Competencies: A Case Study” Robert Long Altaf A. Memon LiFang ShihAbstractAt Excelsior College, one particularly unique dimension of student assessment is the IntegratedTechnology Assessment (ITA). This portfolio-based assessment method is a capstone experiencefor Engineering Technology students, documenting their ability to integrate knowledge fromvarious technical and general education areas and apply it in a meaningful way.The on-line learning environment facilitates a learner-centered approach to learning, with thelearner as an active participant in the learning process. The approach requires that
Furterer is a Professor of Practice in the Integrated Systems Engineering Department, within the College of Engineering at The Ohio State University. She is also Lead Faculty in the Engineering Tech- nology program across the regional campuses. She has applied Lean Six Sigma, Systems Engineering, and Engineering Management tools in healthcare and other service industries. She previously managed the Enterprise Performance Excellence center in a healthcare system. Dr. Furterer received her Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering with a specialization in Quality Engineering from the University of Central Florida in 2004. She received an MBA from Xavier University, and a Bachelor and Master of Science in Industrial and Systems
the institution’s liberal arts core curriculum willbe presented, along with the findings from building on these successes.1 Introduction and MotivationIn response to a mandate from the institution’s regional accreditation body, the University ofDetroit Mercy (UDM) is in the process of implementing a new general education core, consistingof student learning outcomes that are based on the cognitive levels in Bloom’s taxonomy ratherthan lists of courses in various disciplinary areas. The courses that are being designed or adaptedto satisfy these outcomes must include an assessment component that will enable the institution toevaluate the effectiveness of this core curriculum. Assessment processes in programs separatelyaccredited by ABET or
2006-2146: INNOVATIVE SIMULATION-BASED ONLINE SYSTEM FORLEARNING ENGINEERING AND TRAINING SAILORS’ TECHNICAL SKILLSYakov Cherner, ATeL, LLC Dr. Yakov E. Cherner, a Founder and President of ATEL, LLC, combines 20+ years of research and teaching practice with extensive experience in writing curricula and developing educational software. He is the author of an innovative concept of multi-layered simulation-based conceptual teaching of science and technology. This instructional approach uses real-world objects, processes and learning situations that are familiar to students as the context for virtual science and technology investigations. To facilitate this methodology for corporate and military
Session XXXX Professional Development for Community College Teachers: An Online Graduate Certificate Program in Community College Teaching Theodore J. Branoff, Colleen A. Wiessner, and Duane Akroyd North Carolina State UniversityAbstractThe departments of Adult and Community College Education (ACCE) and Mathematics, Scienceand Technology Education (MSTE) within the College of Education at North Carolina StateUniversity developed a prototype graduate certificate program in Community College Teaching.The program focuses on developing the knowledge and skills
latter group are usually assigned this course because it is an integral part of theuniversity’s engineering curriculum and the schools have no formal Industrial Engineering programor faculty to teach the course.A required course in Engineering Economics emphasizes the importance of this subject in theoverall undergraduate education of engineering and engineering technology students. This priorityin turn necessitates the need to ensure the course offered provides a complete and comprehensivecovering of all the material essential to a quality first course in Engineering Economics. Because oftheir extensive education, Industrial Engineering faculty teaching the course are rather ambitious intheir expectations of what can and needs to be covered in
curriculum, proved challenging butattainable given the strong administrative support and leadership for this program, and UTEP’sdesire to provide innovative undergraduate engineering education that leads toward increasedretention and advancing opportunities for serving underrepresented populations.BackgroundLeadership Engineering (LE) is defined as an emerging engineering sub-field that integratesdisciplinary knowledge and practice with communication, business, and leadership skills. Thisinnovative approach to engineering has emerged as a direct result of industry’s immediate andlong-term need for a new kind of engineer: one with a new skill set to work in complex 21st
environment is difficult to manage and easy to cause chaos and confusion.E. Safety issuesSafety is always an important and sensitive issue that arises in the discussion of travel and the realizationof a global project9. Social stability, contagious deceases and travel safety in the abroad country must beconsidered before any international program can take place.VI. Efforts to build a sustainable global learning environmentA lot of universities are working hard to build a sustainable global learning environment for theengineering programs. These efforts are taken in the following seven directions.A. Curriculum changeSome universities are integrating global issues into all years of a student’s educational experience40.Global preparation is moved beyond
1970 establishment, the program has experienced significant restructuring, including amajor 2008 overhaul in focus and curriculum, leading to a name change to Engineering Studies[3]. The foundational vision and motivation remain. The curriculum for the major in EngineeringStudies consists of fundamental courses in math, science, and engineering sciences – selected byeach student from an approved list – as well as considerable coursework in the traditional liberalarts. The framework for students to integrate all these courses is provided by a three-courserequired core curriculum in Engineering Studies: Engineering Economics and Management;Engineering & Public Policy; and Engineering and Society [4].Our Engineering Studies degree program [4
," Learning and instruction, vol. 35, pp. 94–103, 2015.[30] J. Clarke and C. Dede, "Design for scalability: A case study of the River City curriculum," Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 353–365, 2009.[31] R. E. Stake, The art of case study research. sage, 1995.[32] H. Gaya and E. Smith, "Developing a qualitative single case study in the strategic management realm: An appropriate research design," International Journal of Business Management and Economic Research, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 529–538, 2016.[33] N. Siggelkow, "Persuasion With Case Studies," Academy of Management Journal, vol. 50, pp. 20–24, Feb. 2007, doi: 10.5465/AMJ.2007.24160882.[34] A. B. Starman, "The case study as a type of qualitative
extremes of depth versus breadth. AeroelasticityFigure 2: Compression of the Fluids/Aerodynamics curriculum demands mathematical and numerical insights and delving into basic theory.Aircraft Design, as the final course in the Capstone design track, spends little time on theory butapplies results from high speed aerodynamics. Thus AE3xxx must serve to integrate theknowledge gained from the entire fluid dynamics sequence, and prepare students to apply bothdepth and breadth. The basic content of AE3021 is distilled from the content of over
some institutions, thisauthor found that no up-to-date text – one that draws upon very recent work by theAdvanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, Organization forEconomic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Nuclear Energy Agency and others –is available. Therefore, a curriculum that draws upon recent works by these programsand agencies, using their publications in lieu of a textbook, was prepared. An extensivebibliography of these papers and reports is presented.Objectives and Approach Page 12.99.2The course objective was conveyed to the students via the following text, which appearedon one of the first slides presented: Many
remediation and enhanced oil recovery. Page 24.759.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2014 Innovative Teaching of Product Design and Development in an Engineering Management Master ProgramAbstract: Engineering Management is a discipline that is not rigidly defined and theMaster Programs attract students with different undergraduate disciplines. Studentsare attracted towards Engineering Management only at the Masters’ level and it isdifficult to incorporate all topics in the Masters’ curriculum. Therefore a choice has tobe made. Some programs give more emphasis for Product
”, or “ I can’t wait to get into fluid mechanics!” (a first semester sophomore course inour curriculum) bring strong affirmation of this approach to the first-year engineering course. Page 24.311.8Observations, Assessment and ConclusionsAs the course has evolved over the nine years I have taught it, I have moved from a more open-ended project format to one where the projects have a “tighter” design window. For example, apast Team Challenge requiring pH control in a mixing tank involved students assembling “fromscratch” a completely automated systems from an assortment of disconnected pipes, pumps, andtanks (along with their LEGO NXT and Vernier
formats for the first year experience than do the grads. The table showsthat the new format results in faster engagement with a PhD research topic, advisorconversations, integration into lab groups, and conversations with the PhD committees.We conclude that the new format fruitfully addresses the prior concerns of both ourfaculty and graduate students.Spring proposition: An original or an echo ? Graduate students are uniformly supported by outside grants. According, foreach advisor topic offered to new students in our late fall student-advisor selectionprocess, a funded proposal already exists. Whether the spring proposition courseproduces a novel proposal is suspect, but the defining purpose of spring is for the studentto take ownership
enterprises in this agile paradigm and theskill and training our educational institutes are providing. The virtual learning models described in this paper,and the integration of engineering, information systems and communication technology in a classroom settingwill assist in bridging these gaps.Background of Agile Manufacturing and Virtual Enterprises Both manufacturing and service organizations are continually rethinking how they function as theystrive to compete successfidly in today’s global, rapidly changing business environment. In this environment anew business paradigm known as agility is emerging. The adaptation of agility principles is an integral part ofthe strategic relationships between the academia, government and industry. The
survey,instructors viewed themselves as a guide or facilitator, bringing students through the textbookmaterial in a “rational way” and providing alternate explanations to the text. Others attempt togive a “big picture” view, tying various elements of the course (and the curriculum) together into Page 22.788.13a cohesive whole. For some, the role shifts as needed, from mentor to partner to coach dependingon the student and the situation. Some express the need for them to make the topic interestingand accessible, and to develop new examples and homework problems. The role as an evaluatorwas
AC 2010-680: IDENTIFYING ENGINEERING INTEREST AND POTENTIAL INMIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS: CONSTRUCTING AND VALIDATING ANINSTRUMENTMichele Strutz, Purdue University Michele L. Strutz is a 2009 NSF Graduate Research Fellow and a doctoral student in Engineering Education, with a secondary doctoral focus in Gifted and Talented Education, at Purdue University. Michele's research interests include stEm talent development and identification. Prior to completing her Masters Degrees in Gifted and Talented Education and in Curriculum and Instruction, Michele worked as an engineer for 13 years in Laser Jet Printer marketing at Hewlett Packard Co., computer systems design at Arthur Andersen & Co
Annual Conference Proceedings, Session 3630.19. Wankat, P. C., Oreovicz, F. S., & Delgass, W.N., (1998). Integrating soft criteria into the ChE curriculum. ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Session 2613. Page 8.1181.9 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2003, American Society for Engineering EducationSHELIA K. BARNETT is an Assistant Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering in the Department ofMechanical and Industrial Engineering at Mercer University in Macon, Georgia. She currently coordinates the workmethods
selected from the various sectorsbased on an analysis of the survey results. Documentation of the education and researchrequirements of the various sectors was finalized, and key partners were identified for theinitiative. Representatives from Mapúa visited USC in July 2000 to view the state ofenvironmental education and research at USC. Coupled with results from the Philippine surveyand workshop, a curriculum was designed to provide a state of the art graduate environmentalengineering program at Mapúa. Currently, the proposed program is awaiting approval by thePhilippine Commission on Higher Education (CHED).IntroductionMapúa Institute of Technology is a technological school located in Manila, Philippines. It offersten undergraduate engineering
theory.Dr. Owe G. Petersen, Milwaukee School of Engineering Dr. Petersen is Assistant VP of Institutional Research and Assessment, Professor Emeritus and former Department Chair of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE). He is a former Member Technical Staff at AT&T Bell Laboratories and received his Ph.D. de- gree from the University of Pennsylvania in 1971. His technical work ranges over topics such as Optical Data Links, Integrated Circuit Technology, RF semiconductor components, and semiconductor compo- nent reliable. He is a Senior Member of the IEEE and an ABET EAC program evaluator in Electrical Engineering
theimportance of engineering ethics. Educators have begun incorporating engineering ethics incurricula in a variety of formats: as a component in introductory or capstone courses, a centralelement in stand-alone courses, and/or through deliberate integration across curriculum [1], [2].The main approaches in teaching of ethics continue to use case studies or case-based discussionssupplemented by moral theory and/or professional codes of ethics. Service learning is anotherapproach that has increasingly been used and reported as an effective pedagogical strategy ininstruction of engineering ethics [3]-[5]. In the U.S., the main driver in incorporating ethics inengineering curriculum was the changes in ABET engineering criteria requirements on
on Education, 53(1).[16] WGBH Educational Foundation. (2005). Extraordinary women engineers final report. Reston,VA: American Society of Civil Engineers.[17] Aglan, H. & Firasat Ali, S. (1996). Hands-On Experiences: An Integral Part of Engineering Curriculum Reform. Journal of Engineering Education, 85(4), 327-330.[18] Xie, Y. & Schauman, K. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Harvard University Press.[19] Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411–427.
and conducted a workshop titled ”Learning Machines: Computation, Ethics,and Policy”, where we designed a curriculum to provide an introduction to autonomous robotsand machine learning, with a special focus on their integration in human-robot teams. It isstructured as an immersive 3-day workshop, fostering understanding through hands-on activities,group discussions, and case studies. The course targeted professional adults, specifically USAFleaders and decision makers, who are keen to utilize AI in their workplace. We focus not only onthe technical, but also the ethical, and policy aspects of AI presented through the context ofautonomous robots and human-robot teaming.Design PrinciplesAt the core of our Learning Machines curriculum are three
graduation rate is only 50%, withhalf of these students leaving engineering after the first year. Many of these students lack first-hand knowledge of the wonderfully creative and diverse types of work in which engineers areengaged. The idea is to introduce students to a wide variety of practicing engineers who are verypassionate about and fulfilled in their work – giving the students more reasons why they shouldstick it out early on in the engineering major when the time commitment to their studies issignificant and the first year curriculum is less engineering courses and more math, chemistry,physics and general education courses. As an additional note, we also simultaneously instituted acollege-wide mentoring program in which all of our beginning
problem solving and team work skills of the students, and alsoenhanced student understanding of societal impacts/contemporary issues. Feedback onthe projects from students, the City of Columbus, and FLOW were all very favorable.1. IntroductionIt is recognized that engineering education today must provide both a sound grounding inengineering fundamentals as well as detailed knowledge of the practical aspects ofengineering design and implementation [1, 2]. One way to encourage this shift fromsimple “analysis” to “synthesis” and “evaluation”, is to incorporate real-world problemsin the curriculum, provide the opportunity for students to work in teams, and nurturestudents’ ability to analyze results and integrate science with practical knowledge.The
, if not expertise in, each of the four mechatroniccomponents.The course described in this paper, MSE 5183 Mechatronic Systems I at Lawrence Tech, servesas an entry-level graduate course for students enrolled in the Lawrence Tech Master of Sciencein Mechatronic Systems Engineering (MSMSE) program as well as a technical elective forundergraduate students in Mechanical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, and BiomedicalEngineering. For many undergraduate and graduate students, this course serves as a firstexperience with the integration of sensors, actuators, and microcontrollers. Control theory is notintroduced but is instead offered in subsequent courses.Mechatronic Design ProjectBefore discussing course modifications and assessment, the
, a single kit was developed to be purchasedby students upon entering the ME major, with all the components needed for subsequent requiredcourses. Meanwhile, an online repository with sample code, descriptions of components, andtutorials was compiled [4]. This online repository can enable cross-curricular learning, allowingstudents to link knowledge from different courses. Faculty teaching ME courses can use thesesources as supplements for their teaching material—easily implementing hands-on assignmentsthat reinforce theoretical concepts in the course. We formally assessed the use of these kits andonline repository using a pre-post semester survey of students. To capture how the kits impactstudent learning objectives across the curriculum
willdefine a plan to adjust the faculty continuous improvement process based on the results.Future workFuture work will focus on supporting collaborative reflection (strategy #2) efforts in eachacademic department and also in the development of a rubric for faculty portfolio review(strategy #3) as well as the development of professional development programs aligned withstandards 9 and 10 of the CDIO framework.References [1] A. Burbano, "Integrated Curriculum Design for an Industrial Engineering Program in Latin America," in American Society for Engineering Education ASEE, New Orleans, 2016.[2] H. Mantusovich, M. Paretti, L. D. McNair and C. Hixson, "Faculty motivation: A gateway to transforming engineering education.," Journal of Engineering
. Curriculum designtheory discusses the crucial role of developing an assessment that is capable of proposing where studentsare in the developmental trajectory of the object of learning (what needs to be learned) [18]–[20].Accordingly, we aimed to use systems thinking activity that made it possible to capture studentperspectives and provide a method of evaluation for researchers and educators; in that way, we will knowwhere the students are in the systems thinking developmental trajectory, and it will allow us to designeffective instructional interventions that move them forward in this trajectory. For the first phase of ourresearch, we utilized the systems thinking assessment tool from a peer-reviewed paper [7] to help identifythe areas of