into online teaching and learningnationwide. After completing the interrupted spring semester, adequate time was left for alleducators to prepare for the fall semester[1], [2].Given the ongoing and unprecedented situation that COVID-19 has brought to higher education,and like many other Engineering Schools and Colleges across the U.S., during the Fall term of2020, the College of Engineering and Technology (CET) at Western Carolina University (WCU)modified their traditional method of instruction, from a face-to-face method to a broadly definedhybrid and online instruction (both synchronous and asynchronous) methods [3]. These last twomethodologies, hybrid and online instruction, has been previously studied under normalcircumstances [4]–[6
– knowing how databases interact with servers inbuilding IoT products, for example.The Agile Experiment (History of the Course)To meet these challenges, we established three project objectives. Our first objective was to findmore agile and sustainable processes to develop and continuously improve engineeringcurriculum. The second objective was to improve our pedagogical methods to make theclassroom learning experience more engaging [1]. The third objective was to develop a newlearning experience for our students that produced measurably better learning outcomes.An essential idiom that emerged from student, faculty, industry, and professional surveys was thewidespread use of agile methodologies. Since these methods are part of the curriculum we
University of Notre Dame.Simran Moolchandaney, University of Notre Dame Simran Moolchandaney is a class of 2023 undergraduate student at the University of Notre Dame major- ing in Computer Science and minoring in Bioengineering. Outside the classroom, Simran is an NCAA Division 1 Fencer, and an active SWE member who zealously engages in community service work.Gabrielle Tanjuatco, University of Notre Dame Gabrielle Tanjuatco is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame in Mechanical Engineering in the Class of 2021.Caroline Lubbe, University of Notre Dame Caroline Lubbe is a Chemical Engineering student in the University of Notre Dame Class of 2023. American c
students found the PRR/MFPprocess to be a beneficial process because they believed they received useful feedback from theEngineering Directors and that it helped their project outcome. We further validated the positiveeffects off the PRR/MFP process by examining the effect of the MFP grade on the technicalevaluation of the team’s final project for 147 teams over 8 semesters. From these results, webelieve the PRR/MFP process is a useful process to promote team preparedness and increaseproject success in engineering capstone courses. The process not only encourages mentorshipfrom course Engineering Directors, but also allows students another opportunity to learn topresent and defend their work.1. IntroductionIn the concluding year of an engineering
roleofsocialjusticeandthedangerofignoringitinourdailylivesanddesigns. Introduction Forthelastseveraldecadesitseemsthatthemainfocusineducationhasbeenalmostexclusively onSTEMinitiatives.ParticularlyintheU.S.,STEMinitiativesfrominstitutionalorganizations togovernmentagencieshavepushedthenarrativethatreceivingSTEMeducationiscriticalto informandpreparefuturegenerationstobemorecompetitiveinaglobalizedworld[1].Inthis sense,STEMeducationistoutedasacure-alltopreparecitizensforthe21stcentury,andweas educators“atethisup”withoutasmuchasacritique.ThecurrentmodelofSTEMeducation narrowlyfocusesonscienceasbothnon
intervened into higher education in March 2020due to the COVID-19 pandemic [1] and subsequently altered the original course design. Facultyspend a considerable amount of time developing their courses, which are uniquely suited for thein-person, seated, learning experience. We may coordinate our courses using an instructionaldesign model such as the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, andEvaluation) [2]. The ADDIE and other instructional systems design methods align the learningobjectives, instruction, student outcomes, and assessment techniques. A problem arises when theoriginal instructional design method is no longer applicable. The governmental and institutionalreactions created a sea change effect for courses originally
. IntroductionMono-disciplinary solutions are falling short as we face complex issues (e.g. climate change,housing shortages, medical crises) in a globalized world where individuals with diverseexperiences and training work beyond disciplinary categories, often leading to expandedperspectives on daunting problems with socio-technical concerns [1]. As undergraduate studentsprepare for careers that will involve solving complex problems requiring input fromheterogeneous domains, they need practice working in interdisciplinary teams. However,students and instructors face challenges in these settings. Within undergraduate curricula, suchlearning objectives are often measured as individual outcomes in courses but accomplishedthrough teamwork. In these scenarios
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 The Development and Use of Moderated Engineering Teaming Exercises (METE)IntroductionThe purpose of this paper is to define a framework to allow an instructor to effectively teachteaming practices that are consistent with the ABET requirements for teaming. The teamingpractices are developed through the implementation of Mechanical Engineering TeamingExercises (METE) in upper division engineering classes.ABET-EAC accreditation requirements [1] include the following as the fifth of their sevenstudent outcomes:[Students will demonstrate] an ability to function effectively on a team whose members togetherprovide leadership, create a collaborative and inclusive environment
State Physics Department and the Center for NanoscaleScience, a National Science Foundation Materials Research Science and Engineering Center(NSF-MRSEC), made a rapid pivot of our Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU)program from an in-person 10-week research experience to a virtual research preparation andprofessional development program which was designed to prepare science and engineeringundergraduate and master’s students for entrance into the workforce or their continuation in agraduate program. The overarching goal of this virtual experience was to develop and refineprofessional skills that are often not explicitly taught in science and engineering classes. Theprogram had three distinct areas: (1) Career Preparation (Professional
Techie Times, a STEM summer camp centered around doing activities froma home environment created.Techie Times was developed by Purdue Polytechnic Institute Faculty, Graduate Students, andUndergraduate Students to create a new opportunity for camp participants to learn more aboutthe STEM field, execute fun and engaging projects, and network with fellow students fromaround the country. The program was held from July 27th to August 5th, 2020, stimulatingSTEM ideation before heading back into the school year. The program activities were completedall together at home, supported using virtual meeting platforms [1]. Techie Times was accessibleto all participants, eliminating finances as a participation barrier. Participants were able to signup and
,feeding to their fear about saying the wrong thing.The disconnect between the two groups often results in explicitly marginalizing classroomenvironments, i.e., environments where students feel unwelcome from blatantly marginalizing ordiscriminatory behaviors [1]. The data demonstrates that faculty are interested in developingimplicitly inclusive classrooms but fear that their lack of expertise on these topics will lead tofailure and having a negative impact on students. However, students voiced strong support andinterest in having faculty discuss and teach about inclusivity and ethics in their engineeringclassrooms. To create implicitly inclusive environments, faculty are encouraged to acknowledgeand discuss such topics in their classes and
Education Organization and Leadership from the University of Illinois. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 The Early Research Scholars ProgramBackgroundResearch experiences for undergraduates has shown to increase retention in scientific fields [1],and the NSF Summer REU program provides great support for such experiences. Most REUs aredesigned for advanced students with strong foundations in Computer Science. The EarlyResearch Scholars Program (ERSP) was designed to provide a structured research experience forstudents early in their CS career (pre-data structures when they apply). The goal is to increaseretention of women and under-represented
of studies have shown the link between what a parent perceives as important and whattheir child values [1]. This connection between a parent and their child has the potential topositively influence their career path. Specifically, mothers are shown to play an especially largerole in their child’s interest in a STEM career [2]. Due to this connection, parents’ perception ofSTEM could be a valuable tool in encouraging students to consider pursuing STEM, regardlessof the parent’s occupation. The demand for STEM workers is growing and understanding whatparents’ opinions of STEM are could provide a resource to fill those needed roles [3].In this study, we focus on how parents, who send their children to a STEM summer camp viewSTEM. Parents
the region of fluid near a surface where a velocity gradient naturallyexists due to the viscosity of the fluid [4]. Due to no-slip boundary condition, the velocity of thefluid that is adjacent to the surface of the body is zero. The velocity of the fluid eventuallyreaches the free stream velocity as the vertical distance increases (Fig. 1). The vertical distancefrom the surface to the point where the local velocity is 99% of the free stream velocity isdefined as the boundary layer thickness [4]. Figure 1: Boundary layer thickness illustrationFor the flow over an airfoil, due to its curvature, the incoming fluid will reach a maximumvelocity, and up until this point it witnesses a favorable pressure gradient (high to
year appointment with the Center as a postdoctoral researcher. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 The Effectiveness of Synchronous vs Asynchronous Modes of Instruction in an Online Active Design Thinking CourseIntroduction This is a complete research paper. Online courses are in demand in today’s world asthey broaden the reach of education including non-traditional students and students withdiverse backgrounds. Higher education institutions are adapting distance education as it breaksdown geographical barriers [1]. According to Strong et. al, “regardless of the advantages ofonline learning opportunities for students and institutions
paper reports on a survey of all engineering faculty at San José State University (SJSU) inSpring 2020. The purpose of the survey was to determine the impact of the shelter-in-place onfaculty. Overall, 104 faculty completed this survey. Based on the number of COE faculty inSpring, 287, this equates to a confidence level of 95% with a margin of error of 8%. Because ofthis low margin of error, we can be fairly confident that this survey is representative of thefaculty teaching in the College in Spring 2020. The majority of the respondents who answeredthe question about rank were lecturers (58); there were fewer tenure-track (18), tenured (13),adjunct (1), and Teaching Associates (1) responding. Of the faculty who responded to identifytheir gender
designstudents’ engineering design self-efficacy and their project experience.Background1. An Introduction to Self-EfficacySelf-efficacy is one’s belief about their own ability to successfully achieve a particular goal orskill. The framework was first introduced by Bandura in 1977 [1]. A person’s self-efficacy isimportant because it affects their attitude and behavior. Those with high self-assurance have astrong belief in their abilities. When encountering an obstacle, they will see it as a challenge tobe conquered and will continue to persist in overcoming the problem. They set challenging goalsfor themselves and will put forth increased effort to achieve them. They are able to recover theirsense of efficacy quickly after setbacks and failures [2
tolearning or not. Indeed, the importance and the amount of homework that students should beassigned have been debated for more than 100 years [1].Whether assigning, collecting, and grading homework enhances learning or not remainscontroversial to this day. Results of many studies disagree [2] - [13], [14] - [16]. It is argued inthe literature that these disagreements arise because the methodologies used are very, verydisparate; that students cannot be treated as objects that are identical; that, indeed, theirindividual characteristics, beliefs, motivations, psychological predispositions to learning varywidely; and that the academic traditions and standards of the schools that students came fromvary a lot as well. The literature on this subject is
portions of the population which are greatlyunderrepresented in the STEM fields, and what the data tell us is that family income matters.Overall, only 32% of 2009 ninth graders from families in the lowest fifth of income levelenrolled in college within a year after graduation, compared to 51% of those from the middlefifth and 79% of students from families in the highest income group. And of that population, thepercentage of low-income students who attained a degree within 8 years was only 14%,compared to 29% for middle-income students and 60% for high-income students [1] . Moreover,low-income students are likely to be less prepared in math and science than their high-incomepeers coming out of high school, which makes them less likely to choose
realisticscenarios, and in some cases enable the students to engage ABET Outcome #1 (identify,formulate, and solve a complex engineering problem), Outcome #4 (make informed judgments,which must consider the impact of engineering solutions in global, economic, environmental,and societal contexts) and Outcome #7 (an ability to acquire and apply new knowledge asneeded). Also, the instructors sought to reduce student anxiety over final exams by keeping theassessment low stakes and emphasizing the knowledge and skills the students had gained overthe semester. Given that this assessment was implemented in some of the courses pre-COVID,during the Spring 2020 semester, and Fall 2020 semester, the epic finale approach was alsovalued for its capacity to reduce
a socio-technical(rather than techno-centric) approach. In this paper, we share: 1) the ExSJ framework, 2) theinfrastructure, mechanisms, and activities we are using to apply this framework, and 3) thechallenges and complexities we are facing as we apply it. The foundational values of the ExSJ canbe applied to all engineering contexts, providing a platform for change that moves away fromnarrowly constructed and techno-centric epistemological approaches, and an expansion to engagesocial and environmental justice, humanitarian goals, peace, and sustainability in engineeringthrough equitable partnership exchanges.IntroductionIn 2019, seven faculty and staff members in the University of San Diego’s (USD) Shiley-MarcosSchool of Engineering (SMSE
for those that we serve.Our origins: 2012-2014The founding of our division can be traced to the work of a few engineering educators and arecognition of the importance of educating engineers in leadership. As Ohio University’s David(Dave) Bayless noted in a short essay in the Appendix of our division’s first strategic plan [1],the Engineering Leadership Development Division was officially approved to become a newASEE division on Wednesday, June 18, 2014. But the inspiration and efforts to build support forthis new division started at least three years prior. Dave was partly inspired by an article byRichard (Rick) J. Schuhmann on “Engineering Leadership Education” [2], which described theorigins and evolution of Penn State’s engineering
,geographic separation, or social distancing requirements could make it otherwise infeasible. Thispaper reports on the perception and impact of all these tools on student satisfaction in the course.IntroductionBackgroundCapstone Design courses are commonly implemented in undergraduate engineering curriculumto satisfy ABET accreditation requirements [1] and are an effective method to provide studentswith experience developing solutions for real-world design problems. Past research [2, 3] showsthe merit of these Capstone Design courses and describes the function of these courses. Acrossvarious Schools and Colleges, Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) has over 1000students from around 200 teams to work on their course projects each semester
distribution workplacecan be developed. The purposes of this study were to (1) explore managers’ and workers’perceptions of the FOW technologies within current workplace practices, and (2) to identifysome skills future employees should possess in the industrial distribution industry. This workadopted a grounded theory research study and the convenience sampling method was used tocollect data. Qualtrics was employed to distribute a survey with open-ended questions. A total of13 employees in the warehousing and industrial distribution industry participated in this study.Five specific themes were extracted, including lack of support at both company and societylevels, employees’ preparedness for the FOW, motivation to learn, perceived technologicalchanges
in the emergence ofinterdisciplinarity across and beyond engineering fields.From a pedagogical perspective, two distinct types of interdisciplinary approaches are identified:1) Bolstering of existing fields with infusion of technological knowledge and 2) Evolution ofhybrid fields combining two or more existing fields. Inclusion of emerging technologies in theera of Industry 4.0 such as artificial intelligence (AI), Internet-of-Things (IoT), and Robotics willalso be discussed. Examples such as smart cities, smart manufacturing, and innovations in themedical & health sectors will be used to demonstrate pedagogical approaches. The engineeringeducational curriculum of the third decade of the 21st century is proposed to be as follows: 1
focusedextensively on “backward” course and curriculum design, an analog to the traditionalengineering design approach [1]. Such an approach to designing courses and curriculaencourages engineering educators to start by articulating and formulating desired studentlearning outcomes, and then to “engineer” (identify, specify, validate) the appropriate pedagogiesand learning activities to achieve student learning outcomes as well as the appropriateassessment strategies to evaluate the efficacy of those activities for meeting stated outcomes.Such an outcome-driven, backward design approach arguably serves as the dominant paradigmfor designing both courses and curricula in engineering education.In parallel with the formalized, explicit educational programming
classroom culture, but not on “how all students and the instructor are working withinthe culture to achieve educational goals” [1]. Using this verbal introductory activity includeseach student as well as the instructor by requiring all to participate daily. Keeping studentsengaged throughout the class is known to improve classroom culture and has been cited bymultiple researchers as one of the best ways to build this culture and relationships [2, 3]. One ofthe challenges with encouraging students to participate is that they may not feel comfortable orconfident in the course material. In this course specifically, this is often the first time thesestudents are taking an engineering course within their discipline, which may make participationeven more
education workforce has shrunk by atleast 7% since February 2020 – a drop not seen in the over 60 years that the agency has trackedsuch data [1]. The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center indicates that fall 2020undergraduate enrollment was down 2.5% over a year ago, with most students taking coursesremotely [2]. A recent survey of undergraduates found that they reported struggling withmotivation and missed receiving instructor feedback and collaborating with other students, whichcan be challenging in a virtual space [3].In the U.S. workforce, women held more jobs than men a year ago [4]. Since the pandemic hit inMarch 2020, women have suffered higher job losses than for men, and much of this loss has beenexperienced by Black women and
studentrepresentation, impacts student stickiness. Our research questions are: 1) To what extent do female and racial/ethnic representation in engineering departments impact student stickiness? 2) Does engineering department diversity impact student stickiness differently for underrepresented subpopulations?The educational environment in higher education Much of the sociocultural research on student retention and persistence has relied onTinto’s (1993) model of student departure. In this model, students enter the institution andbecome integrated academically and socially based on their interactions in the educationalsystem. The model focuses on the students’ abilities to integrate rather than the institution’sresponsibility
,thispaperwillexaminethefollowingresearchquestions: 1) WasthereachangeinjuniorcourseDWFratesafterthecurriculumchange? 2) DostudentswhostruggleinthejunioryearrecovertograduatewithadegreeinAES, andwhatdoesthisrecoverylooklike? 3) Willthiscurriculumchangepotentiallydecreasetheundergraduatestudenttimeto degreemetric? 4) Howdiddoublingthejuniorcourseofferingsimpactthedepartment’sabilitytocover undergraduatecourses?Literaturereview:Changestothecostofuniversity,enrollment,andengineeringpedagogyhavehadsignificantimpactsonbothstudentsandfaculty.STEMenrollmentatU.S.universitiesincreased44%in9yearsfrom427,503fulltimestudentsin2009to616,200in2018accordingtoRoyetal.[1]Locally