloud State University, and M.A. & Ed.D. in Technology Education at West Virginia University. Steve is a Minnesota farm boy who has been involved in technology his entire life. He has worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico Highlands University, and on various grants funded by the US Department of Education, NASA, and Microsoft. He became a member of the Oxford Roundtable in 2008 and presented at the roundtable again in 2010. Dr Macho recently began to collaborate with the
Paper ID #13566Communication as Both the Ultimate Interdisciplinary Subject and a Fieldof Specialization Encompassing More Than Technical Writing: Communica-tion Instruction Across DivisionsDr. Kathryn A. Neeley, University of Virginia Kathryn Neeley is Associate Professor of Science, Technology, and Society in the Department of Engi- neering & Society in the School of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Virginia. She is a past chair of the Liberal Education/Engineering & Society Division and winner of the Sterling Olmsted Award for outstanding contributions to liberal education for engineers
AC 2012-4041: TECHNOLOGY IMPACT: FROM UTOPIA TO WASTE-LANDDr. Robert A. Heard, Carnegie Mellon University Robert Heard is Associate Teaching Professor in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering. Past experience includes 17 years in industry and the past seven years teaching at Carnegie Mellon with particular emphasis on the engineering-based courses, including materials selection and capstone design courses. Page 25.1268.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Technology Impact – From Utopia to WastelandAbstract A course entitled
National Academies, Washington, DC. 2. Borrego, M., Froyd, J. E., & Hall, T. S. (2010). Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in US engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(3), 185-207. 3. Prince, M., Borrego, M., Henderson, C., Cutler, S., & Froyd, J. (2013). Use of research- based instructional strategies in core chemical engineering courses. Chemical Engineering Education, 47(1), 27-37. 4. Froyd, J. E., Wankat, P. C., & Smith, K. A. (2012). Five major shifts in 100 years of engineering education. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(Special Centennial Issue), 1344- 1360. 5. Jesiek, B. K., Borrego, M., and Beddoes, K. (2010
://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/how-clean.html14. Voinov, A. and H. Cardwell (2009). "The Energy-Water Nexus: Why Should We Care?" Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education 143(1): 17-29.15. Graedel, T. E. and B. R. Allenby (2010). Industrial ecology and sustainable engineering, Prentice Hall.16. Likert, R. (1932). "A technique for the measurement of attitudes." Archives of Psychology 22 140: 55.17. Granderson, J., M. Piette, et al. (2011). Energy Information Handbook: Applications for Energy-Efficient Building Operations. Berkeley, CA, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory: 298 pp. Page 23.570.12
included in the study had the same exposure to nanotechnology in class. Theselected section consisted of 28 student teams (with 3 or 4 students per team).B. Nanotechnology Graphical User Interface (GUI) ProjectThe project partner for the nanotechnology project was a NSF-funded Network for ComputationalNanotechnology (NCN) whose mission is to support the National Nanotechnology Initiative bycreating and operating a cyber-platform for expanding and supporting the nanotechnologycommunity formation and growth by sharing computational simulations and educationalresources. The platform is called nanoHUB.org. It is an interactive online data and researchsharing environment with 64,659 interactive users; the environment primarily consists of
working on better understanding of students’ learning and aspects of tech- nological and engineering philosophy and literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the human side of engineering, new ways of teaching engineering in particular Electromagnetism and other classes that are mathematically driven. His research and activities also include on avenues to connect Product Design and Engineering Education in a synergetic way.Kate A Disney, Mission College Kate Disney has been teaching engineering at the community college level since 1990. Her interests are promoting greater gender and racial balance in
Paper ID #6174Gadget Avalanche: A Technology Literacy Course for Novice AdultsDr. Katy Luchini-Colbry, Michigan State University Katy Luchini-Colbry is the Director for Graduate Recruiting at the College of Engineering at Michigan State University, where she completed degrees in political theory and computer science. A recipient of a NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, she received her Ph.D. and M.S.E. in computer science and engineering from the University of Michigan. She has published nearly two dozen peer-reviewed works related to her interests in educational technology and enhancing undergraduate education through hands
Paper ID #11803Interactive Panel: Improving the Experiences of Marginalized Students onEngineering Design TeamsDr. Lorelle A Meadows, Michigan Technological University Dr. Lorelle A. Meadows is the Dean of the Pavlis Honors College at Michigan Technological University.Prof. Denise Sekaquaptewa, University of Michigan Denise Sekaquaptewa, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Her research in experimental social psychology focuses on stereotyping and intergroup dynamics, in partic- ular how being in the numerical minority in terms of gender or race influences academic outcomes and
literacy. In particular how such literacy and competency are reflected in curricular and student activities. His interests also include Design and Engineering, the human side of engineering, new ways of teaching engineering in particular Electromagnetism and other classes that are mathematically driven. His research and activities also include on avenues to connect Product Design and Engineering Education in a synergetic way. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020A perspective on students’ autonomy in learning and engaging in a freshman inquiry-based learning environmentAbstractPresent day workforce requires graduates to be self-starters, independent and willing toexperiment, as genuine
Paper ID #7154Abstraction as a Vector: Distinguishing Philosophy of Science from Philoso-phy of Engineering.Dr. John Krupczak, Hope College Professor of Engineering, Hope College, Holland, Michigan. Former Chair of the ASEE Technological Literacy Division, Former Chair of the ASEE Liberal Education Division, CASEE Senior Fellow 2008- 2010.Dr. Gregory Bassett Page 23.131.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013Distinguishing Engineering from Science by Treating Abstraction as a VectorAbstractA
Paper ID #6570Applying a knowledge-generation epistemological approach to computer sci-ence and software engineering educationDr. Stephen T Frezza, Gannon University Dr. Stephen T. Frezza, C.S.D.P. is a Professor of Software Engineering at Gannon University in Erie, PA (USA). Dr. Frezza is a Certified Software Development Professional (CSDP), and at Gannon pursues research in Program Assessment, Software Engineering Pedagogy, and Engineering Philosopy. His teach- ing interests include Software Process, Requirements, Design, Testing and Quality Assurance. He is the past chair of the Computer and Information Science Department
Paper ID #10840Development of a Simplified Method for Representing Technological Systemsfor Non-EngineersDr. John Krupczak, Hope College Professor of Engineering, Hope College, Holland, Michigan. Former Chair of the ASEE Technologi- cal Literacy Division. Former Chair of the ASEE Liberal Education Division. Senior Fellow CASEE, National Academy of Engineering, 2008-2010.Lauren Aprill, Hope College Engineering Student, Hope College, Holland, Michigan 49423Daniel J Langholz Engineering student at Hope College, Holland, Michigan
Paper ID #9187An Intuitive Approach to Teaching concepts in Engineering to a General Au-dienceDr. Daniel Raviv, Florida Atlantic UniversityMr. George Roskovich Page 24.172.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 An Intuitive Approach to Teaching Concepts in Engineering to a General Audience Daniel Raviv and George Roskovich Department of Computer & Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Florida Atlantic University
AC 2012-3428: USING TECHNOLOGY TO TEACH COMMUNICATIONSAND COMMUNICATIONS TO TEACH TECHNOLOGY IN A STUDY-ABROADLEARNING ENVIRONMENTMr. David Bowles, Louisiana State University David (Boz) Bowles is a Technical Communication Instructor in the Engineering Communication Studio at Louisiana State University. He earned a bachelor’s degree in English and a master’s of fine arts in creative writing from Virginia Commonwealth University.Paige Davis, Louisiana State University Paige Davis has 22 years of experience in the College of Engineering at Louisiana State University. For the past two years, she has directed a study abroad program specifically designed for engineering students. In addition to teaching, she assists with
Paper ID #6680Waves of Engineering: Using a mini-wave flume to foster engineering literacyMs. Alicia L Lyman-Holt, Oregon State University Ms. Lyman-Holt has been the Education and Outreach Coordinator at the O.H. Hinsdale Wave Research Laboratory since 2005. She manages and leads the diverse outreach and education programing at the laboratory which serves over 5000 visitors per year, including K-12 students, undergraduate, graduate students, media outlets and the general public. She also takes the mini-flume ”on the road” to large public events, such as Smithsonian Folklife Festival and Engineering Week Family day
Paper ID #11738Interactive Panel on Perspectives and Practical Skills for Men as Advocatesfor Gender EquityDr. Lawrence J. Genalo, Iowa State University Dr. Genalo is a University Professor and Associate Chair of the Materials Science and Engineering Department at Iowa State University. He is a Fellow of ASEE and has run the NSF Grantees Poster Session for nearly 20 years. He is a former chair of DELOS and the Freshman Programs Constituent Committee (the year before it became a Division).Dr. Roger A. Green, North Dakota State University Roger Green received the B.S. degree in electrical and computer engineering and the
Paper ID #28898Building Early Elementary Teacher Confidence in Teaching ComputerScience Through a Low-Cost, Scalable Research-Practitioner CollaborationJustin Lee Clough, University of Southern California Justin L. Clough is a PhD student at the University of Southern California studying Mechanical Engineer- ing; his advisor is Assad A. Oberai. He received his Bachelors of Science from the Milwaukee School of Engineering and Masters of Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, both in Mechanical Engineering. He holds a DOD:SMART scholarship and works closely with the AFRL/RQHV teams at Wright-Patterson
AC 2012-4458: TECHNOLOGICAL LITERACY IN REQUIRED SCIENCECOURSES FOR NON-STEM STUDENTS IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGEWITH EXTENSION TO JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTProf. Vazgen Shekoyan, Queensborough Community College, CUNYDr. Todd Holden, Queensborough Community College, CUNY Todd Holden is an Associate Professor in the Physics Department of Queensborough Community College of CUNY. His current research interests include bioinformatics and microbial fuel cells. He also mentors student research projects.Raul Armendariz Ph.D., Queensborough Community College, CUNYDr. Helio Takai, Brookhaven National Laboratory Helio Takai is an Elementary Particle and Nuclear Physicist with interest in development of instrumenta- tion for the
AC 2012-5100: DEFINING ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGICAL LIT-ERACYDr. John Krupczak, Hope College John Krupczak is professor of engineering, Hope College, Holland, Mich.; CASEE Senior Fellow (2008- 2010); Past Chair, ASEE Technological Literacy Division;and Past Chair ASEE, Liberal Education Divi- sion.Dr. John W. Blake P.E., Austin Peay State University John Blake is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Technology at Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, Tenn. He served as Department Chair from 1994-2005. He received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from Northwestern University, and is a registered Professional Engineer in the state of Tennessee.Ms. Kate A. Disney, Mission
materials that are manipulated for human ends.These tensions can be broadly classified as related to being and practice in engineeringeducation. While Table 1 reflects issues identified at the workshop it is important to note thatnone of these tensions are isolated, i.e. they all depend on each other in the larger, inter-relatedsystem that is engineering education. (a) 2003-2005: 16 issues from 6 programs (b) 2013-2015: 46 issues from 17 programs Figure 1: Comparison between major issues identified in National Science Foundation program solicitations and descriptions separated by one decade.To understand how the issues identified by faculty participants at the workshop compare withthose that are
the program educational objectives. Student outcomes are outcomes (a) through (k) plus any additional outcomes that may be articulated by the program: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams (e) an ability to identify, formulate