studied as an approach to piquing studentinterest in science and providing both motivation and a framework for students to learn andapply scientific principles. The study reported in this paper explores the use of the EngineeringDesign Process (EDP) as a framework for learning science in a middle school classroom. Thissection of the paper presents a review of the literature on approaches to the integration of scienceand engineering as well as the relationship between student interest in a topic and their desire tolearn more about that topic.IntegrationIntegrated STEM education allows students to make connections among the disciplines ofSTEM[1], but presently, there are many forms of this integration with no universally adoptedmodel[2]. This
dimensional analysis.An example of the prerequisite quiz is provided in the Appendix of this paper for reference.Results of the prerequisite quiz often show some students have difficulty with differentiation.Some students have errors is solving indefinite integrals, by not including the constant in theintegration result. More students have difficulty to solve the problems related to differentialequations. Not all students were able to solve numerical methods or thermodynamics problemscorrectly. Most students cannot explain the reason why the Moody diagram for friction factors isexpress in terms of dimensionless parameters.There has been a gradual decline in students’ grasp of course material, attributed to several factors,including: 1) easy access to
, indicating students' superficial engagement in the reflection activity.Recommendations for instructors are provided to improve students' understanding of thereflection activity and their level of engagement in the three dimensions of metacognition.I. IntroductionEnvironmental engineers work on natural systems to find solutions for human needs. Significantchanges occurring in the environment raise the need for environmental engineers to be well-equipped with skills such as critical thinking and lifelong learning. The United Nations [1]presented 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with the overarching objective ofenhancing human life by focusing on improving health, education, equality, and economicgrowth, along with preserving oceans and forests
those who did not answer correctly receiving aless difficult question. However, sometimes, when correct, a student interpreted a similarquestion as an indication they were incorrect the first time. We also describe differences in theways students negotiated uncertainty and how they engaged in the more extensive instructionaltools. This paper contributes both to how students conceptually engage with complex materialsscience content and how student-technology interactions can support or hinder learning.Keywords: conceptual learning, knowledge in pieces, adaptive learning module, think aloud,materials science.IntroductionEngineering educators are increasingly emphasizing the importance of students’ conceptuallearning [1]. At the same time, the
AI potentiallyposing an acute imminence of disruption to academic contexts, any policymaking or strategicintegration must recognize that students are both the key receptors of changes and the closestobservers that can flag both emerging opportunities and harms. The study thus has a time-sensitive charge of unveiling student beliefs while power is retained to guide the unfolding statusof AI.ContextThe context for the study is a freshman level design thinking course at a Tier 1 US university.The course is a required course and is offered in flipped format. All the course materials areshared with the students before the actual class through the learning management system andduring class time discussion and hands-on project work takes place. The
adopt more dynamic and participatory pedagogical approaches,particularly in technical and applied areas such as Industrial Engineering.Unlike traditional approaches, active methodologies emphasize student participation in thelearning process [1]. These include techniques such as problem-based learning, project-basedlearning, case studies, and flipped classroom pedagogy. These methods focus on developingtheoretical knowledge, practical skills, and competencies essential in the modern industrialenvironment.Active methodologies are particularly pertinent in teaching Information Systems withinIndustrial Engineering [2], [3]. Information Systems is a dynamic area that requires a theoreticalunderstanding and a practical and applied one. The speed
Instructional Processor,which was developed as a design example in an Advanced Digital Systems course [1], [2], hasbeen expanded to facilitate teaching of a Computer Architecture course. The system is modelledin VHDL and can be simulated using Xilinx design tools to demonstrate operation of theprocessor. A basic microcontroller is then created by adding memory-mapped I/O. The systemcan be synthesized and implemented in hardware on an FPGA. The processor can then beinterfaced with multiple peripheral devices to demonstrate a variety of applications.Several Computer Architecture courses exist which use hardware description language modelsand simulation, combined with FPGA implementation. Many of them are based on the open-source RISC-V system-on-chip
Deformation & Failure Mechanisms, Materials Science, Fracture Mechanics, Process-Structure-Property Relationships, Finite Element Stress Analysis Modeling & Failure Analysis, ASME BPV Code Sec VIII Div. 1 & 2, API 579/ASME FFS-1 Code, Materials Testing and Engineering Education. Professionally registered engineer in the State of Texas (PE). ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Teaching Effective Communication for TeamworkThis is a Work in Progress paper.IntroductionEngineering projects are often complex and require collaboration, making teamwork skillscritical for engineers. Employers want to hire students with strong professional skills, includingthe ability to work
. economy,playing a significant role in fostering sustainable economic growth and competitiveness [1], [2].This sector reinforces U.S. commercial innovation, offers high-wage employment, and is crucialin reducing the U.S. trade deficit [3], [4]. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, © American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 2024 ASEE Annual Conferencemanufacturing processes contribute to 35% of the U.S. economic growth and account for 60% ofU.S. foreign trade (exports) [5], [6]. Additionally, manufacturing operations are responsible for55% of U.S. patents and 70% of research and development spending [5]. As of 2022, themanufacturing sector employs over 12.5 million people
ease accreditation metric creationAbstractBackground: Research has shown that students from underserved groups are more likely topersist when they see the link between their coursework and improving society [1], [2].Simultaneously, human welfare and social impacts have become a part of accreditation protocolsfor engineering programs [2], [3], [4]. These two factors result in a need for faculty tostrategically create inclusive classrooms where students 1) are engaged in the field of studythrough application to their personal, social, and global knowledge contexts and 2) aredemonstrating proficiency on subject matter sufficient to demonstrate accreditation andprogrammatic requirements. In prior work the authors have shown strategies that exist
NORMAL READINGS %R FREQUENCY NORMAL RANGE R/X HIGHEST ELEMENT # ELEMENT DESCRIPTION TIME TIME 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CYCLES TIME R E R
Faculty of Engineering, University of ManitobaIntroductionIn her book Teaching to Transgress, bell hooks* shares insights into pedagogy informed by herown history as a student and a postsecondary instructor, as well as anticolonial, feminist, andcritical approaches to teaching and learning [1]. She highlights the importance of passion,relationality, and criticality to liberatory pedagogy that empowers students to engage deeply andagentively in the classroom. hooks’s ideas can be especially helpful as we consider how toeffectively engage undergraduate engineering students in courses that ask them to demonstratetheir understanding of engineering in a social context – an outcome that is often required foraccreditation purposes. As instructors
Engineering and has itswriting assignments embedded in a required engineering design course. Both the standalone andembedded course target upper-level students, both have had similar distributions of assignedgrades, and both are led by faculty who have authored well-known textbooks on technicalwriting [1, 2]. This work-in-progress paper presents the theoretical arguments of and the methods fortwo research questions grounded in the third student outcome of the Accreditation Board forEngineering and Technology (ABET): “an ability to communicate effectively with a range ofaudiences” [3]. The two research questions are as follows: 1. Which course strategy (standalone or embedded) provides more value to engineering students in their ability
the deployment of a specializedGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) tailored to the specific needs of multidisciplinary teams. Aframework for Gen AI literacy and deployment and an evaluation rubric to quantify and assess theefficacy of human-Gen AI collaboration are proposed. Figure 1 shows the flow of the work presented inthis paper. The following sections of this paper are organized as follows: Literature Review, TDCRModule, Gen AI Literacy Framework, Project Pal GPT, Human-AI Collaboration Evaluation Tool, andConclusion Figure 1: Flow of TDCR module and Gen AI integration in curriculum2. Literature review 2.1. Project-based learning (PBL) Project-based learning (PBL) has been shown to be effective in increasing
engineers was 8.5% [1] of the professionin the United States, Mechanical Engineering degrees rank the highest awarded at thebaccalaureate level, with only 17.6 % awarded to women [2]. One factor that aids recentgraduates in obtaining employment is experience, such as internships, co-ops, researchopportunities or participating in design and build engineering teams. Many of the design andbuild teams that engage mechanical engineering students are run through the Society ofAutomotive Engineers (SAE). These include eight collegiate design series SAE Aero Design,AutoDrive Challenge ll, Baja SAE, SAE Clean Snowmobile Challenge, Formula Hybrid,Formula SAE, Formula SAE Electric, and Mission Autono that provide undergraduate andgraduate students with pre
criteria and 226 articles made it to the nextphase. These 226 articles were then screened by full text and only six articles made it to the finalinclusion phase. The themes that emerged from the synthesis of the six articles are improvementof conceptual learning and critical thinking, use of technology for inclusive teaching practices, andenhancement of student interactions and engagement. The findings of this study are timely andrelevant as ABET is increasingly accrediting online engineering programs in the United States.Keywords: online engineering, teaching engineering online, online educationIntroductionOnline education is rapidly expanding due to its accessibility, scalability, and flexibility [1-2].Despite the numerous advantages of online
oflearning”. That is exactly what the author noticed among students indiscovering the use of this new tool.Overall, based on the author’s experiences, most students were curious to learnmore about this new tool. As a result, they were more engaged in writing codes.The author has warned students that scientific advances can both help and hurt andAI is no exception. Students highly welcomed this new tool and were eager to useit in a positive way in the other courses to enhance their learning.(1) IntroductionThere is a lot of buzz around AI and specifically, how ChatGPT6,7 is being used inthe academic field. Most notable comments include: “AI will take over the role ofan instructor” or “students will never write their own research papers or their
University with specialization in Construction Management. His research focus is in the area of contract administration on heavy civil projects. His teaching areas include 1. introduction to the built environment and construction management, 2. construction materials and methods, 3. construction equipment, 4. building construction cost estimating, 5. heavy civil construction cost estimating, 6. project planning, scheduling, and control, 7. temporary structures, and 8. contract changes and claims management. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2024 Teaching Project Planning and 4D Scheduling in a Project Planning and Scheduling Course
. It was created in 2013, through a National Science Foundation (NSF)grant that enabled faculty from different universities to attend six workshops where they startedto co-create material for an introductory infrastructure course. Since then, yearly workshops havebeen offered to introduce potential members to the community of practice, share materialsdeveloped over the years, assist new members in adapting existing material for their courses,network, and continue to develop new lessons. At this time, the community has developed 44peer-reviewed lessons that any faculty member can access and modify to fit their teaching needs.A survey was conducted in 2020 to determine CIT-E’s impact, as well as community members’interests [1]. Due to the large
, has gained attention from the computingeducation community over the last few years [1]. The focus in PI is active student engagementthrough discussion, involving students in the answering and discussion of multiple-choicequestions. This is typically accomplished by obtaining real-time student feedback through theuse of student response systems in class as the students learn the topic.SOLID is an acronym that denotes five basic principles widely used in designing software builton the .NET platform. S stands for SRP (Single Responsibility Principle), O for OCP (OpenClosed Principle) L for LSP (Liskov Substitution Principle), I for ISP (Interface SegregationPrinciple) D for DI (Dependency Inversion Principle). The main purpose of these
team can result inmore creative and innovative ideas. Finally, a range of backgrounds can increase the team’sability to understand and empathize with different customers and stakeholders. Allowing for aculture of inclusion strengthens the output of a group and maximizes the benefits of a diverseteam [1-2]. It is therefore critical for engineers to understand how to work with others and giveand accept criticism in a way that is respectful and builds up the team rather than alienatingmembers.During the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic, many teachers switched to online education, and themethods that faculty use now in and in the future will and should change because of thisexperience [3]. The lessons learned in online education cannot be understated. While
themselves multiple-choice with a list of potential justifications to choose from(these are called Two-Tier MCQs or TT-MCQs [1]).We propose JMCQ (Justified MCQ), a TT-MCQ assessment with an added twist to gain insight:students must additionally explain why wrong options in the MCQ are wrong by selecting (fromchoices) a short explanation. We reason that a single justification is also a single piece of data andperhaps a single point of failure (for the student) whereas multiple justification options forpotential wrong answers might help build a more complete picture of a student’s conceptualunderstanding. Because the two tiers provide two scores, a correctness score and a justificationscore, we seek to understand the degree to which one can quantify
, Pedagogies for Engagement, Mixed-Methods Research, Entrepreneurship, Intrapreneurship, Educational Impact, Project-BasedLearning, Innovation Management1 IntroductionIn an era where engineering increasingly intersects with modern society’s economic andsocial foundations, the role of the engineer is rapidly evolving. No longer limited to technicalanalytical prowess, practical ingenuity, and advanced technical skills – today’s engineers arecalled to be highly creative, capable of invention, innovation and thinking outside of the box.They should be equipped with business and management acumen and be capable ofdynamism, agility, resilience, and flexibility [1]. These are all qualities that resonate withbeing innovative and entrepreneurial; as such
traditional lecture style that is used in most engineering courses has several difficulties thataffect the processes of teaching and learning. Although many students can be efficiently taught asignificant amount of knowledge using this method, its one-way nature encourages passive andsuperficial learning and does not stimulate students' motivation, confidence, or excitement. As aresult, graduates of traditional lecture models frequently lack the fundamental abilities neededfor success in the workplace [1], [2]. The goal of engineering education research is to pinpointthe information and abilities that aspiring engineers must gain both in the classroom and in theircareer.Students' learning and engagement in a classroom environment may be enhanced by
University Greensboro, NC USAChapter 1: Introduction1.1 Background In the United States, over one in four adults deal with some type of disability, includingissues with mobility, cognition, hearing, vision, or other limitations to their self-care. The Centerfor Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that approximately 27% of all adults in theUnited States are dealing with some sort of disability, which includes issues with mobility,cognition, hearing, vision, and self-care [1]. One barrier to independent living faced by peoplewith disabilities is the struggle to complete activities of daily living (ADL). Those dealing withissues of physical limitations are sometimes unable to complete ADLs without
record the initial state at the start of the departmenttransformation.This paper analyzes faculty responses collected across the college of engineering to identify howfaculty knowledge and attitudes differ and which departments we may learn from during ourtransformation process.IntroductionMany of our students encounter and are constrained by normative social constructions andsystems of oppression of gender, race, and socio-economic class. They are aware that manydepartments are white-, straight-, and male-centered, controlling who is welcome, or evenpermitted entry. As described in the literature [1] [2][3][4], our students experience tensionsbetween engineering contexts and their gender, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, andsocioeconomic
ethical considerations. The findings suggest that thoughtful incorporation of bothsustainability and automation boosts productivity and economic benefits and leads toenvironmentally and socially responsible manufacturing. This paper is intended for academicsand researchers interested in the future directions of sustainable manufacturing in the era ofIndustry 4.0.IntroductionIndustry 4.0 signifies a substantial revolution in manufacturing, where cutting-edge technologymaximizes efficiency while reducing resource usage. Industry 4.0 is a German initiativeintegrating production with information technology [1]. The contemporary industrial revolutionutilizes sophisticated digital technologies, for example, artificial intelligence (AI), big
thesehave changed over time. This information will help librarians to better support MET students andfaculty by allowing for targeted information literacy instruction and outreach.IntroductionInformation behavior is a general term that serves as an umbrella for describing the many waysthat people interact with information including information seeking, information use, andinformation creation, among others [1]. Bates also explains that the concept of informationbehavior includes, but goes beyond, information literacy which is more narrowly focused on“finding and effectively evaluating desired information”. Instead, information behaviorresearchers have developed a wide range of theories and models to better understand the ways inwhich people
engineering years ago [1].According to Pew Research Center, employment statistics for STEM job clusters (definedSTEM jobs specific to the applicable industry), Caucasians, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanicsrepresent 67%, 13%, 9%, and 8% respectively of STEM jobs—Caucasians and Asians areoverrepresented in engineering and architect jobs at 71% and 13%, respectively—Blacks andHispanics are underrepresented at 5%, and 9% respectively [2]. The increase of women inengineering academia or the workplace has been slow to non-existent over decades. In a surveyposted by the U.S. Census Bureau, decennial census 1970-2000 and American CommunitySurvey public use microdata 2010 & 2021 reported a slow incline of female representation inengineering in the workplace
are motivated, persist through their programs, and learnengineering material [1]- [3] which has led to calls for supporting students’ engineering identitiesalongside traditionally taught competences [4]-[8]. The degree to which students feel recognizedor seen as the “kind of person” who can do engineering has been delineated as the mostimportant element in the development of an engineering identity [9], [10]. An understanding ofrecognition is critical for designing high-impact curricular practices that support identitydevelopment and in guiding program culture that includes students in the community ofengineering. Researchers have explored if students believe others see them as engineers andemphasized the importance of these beliefs [11], [12