the relative location of the state whenanalyzing a power cycle. ! Figure 1. Clausius app with T-s diagram for water on Apple iPad.Clausius reverses the approach commonly taken by existing reference applications by forcing theuser to first locate the state on a property chart using their fingers to glide along a knownproperty until they are in the desired region. As the user navigates their way to the desired state,Clausius provides instantaneous and continuous property values of the state at the finger tip.Thus, the navigation action itself delivers information related to (a) Property Trends: how theproperties change across the property chart and (b) Regional Context: where the state is locatedwithin the property chart. For
capable systems, and recent advances in policy by the FAA haveenabled a climate where UAS may be effectively used as a model for students in many age groups tolearn the SEDP and critical problem solving skills. A UAS SEDP project provides a stimulating hands-on active learning opportunity many students are seeking today. In addition, the application of UAS tosolving real-world problems provides intrinsic motivation to students and faculty alike, as well asengendering public support.The University of Alaska (UAF)[1] has broadly embraced the concept of active learning, supportinginitiatives to more effectively engage students, such as “flipped” classrooms where students take amore active role and responsibility for their education. The College of
support and procedural differences in the circuit constructionprocess in the 2D and 3D environments that contributed to deviations in performance.Additionally, the study found differences in the affect of the students learning in the computerenvironments that impacted performance. The findings of this study provide valuable insightsabout how the physical fidelity impacted participant’s performance. These results can be used tobetter design and integrate computer mediated environments in technical education.IntroductionWhen evaluating disparities in the performance of individuals using various types of technology,research studies have typically attributed statistically significant differences in performance tothe technology.1, 2 However, these
of some ofthese challenges demands radical solutions proposed by creative and risk-taking minds.Historically, engineering and other science fields have not rewarded creativity, and it has beenfound that innovative thinkers are three times more likely to drop out of engineering courses thanconventional thinkers.Published literature supports the idea that individuals with ADHD may have the potential to bemore creative than their peers.1-5 Their ability to be spontaneous and divergent thinkers allowsthem to take more risks. As they naturally tend to think outside of the box, individuals withADHD have the potential to offer unexpected solutions to complex problems.6 Recent researchfindings suggest that: “We can find among the leaders of “notable
devices (IWMDs) security challenges have not been subjectof specific readings for educational purposes, to the best of authors’ knowledge. To provideselect topics and sub-topics (the list includes select items but it does not confine the approachand can be broadened) required for cryptographic engineering used for IWMDs securityresearch/teaching integration, we would like to first differentiate the materials used in embeddedsecurity courses15, 16 and the ones specific to IWMDs. Table 1 presents select topics consideredin the integration process.Because the main objective of this paper is integration of research and teaching related toIWMDs security, we exclude the topics used for education purposes only and are not the resultsof our prior
of a commercial process control system in astudent laboratory, but do not clearly address the reasons for choosing such a system [1] – [3].Many different approaches to demonstrating or incorporating process control in a laboratory arepossible. Using a distributed control system (DCS) is just one option from many.In our analysis, we considered the following questions to determine which control system bestaligns with our educational goals and needs. First, what type of control system might be mostmeaningful to students and provide an introduction to industrial practices? Second, what is thetotal cost of the system? Certain systems may have higher up-front costs but can save money inthe long run because they require less on-going maintenance
Johnson ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 From the Entrepreneurially Minded Learning Framework to Economic Development: Expanding the Three C’s with Six I’s AbstractKEEN's well-established entrepreneurial mindset model is a crucial catalyst in training engineers to seekinnovation and economic development [1]. The Three C’s model of following one's Curiosity, makingconnections between concepts, and Creating value can not only be taught, they form a set of habits thatpair with self-directed learning to nudge engineers to more creative and innovative solutions. Theexpectation is that more creative and innovative solutions will result in
engagement with complex, forward-thinking concepts, preparing studentsfor the future of the built environment. Recommendations for enhancing assignment design andexpanding the scope of student interactions are also discussed.IntroductionThe construction industry is undergoing rapid transformation, driven by the increasing emphasison sustainability, technological innovation, and adaptive thinking in designing and managingfuture built environments. To prepare students for these shifts, construction engineering andmanagement educators must integrate tools and assignments that cultivate critical skills such asdigital literacy, problem-solving, and creative thinking [1]. This work-in-progress paperexamines how first-year Construction Management (CM
Engineering Outstanding Graduate Student Research Award from Purdue University. She was also a Bilsland Fellow of the College of Engineering at Purdue University when she was a Ph.D. student. ©American Society for Engineering Education, 2025 Expanding the Engineering Workforce: An Exploratory Study of a Mid-Career Transition from a Non-Engineering BackgroundIntroduction The United States has vocalized a desperate need for an increase of engineers in theworkforce to maintain the country’s position as the forerunning performer and collaborator ofscience and technology activities worldwide [1], [2], [3], [4]. As published by the NationalScience Foundation, the United States’ science and
integrating, teaching and assessing sociotechnical thinking skills inengineering programs. They found a strong emphasis on integrating social considerations withintechnical courses, and various studies examining the use of particular pedagogical strategies tobuild understanding of sociotechnical complexity and the role of social justice. Morespecifically, key themes identified include: 1) barriers to developing STT; 2) students’development of STT; 3) engineering identity, culture and STT; 4) characteristics of STT; 5)challenges in teaching STT; 6) opportunities for teaching STT; 7) incorporating prior knowledge;and 8) creating emotional connections. The STT literature explored offers many importantinsights about student and instructor experiences
density, more accessible resources, and organized municipalservices, tend to have established recycling programs. According to the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA), urban municipalities often have comprehensive curbside recyclingprograms, drop-off locations, and educational initiatives to encourage recycling [1]. In contrast,rural communities are challenged by remote or sparsely populated regions, funding constraints,and limited if any civil resources to plan and facilitate recycling programs. Rural areas requiremore time to travel greater distances, making recycling more expensive and time-intensivecompared with urban counterparts; if there is a need for transfer stations because of distances,this also raises the cost of recycling
different students’ ranging interests, preferences [1] and paces, par-ticularly in introductory programming courses where students’ prior experience can vary widely.The challenge extends to K-12 education, where exposure to programming is often limited, and thedevelopment of foundational computational thinking skills is critical. We seek to address these is-sues by leveraging our WebTA code critiquing software to provide real-time, automated feedback,to enhance programming instruction and better support student learning and engagement acrossdifferent academic contexts.We see a need for collaborative frameworks between universities that allow for successful exchangeof pedagogical practices and innovative technologies. The lack of such cross
trackerdemonstrated a 16.5% improvement in energy generation compared to the fixed solar panel.Reflection highlights substantial learning outcomes, including interdisciplinary learning,automation, coding, problem-solving skills, self-efficacy, and collaborative experiences. Thisproject allows high school and undergraduate students to replicate their experiences in anaffordable, efficient, and educational manner.KeywordsSolar energy, solar tracker, solar power, education, Arduino, Coding, automation, high school,undergraduate1. IntroductionAccording to the International Energy Agency, global energy-related CO2 emissions reached anew high of 36.8 billion tons in 2022, and the value will continue to grow as global electricitydemand keeps increasing [1], [2
local events or weather thatare beyond one’s control. Risk mitigation requires feasible and practical action plans in unexpectedsituations, and trip leaders will communicate the expectations and common risk factors to the students sothat they will behave responsibly.As NAFSA summarized in [1], risks may arise to impact a participant’s physical or mental health,personal or financial safety, privacy, security, as well as interactions among participants and/or with theirfamilies remotely during the trip. Adapting to the local culture and lifestyle is vital of an effective actionplan, instead of demanding that the same solution that would have worked in the home country shouldwork in the host country. In general, risks do not outweigh the benefits
they maintain over the course of the semester. Instructor experiences are capturedthrough the self-reflection of the authors and documentation of their perceptions of the successesand challenges in running this course. We feel that the course was well received by students andallowed them an opportunity to critically reflect on the role of engineers and their own educationas future professionals. 1. Introduction Discussions of social justice in engineering education have gained momentum over thepast few decades, notably resulting in the nascent Equity, Culture and Social Justice (ECSJ)division of the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE). Changes to the ABEToutcomes required for accreditation since 2000 have also increased
opportunity to accomplish the desired diversification of theengineering workforce [1]. However, the transition from community colleges to four-yearbachelor-degree awarding institutions often comes with a “transfer shock” and unique challengesleading to undesired academic outcomes [2,3,4]. More effective support is needed to ensure theirsuccess [5].More specifically, previous research has shown that transfer students can experience uniquechallenges in their engineering journey, particularly after their transfer to a four-year institution.They can be faced with a lack of guidance as they navigate a new educational environment alongwith a lack of social integration as they enter this new social space [6,7,8]. In addition, financialcosts often present a
risks.Introduction:Generative AI (GenAI) utilizes sophisticated algorithms to produce human-like content acrossvarious formats, including text, image, audio, and video [1]. Following the introduction ofChatGPT in 2022, GenAI has gained considerable prominence across various sectors, includingeducation, healthcare, and technology [2]. In higher education, opinions regarding the integrationof GenAI remain divided. Whereas some faculty members endorse its incorporation withininstructional frameworks, others contend that it diminishes students' critical thinking and cognitivedevelopment [3,4]. Furthermore, additional challenges encompass algorithmic bias, data privacyissues, and the spread of misinformation [5].The fields of robotics and artificial intelligence have
Doors for All: Creating an Inclusive and Equitable Engineering Education Model Inspired by the ASEE Mindset ReportI. IntroductionIn recent years, ASEE, in partnership with other national organizations such as the NSF, NAE,NAB, and the broader engineering community, has engaged in a multi-year effort to create a setof high-impact recommendations to transform the landscape of engineering education in the 21 stcentury. The 2018 ASEE and NSF report, Transforming Undergraduate Education inEngineering [1], emphasized that the engineers of tomorrow must possess “deep expertisewithin a single domain, broad knowledge across domains, and the ability to collaborate withothers in a diverse working environment.” This vision has been echoed in
the experiences of engineering students at theonset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the data collected, this paper’s guiding researchquestion is, "How did engineering graduate students experience the transition to non-traditional/alternative learning during the COVID-19 pandemic?" Both undergraduate and graduateparticipants were recruited using the researchers' personal networks, social media platforms, andpartnerships with organizations like NSBE. Participants were given autonomy over the accessibilityof their stories, opting for one of three categories: 1) Everyone, 2) Researchers Only, and 3) No one.To investigate this research question, we analyzed survey responses collected using the SenseMakerplatform, where students were prompted to
, ultimately reducing theDFW rate and better preparing students for future coursework and professional challenges.Keywords: Faculty paper, Contextualized Learning, Learning Assistants, Introduction toComputer Science, non-Computing majors, DFW rate, Peer-led learning.1 IntroductionIt is now essential for engineering students to acquire strong programming skills early in theiracademic careers due to the quick integration of computing skills into engineering specialties.However, the special requirements and viewpoints of non-computing engineering majors aresometimes overlooked in conventional introductory computer science courses. Disengagement,poor learning outcomes, and a high rate of drop, fail, and withdrawal (DFW) might result fromthis imbalance
tabletop microgrid demonstration project, it is imperative to establish acomprehensive understanding of the key concepts and components involved. Microgrid Concept:A microgrid represents a sophisticated energy distribution system designed to enhance thereliability, resiliency, and efficiency of power supply within a localized area. The concept ofmicrogrid was initially presented in the technical literature by Lasseter [1-3] as a solution tointegrate distributed energy resources, including Energy Storage Systems (ESSs) andcontrolled loads reliably. There are a number of definitions of microgrids in the engineeringliterature [3-4]. The basic definition of a microgrid by the U.S. Department of Energy is “Agroup of interconnected loads and
faculty and administrators for creating a thorough studentneeds assessment and characterization of institutional context.IntroductionThis paper describes an approach that can be used by faculty and administrators to helpcharacterize student needs. Characterizing student needs is essential in efficiently developingprogram-level student support plans for increasing retention and completion in STEMdisciplines. An overview is provided herein to help faculty, staff, and administrators in two-yearcolleges to identify sources of data that can be used to inform plans for student support.The need to improve STEM education in the United States, particularly in the area of retentionand timely degree completion, is well established [1]. A wide variety of
co-curricular leadership development program.IntroductionThere has been an increasing interest in developing leadership skills in engineering students toimprove the ability of the profession to influence change in a highly technological world [1].Various pedagogical and programmatic approaches have been employed to help developengineering leaders, including formal courses, certificates and minors, as well as co-curricularprograms [2] [3]. However, an ongoing challenge is evaluating the success of these programs [4].For curricular programs, it is possible to evaluate student deliverables to look for evidence ofskill development, and course evaluations provide other data on how students value the coursecontent and delivery. However, for
some key properties of real world orbits that are relevant to our metaphor.Orbits are made possible by the force of attraction of between two objects, determined by theirmass and their distance from one another known as gravity. The equation for the force of gravitybetween two objects is given by, 𝐺∙𝑀1 ∙𝑀2 𝑓𝑔 = (1) 𝑟2where, M1 and M2 are the masses of Object 1 and Object 2 respectively. G is a gravitationalconstant, and r is the radial distance between the center of masses of the two objects.25Equation 1 shows that the force of gravity increases with
instructors at four Canadianinstitutions.Although there is research on engineering ethics education3,4,5,6, there is a gap in examining howengineering instructors view the inclusion of ethics and the other hallmarks of STSE in their ownteaching. This research was designed to help fill this gap in the field, focusing on three keyresearch questions: (1) How do undergraduate engineering instructors describe their teachinggoals and practices?; (2) How do undergraduate engineering instructors describe their teachinggoals and practices with respect to exploring the relationship between engineering, society andthe environment (i.e. STSE)?; and (3) What are the specific challenges or enabling factors inexploring the relationship between engineering, society
successful interactions and learning outcomes.1-3 One important challenge centers onthe interactions between students from groups negatively stereotyped as poor performers inengineering (e.g., women and under-represented racial minorities) and others. A body of researchin psychology indicates that students from these marginalized groups may have qualitativelydifferent group work experiences compared to others, which may contribute to their self-selection from engineering and thus their group’s under-representation in engineering fields.Recent research suggests that the negative experiences of people from marginalized groups onengineering student design teams can influence many factors that contribute to persistence andsuccess, such as development of
seen in these tasks, my research questions are as follows: (1) Inwhat ways did the ideas and factors used to inform designs evolve as groups engaged in failure-prone physical testing cycles? and (2) In what ways did groups’ responses to ready success differfrom those seen after repetitive failure? I conclude with a discussion of implications for futureresearch, classroom instruction, and the design of design tasks and curricula.BackgroundThis work is informed by constructivist and constructionist theories of learning, emphasizingbuilding on learners’ prior understandings and experiences of the world (Piaget, 1952; Smith,diSessa, & Roschelle, 1994) through construction of public physical artifacts (Papert, 1980) asproductive ways to engage
rather non-systematic programmatic manner. The authors view the forces leading to the need for aprofessional doctorate as depicted in the following illustration's converging arrows. The arrowsin Figure 1 represent these forces converging on universities and on business and industry. Thecore of the figure depicts four primary aspects of advanced post-graduate (doctoral in this case)education that need to be tailored to create a professional doctorate program responsive to thesituation faced by contemporary business and industry. Figure 1. Forces Creating the Need for, and Components of, a Professional Doctorate. The fields of nursing, education
emerged through the collaborative inquiry process. We concludewith a question about the implications of this exploration for individual researchers, thecommunity, and policy makers that warrant further conversation.IntroductionThe Boyer report,1 Scholarship Reconsidered, articulated a new paradigm for scholarly activitiesthat goes to the core of academic life: “the meaning of scholarship itself” (p. 1). Boyer expandedthe concept of scholarship, traditionally viewed as the scholarship of discovery, to include threeequally important areas: the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and thescholarship of teaching. This view of scholarship has influenced policy conversations within andoutside of academia – shaping reforms in the
education.1. IntroductionPedagogical research has long been concerned with the issue of how feedback can best promotestudent learning. In a review, Shute1 defines formative feedback as “information communicatedto the learner that is intended to modify his or her thinking or behaviour for the purpose ofimproving learning”(p.154). In the context of engineering design education and capstone designcourses in particular, formative feedback is regularly provided to students in design reviewmeetings. These are held at various points in the project progression, often coinciding with thecompletion of major design milestones, and are attended by students, the course instructor, theproject client, and other stakeholders.Traditionally design reviews have been