design costs wereroutinely reaching the tens of millions of dollars 3. Given these constraints, how can we aseducators hope to provide a meaningful SoC design experience in a 10-week quarter?This paper attempts to answer that question by detailing a 1-quarter SoC design course I pilotedin Spring quarter 2015, CPE 439 Real Time Embedded Systems. As discussed in EnablingTechnology, I based the course around a new type of technology called a Programmable SoC(PSoC). PSoCs abstract away many of the low-level design decisions and development work thatgoes into a traditional SoC bring-up, allowing students to focus on developing custom IP,connecting it to the processor through an industry standard interconnect bus, and writing driversoftware to control
achieve prescribed learning outcomes. A significant aspect ofeach of these three elements relies on interactions between the instructor and the students sopedagogies or technologies that significantly modify the nature and extent of interactions canhave effects on the model. Table 1 illustrates methods for coding student behaviors that areindicative of the three elements of the model. Table 1 Community of Inquiry Coding Template Elements Categories Indicators (example) Cognitive Presence Triggering Event Sense of puzzlement Q4, Q5 Exploration Information exchange
engineering curriculum complete the program2. At ouruniversity, we typically lose 40% of our electrical and computer engineering students during thefirst two years of their undergraduate engineering program. The attrition rate continues to trenddownward during the 3rd year of their engineering program. Figure 1 shows a snapshot of thepersistence and graduate rates of the ECE undergraduate program at our university for the 2014-2015 academic year. Graduation rates reflect the number of students who graduated each year asa percentage of the original entering cohort; and the persistence rates reflect the number ofstudents who graduated and/or enrolled each semester as a percentage of the original enteringcohort. Even though Figure 1 captures the
transitioning from a two-year to a four-year institution. In general, the top three reasonsstudents leave an engineering-based discipline are: (1) a perceived lack of belonging in theprogram, (2) issues related to difficulty of curriculum and (3) poor teaching or advising.1 Theseissues are often exacerbated in the transfer process as transfer students adjust to their newacademic environment and begin taking advanced engineering courses.2Engineering transfer students typically transfer from a community college or state college to theuniversity level in the third year of the program. Nationally, and among all disciplines, only 42%of transfer students go on to complete a bachelor’s degree. For STEM transfer students with anassociate’s degree, only 32% go
head and a two piecetop. Figure 1 shows student built examples. Because the intent of the labs is not to traintechnicians but rather to train engineering students in the connection between design andmanufacturing, each lab has an engineering theme in addition to the hands-on training.The birdhouse project focuses on standard print structure with a six page print package includingan assembly drawing, bill of materials, component level drawings, and standard materialcontrolled dimensions and tolerances. The example is given for rapid product developmentthrough standard parts and drawing revisions. The stop focuses on weld dimensioning. Thehammer head focuses on geometric dimensioning and tolerance (GD&T). The concept ofdeveloping
) theoretical understanding and (ii) creativity andinnovation 1, 2, 3. Industry evolution has proved that the need for well-prepared engineers withgood practical skills is constantly increasing. A study of the Royal Academy of Engineering,“Educating Engineers for the 21th Century”, reported that industry seeks for engineeringgraduates who have practical experience of real industrial environments3.As the complexity of microelectronic systems is steadily increasing, universities must updatetheir curriculum to cope with the increased demands of the industry. Further, the technicalcurriculum is in a constant state of flux due to the rapid and continual increases in the complexityand amount of knowledge students must assimilate. New technologies and tools
theAdvanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) rule, setting forth an ambitious goal for all passenger cars,trucks, and SUVs sold in the state to be zero-emission vehicles by 2035. Continuing its decades-long role as a leader in environmental regulation, California paved the way for the rest of thenation to embrace such standards, with an additional twelve states adopting ACC II to date.Legislative and regulatory enthusiasm for electric vehicles reaches far beyond CARB’s rule asthe Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) allocated over $7.5billion to EV infrastructure and another $43 billion to projects ranging from batterymanufacturing to workforce transition for auto workers[1]. However, the goals set out by ACC IIwill require
“and that's why we’re emphasizing math and science. That's why we’re emphasizingteaching girls math and science.” This was followed by the White House creation of theSTEM Master Teacher Corp as a new initiative in July 2012. However, it is still not wellunderstood exactly what factors affect persistence in undergraduate STEM majors andwhere the focus should be placed in order to improve persistence. There is a need forfurther research to help shape policies directed at improving the participation of womenin STEM undergraduate studies.NSF-20122 data for the 2009 high school graduating class showed that women are nowwell represented in advanced math and science high school courses. Table 1 presents thepercentage of male and female students that
details, student blogs, and information on financing their education.Marketing the ProgramEffectively spreading the word about your program to a large audience of prospective students isnot the easiest task to accomplish on traditionally limited recruiting budgets. Thus, defining yourapplicant pool and determining the most cost-effective way to reach these students are critical.When considering the four professional master’s programs, the applicant pools varysignificantly. As shown in Figure 1, the Structural Engineering M.Eng. program draws studentswith very focused backgrounds, traditionally in civil, structural, or architectural engineering.Whereas the Healthcare Systems Engineering and Energy Systems Engineering programs recruitstudents
proactively support students versus optional support designed todevelop a student’s self-awareness. Our findings suggest that career service professionals usetheir beliefs about students as a basis for decisions on how to support students. Implications ofour study include considerations for how we inform students regarding knowledge and skillsassociated with successfully obtaining a first job post-undergraduate degree and how thoseknowledge and skills may be different from ones necessary to obtain an engineering degree.IntroductionA diverse and highly skilled engineering workforce is needed to address today’s grandchallenges involving sustainability, medicine, information technology, and learning.1 Yet manysmart, capable engineering graduates leave
available through the university and customized using Google Script. The tool’sfeatures were incorporated to address the key barriers to remote collaboration and aligns withbest practices in virtual teams.17 Two prior empirical studies support the effectiveness of theintervention (scaffolds) by empirically showing that a combination of the collaboration tool andembedded scaffolds have significant impact on teamwork skill development for engineeringstudents.18 We extend this study by exploring qualitatively how the scaffolds supportedcollaborative work and what elements of the intervention made an impact to the differentprocesses that teams go through when working in projects. Figure 1: Example of a Team Site with Embedded
research from academic medicine intoengineering education, while retaining the core concept of bringing ‘theoretical knowledge andexperimental breakthrough to practice.’IntroductionThe global society we live in presents today’s engineer with many complex challenges toresolve, including the following infrastructure concerns: Availability of Clean Water - Water related diseases affect more than 1.5 billion people every year, and nearly 1 million people die each year from water, sanitation, and hygiene related disease.1 In lower and middle income countries (LMICs) one-third of the healthcare facilities lack a safe water source.1 A review of rural water system sustainability in eight countries in Africa, South Asia, and
and testing the experience environment models, experience building tools thatsupport defining effective learning scenarios, learner interactions and events, and learningassessment tools to measure the efficacy of the experience. The authors describe the capabilitiesof the tools and provide an evaluation of their capabilities based on the update of an existingexperience, the development of new educational experiences, and the application to learningassessment in a class environment.1 introductionSystems engineering and technical leadership (SETL) is a multidisciplinary practice that is asmuch an art as a science. While a traditional model of education can teach the fundamental bodyof knowledge, it is not until this knowledge is put into
reformation in general, and to the use of modern pedagogicalskills in particular. The paper also argues that any meaningful change in Region’s classroompractices today (dominated by traditional lecture-based methods) must be mandated andsupported by the university administration. What is necessary to create a change, is for thedepartment or college, to have a comprehensive and integrated set of components: clearlyarticulated expectations, opportunities for faculty to learn about new pedagogies, and anequitable reward system.Introduction“To teach is to engage students in learning.” This quote, from Education for Judgment byChristenson et al, (1) captures the meaning of the art and practice of pedagogies ofengagement. The theme advocated here is that
reformation in general, and to the use of modern pedagogicalskills in particular. The paper also argues that any meaningful change in Region’s classroompractices today (dominated by traditional lecture-based methods) must be mandated andsupported by the university administration. What is necessary to create a change, is for thedepartment or college, to have a comprehensive and integrated set of components: clearlyarticulated expectations, opportunities for faculty to learn about new pedagogies, and anequitable reward system.Introduction“To teach is to engage students in learning.” This quote, from Education for Judgment byChristenson et al, (1) captures the meaning of the art and practice of pedagogies ofengagement. The theme advocated here is that
ideas of design concepts, i.e., getting inputs from team members, leads to unique concepts that are not generated individual.7Few researchers have surveyed a large number of inventors and innovative companies tounderstand innovation. For example, Walsh and Nagaoka have considered the question “Whoinvents?” by surveying about 1900 Japanese and American innovators identified from theirpatents.8 Arora, Cohen, and Walsh have recently conducted a survey of American companies toidentify the sources of innovation (e.g., supplier, customer, internal lab, startups, etc.); they alsostudy whether patents have played a role in the innovation.92.2 Teaching innovationUniversity programs that teach innovation can be categorized as follows:1. Courses
academics withvocational coursework. The VTCs that have partnered with ASCEND specialize inenvironmental education and green careers workforce training. They also support service-basedlearning opportunities with local employers through the Santa Cruz County Regional OccupationProgram (ROP). ROP centers, such as the Natural Bridges Green Career center, receive fundingfrom the California Department of Education for programs that include career and workforcepreparation for high school students and adults, preparation for advanced workforce developmentand training, and upgrading of existing vocational skills. Given the focus of these particularVTCs on “green careers” they are encouraged by California Governor Brown’s recent (2013)signature on SB X 1-2
ethics and/or engineering student responses to issues of humanitarian or socialjustice nature to inform interview question and survey item design. Finally, this work contributesto the discourse of engineering ethics by developing and applying an ethical framework from thewider literature that has not received much attention in engineering ethics to date.1. IntroductionThis work explores engineering ethics in a “developing world” context. There are many ethicalframeworks with which to examine the involvement of engineers from industrialized countries inprojects directed at the “developing world” (e.g., see the Ethics of International Engagement andService-Learning Project [1]). The framework chosen for this study is care ethics, a.k.a., ethic(s
classroom practices today (dominated by traditionallecture-based methods) must be mandated and supported by the university administration. Whatis necessary to create a change, is, to have a comprehensive and integrated set of components:clearly articulated expectations, opportunities for faculty to learn about new pedagogies, and anequitable reward system.Introduction“To teach is to engage students in learning.” This quote, from Education for Judgment byChristenson et al, (1) captures the meaning of the art and practice of pedagogies of engagement.The theme advocated here is that student involvement is an essential aspect of meaningfullearning. Also, engaging students in learning is principally the responsibility of the instructor,who should become
and humanities complemented the work in class. Table III presentsthe topics of the course. Table I. Topics for the course “Public Policy in Electrical Engineering” Outline Contact Hours Overview of legal concepts 1 Sustainability 6 Government regulation 4 Rates 4 Public Policy (state and federal) 4 Electric Energy 3 Markets
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Award 2013. Dr. Larkin can be reached at tlarkin@american.edu. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Writing in STEM: A Synthesis of Two Adaptive ApproachesAbstractProviding students with opportunities to improve their written and oral communication abilitiescan be an effective way to elicit student learning. ABET Criterion 3 speaks directly to theimportance of this skillset through Student Outcome g which states “an ability to communicateeffectively (3g1 orally, 3g2, written) .” 1 There are a number of ways to include this skillsetwithin the assessment component of a typical STEM classroom. With this ABET studentlearning outcome as a backdrop, this paper
study to focus on chapter activities in the collegiate demographic. Participants in thisstudy, which utilized surveys and existing NSBE data, included student chapter leaders as well asadvisors (minority engineering program directors, engineering college faculty). Four majorquestions guided the survey design: 1. What are the characteristics of each chapter? 2. What activities do the chapters engage in, by type? 3. What assessment methods do the chapters employ to track success? 4. What outcomes are the chapters achieving, by type?The outcomes of interest directly align with NSBE’s 2025 strategic goal to graduate 10,000black engineers annually and include GPA, engineering program retention, graduation rate
educational outcomes.IntroductionPedagogical strategies have undergone significant evolution in recent years, continually seekingto enhance student well-being and optimize learning experiences [1], [2], [3]. Traditionalassessment methods, however, remain a major source of stress and anxiety for students,negatively impacting both their academic performance and overall mental health [4]. Theseconventional evaluation practices often involve tests, quizzes, and assignments that areannounced in advance, giving students time to prepare. However, this structure has beencriticized for failing to measure the extent of student learning [5]. Factors such as poor timemanagement skills and the pressure to compete with classmates exacerbate these issues, leadingto
. MR instruction was able to facilitate an interactive,collaborative, problem-based approach to learning in courses. Implications for Engineeringeducation, grounded in the original literature-based theory, are described.Key words: mixed reality, virtual reality, holograms, digital twins, active learning, educationaltechnology, remote learning, chemical engineering, electrical engineering, computer science,laboratory equipment, laboratory instruction, formative assessment.1. IntroductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, when remote instruction was mandated by institutions of highereducation, laboratory experiences, which are traditionally a practical, in-person activity, wereoffered virtually. There were many ways in which different institutions
in the United States is expected to yield benefits to society, justifying theinvestment of public funds. Finkelstein et al. [1] describe this as a “unique American tradition[of] service and engagement with the greater society.” The scholarship of engagement in Boyer’smodel [2] aligns with this mission. Community engagement can take a variety of forms,including integration into classroom teaching (e.g., service-learning), mentoring co-curricularactivities (e.g., learning through service), outreach (often into K-12 schools and via publicinformation), and research. Community engaged research (CER) is defined as “the collaborativegeneration, refinement, conservation, and exchange of reciprocally beneficial and societallyrelevant knowledge that
diversity, innovation, and the long-term sustainability of STEM fields. Despitegradual progress, mechanical engineering continues to be one of the most male-dominateddisciplines, with women comprising only 8.8% of professionals in the field [1]. This genderdisparity begins early in the educational pipeline, where women account for just 18% of first-year engineering students in the United States, despite demonstrating comparable orsuperior performance in mathematics and science compared to their male peers [2].Two primary factors influence female participation in engineering: recruitment andretention. Recruitment challenges stem from societal stereotypes, limited early exposure toengineering careers, and fewer opportunities for hands-on STEM
annotatedbibliography and a peer-reviewed draft, resulted in improved student ability to obtain evidence,as well as cite and support their claims. Ultimately, students developed skills in informationliteracy that supported the engineering outcomes associated with ethics and professionalresponsibility.IntroductionAssessment provides programs a way to evaluate student learning and develop methods forcontinuous improvement.1 Universities and programs present their interpretation of data toaccreditation agencies. Accreditation agencies are intermediate organizations, which helpprovide the public with assurance that universities and programs are accountable for providingstudents with a quality education. Within the United States, colleges and universities
developmental spaces our students share. Wedo this by supporting academic foundations in engineering, promoting community responsibility,and teaching principles of leadership. Our programming model includes cohort-style engineeringcoursework, bi-weekly course reviews, and a collaborative service-learning project in whichsecond-year students are project managers and first-year students are team members.The Engineering Leadership Community started as a retention strategy in 2009. Students who donot integrate socially and academically into their institution of higher learning are more likely todepart from college before earning a degree (1). In fact, student engagement can actuallycompensate for academic under preparedness, giving students the opportunity
kinds, the fraction of respondents who are female isabout 10% and quite stable across the range from 18 to 45. Among high-school students Page 26.1738.3the fraction of girls with an explicit interest in IT is over 30%, see Figure 1. This findingimplies that women, who chose IT as a specialty at the University stay in the profession.However, although many girls demonstrate an interest in IT area they do not choose acareer in IT. Why and where have all the girls gone? Percent of women in IT by agegroup 35 30 % Women
component ordering lead times were all confounding issues that the MTR team faced. Allof these are real-world considerations that even the idealized design engineer should be aware ofwhen designing a product for market.GradingThe grading scheme for the course below holds students accountable for documenting every stepof the process to ensure all learning outcomes are met. The numerous writing and oral reviews ofthe team’s work ensure projects stay on track and properly document how each of the learningoutcomes is met. Each grading component is evaluated using either a rubric matrix (seeAppendix A for samples) or a detailed evaluation rubric (see Appendix B for sample). 1. System Concept Review (SCR) & System Requirements Review (SRR