have seen little structuralor philosophical changes in the period since. In recent decades, workforce needs and theemployment landscape for STEM graduates has experienced fundamental changes in scale andscope. While the number of STEM-related jobs has risen significantly [1], [2] the range of STEMcareers has also expanded sharply [1], [2] . In the recent National Academies of Sciences,Engineering, and Medicine study report focused on Graduate STEM education for the 21st century[3], the authors observe that “Indeed, recent surveys of employers and graduates and studies ofgraduate education suggest that many graduate programs do not adequately prepare students totranslate their knowledge into impact in multiple careers.” In spite of the
thisperiod, Virtual Labs became the only available means to provide instructional labs to theenrolled students since all students were sent home. That is, the school closures made us changethe way that we used Virtual Labs and necessitated us to modify the course delivery method sothat the lab courses could be performed fully online. Therefore, in this paper, we explained howthe transition took place in the aerospace structures lab for the use of Virtual Labs before, during,and after the COVID-19 school closures. Then, we discussed lessons learned during this period.This paper will be a useful reference for engineering educators who seek to implement orintegrate virtual technology into their pedagogy.1. IntroductionIn our previous study [1], we
department for his outstanding teaching and research excellence. To supplement his teaching and research, he has been involved in numerous professional societies, including ASCE, ACI, ASEE, ASC, ATMAE and TRB. His research output has been well disseminated as he has published thirty journal papers and thirty-nine conference papers. His research interests are 1) Creating Innovative Sustainable Materials, 2) Structural BIM Integration, 3) 4D/5D BIM, 4) Virtual Testing Lab, 5) Innovative Construction Demolition, and 6) Carbon Footprint Analysis on Roadways.Dr. Pavan Meadati, Kennesaw State University Pavan Meadati, Ph.D., LEED AP, is a professor in Construction Management Department. He received Doctorate in Engineering
program to earn aminor in Computing Applications. Many of these courses are taught by non-CS faculty and thecourse contents are adapted for life sciences students. Every course is assigned a dedicated groupof peer mentors who assist instructors and students during lectures and hold separate mentoringsessions every week. The curriculum for the Computing Applications minor (aka PINC minor) consists of thefollowing five courses, and the recommended course sequence is as follows: Fall (Year 1, Semester 1) ● CSc 306: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Computer Programming Spring (Year 1, Semester 2) ● CSc 219: Data Structures and Algorithms Fall (Year 2, Semester 3) ● CSc 308: An Interdisciplinary
assist students’academic achievement and confidence related to their abilities and experiences in the classroom.Situated learning and social cognitive abilities, and self-efficacy specifically in engineering andmathematics serve as the theoretical base for E-path’s conceptual framework. Self-efficacy is acomponent of social cognitive theory; a self-system that allows individuals to exercise controlover their thoughts, feelings, motivation, and actions. Self-efficacy is an individual’s belief inoneself to achieve specific results and perceived capabilities to attain specific types ofperformance [1], [2].Specifically, self-efficacy judgments are task and situation-specific. One critical componentidentified by the investigative team was to use PLTL
diverse promotion patterns as the product of individuals’ idiosyncratic interests,values, goals and competencies, leaving ourselves open to meritocratic explanations of career mobility. Incontrast, when we account for systemic inequities in organizations and society by critically examiningengineers’ careers in the aggregate, it is possible to gain insights into the “hidden curriculum”1 ofprofessional advancement. In this paper, we take the latter approach, adopting a critical secondaryanalysis of data originally collected for a project on situated workplace learning. The key contribution ofour analysis is to reframe the personal choice narrative of career advancement with a structuralexplanation of career stratification based on Jeannie Oakes
engineeringcurriculum. To add to this gap in literature, this paper analyzes quantitative responses of genderand sexual minority students’ perceptions of the engineering curricula from the survey conductedin 2018.Relevant LiteratureThe predominant normative marker of science and scientists in the U.S. has historically andcontinues to be based on White cisgender male perspectives [1]–[7]. Not surprisingly, thishomogenous and heterogenous perspective leads to pedagogical practices in which minoritizedstudents underperform compared to when innovative pedagogical models are used, such asflipped classrooms [8], [9]. This long-standing conceptualization of science and scientists alsoresults in an engineering curriculum that deems “issues of communication, justice
success intheir degrees. Educational data can be retrieved in various levels of granularity thanks to intensivedata keeping ensured by most universities. In most cases data is stored in multiple databases linkedto systems provided by multiple vendors. These systems often link to the main contentmanagement system being used by the university. Moodle and Banner are examples of suchcontent management systems.Universities realize the importance of their data and the potential it has which can allow them tomake more informed decisions [1], [2] related to recruitment and retention. Retention being on thetop of the list for universities, data mining provides avenues and methodologies that can be usedto extract meaningful information that can eventually
taught various models as explained below.Types of models: Structural models can be defined in a variety of ways. When building amodel, the most important question one should ask is, “What do I want from this model?”. DoI want to know when this model is going to fail? Do I want to demonstrate a behavior? Or is itsomething else? Based on the requirements, it is decided what type of models should be built.Some popular models are described below [1]: • Elastic Model: An elastic model usually is geometrically like the original but may be made of a different elastic material. This is a good model to study the elastic behavior but is not useful is predicting the plastic behavior. This model is usually built with plastics such as
videoconferencing softwarelike Zoom or Teams. In the first meeting, the coaches asked the participants to complete aleadership wheel in which they rated their level of satisfaction in ten competencies:academics/work; communication; assertiveness/confidence; organization skills; work/schoolrelationships; self-regulation; clarity/focus; building networks; conflict management; andresilience. The participants scored each competency on a scale of 1-10, based on how satisfiedthey were with their ability in that area. The coach and participant then talked over the scoresand identified competencies to work on together. Subsequent meetings were organic in nature,as participant and coach together discussed current challenges or growth competencies, what
help studentsunderstand their design environment and identify possible prejudices before they are an issue;they also help create a more globally aware student who is prepared for positive and engagedcitizenship.Introduction and BackgroundRecent research in the fields of engineering and design pedagogy has highlighted the importanceof social consciousness in undergraduate education [1]. Yet much of the curriculum for studentsin engineering and design majors remains focused solely on science and mathematics without thenecessary extension of situating the design process in relevant social contexts [2]. Severalresearchers have reported on their efforts to consider social consciousness in the engineeringcurriculum. Examples include adding Socially
National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Ohio Department of Education. Also, he frequently serves as an invited editorial board member, referee or panelist for various international journals, funding agencies, and professional associations. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021Pilot: Ways of Viewing Student Success – “Success is a State Function 1ABSTRACTMost literature in engineering education focuses on the problems or barriers to teachingundergraduate engineering students [1]. In professional settings, it has been implied beingsuccessful is having the ability to get the job
customers. Our aims for this project are two-fold: 1) to helpundergraduate students see that engineering decisions made during the design, production, oreven after launch of a product can have larger consequences than originally anticipated; 2) todetermine if hands-on ethical problem-solving activities in the classroom increases studentcapability in ethical decision making.We have introduced this choose-your-own adventure activity in two courses: the college-widefirst-year Introduction to Engineering Problem Solving course and the second-year chemicalengineering Process Calculations course. This work-in-progress will present initial feedbackfrom students who have participated in the activity and an assessment of student ethical decision-making
machine. Topics includebasic I/O, interrupts, timers, communication methods and protocols, driver circuitry, actuator(stepper motors, dc motors, solenoids, servos) control, user interface, and reactive state-machinedevelopment. We specifically discuss how the lessons and labs build upon themselves over the (a) Side View (b) Playfield Figure 1: Course Pinball Machinesemester to culminate in a complete, functional machine. A custom designed pinball machine,shown in Figure 1, and custom node based embedded system architecture, shown in Figure 3,were developed specifically for this course. The course pinball machine includes both traditionalpinball mechanisms
Paper ID #33461Pivot to Remote Teaching of an Undergraduate InterdisciplinaryProject-Based Program: Spring–Fall 2020Dr. Amitava ’Babi’ Mitra, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Amitava ’Babi’ Mitra linkedin.com/in/babimitra|+1-617-324-8131 | babi@mit.edu Dr. Amitava ’Babi’ Mitra is the founding Executive Director of the New Engineering Education Trans- formation (NEET) program at MIT. His expertise and interest are in setting up and leading innovative ’start-up’ educational initiatives; he has over twenty-five years’ experience in institution building, higher education, corporate e-learning, and distance education
available in thecoming months.Keywords: podcast, flipped classroom, ICT, geology, higher education, motivation, satisfactionIntroductionActive Learning methodologies are a way to improve conceptual understanding and thinkingskills in science areas. Although evidence regarding their benefits is clear-cut, teachers are stillresistant to adopt them [1], [2].In the particular case of geology, this adoption has also been patchy. Few experiences aredescribed that use teaching-learning methodologies that differ from conventional ones, in somecases complemented with field trips [3].Having the Covid-19 pandemic in our midst and having to transfer the teaching-learning processto an online context meant that opportunities were generated which forced
of abilities required to succeed professionally in theinformation age. The top four of these skills include critical thinking, creative thinking,collaboration, and communication [1]. In a typical engineering education curriculum, criticalthinking is addressed effectively. Also, students develop their collaboration skills via project-basedcourses that have become increasingly widespread in engineering education in the last twodecades. Furthermore, communication skills are often addressed through the inclusion of atechnical communication course or by otherwise satisfying the communication component ofestablished general education requirements. Laboratory experiences and project-based coursesemphasize the development of technical communication
paper willdescribe the program elements and explain the effects of these activities on our students withpreliminary outcome data and formative evaluation results about the program.1 IntroductionAccording to the 2020 report "STEM and the American Workforce" [1], STEM supports 67% ofU.S. jobs and 69% of the Nation's GDP. Computer occupations play a critical role in STEM.The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics projected that about 600,000 or 67% of all new jobs inSTEM between 2018 and 2028 would be in computing. Average annual openings in computeroccupations during the decade were projected to be about 450,000 [2]. Although the number ofstudents who graduated with a bachelor's degree in computer and information sciences in 2016was more than 70,000
facilitate and lead STEMlearning programs, providing younger youth with positive role models and direct access to thepost secondary experience. Hiring is normally on a seasonal cycle, with recruitment taking placein December and hiring in January and February. Although it varies from year to year andprogram to program, typically 1 in 3 instructors return for a second or more work term. In 2020there were more returning instructors than in 2019 (40% in 2020 vs 29% in 2019).These instructors receive training and deliver programs, and in doing so, they also gaininvaluable employability and leadership skills as they launch their careers in STEM. Trainingtypically consists of 40-80 hours of onboarding, which includes training in program operationsand
Future workefficacy of such application usage amongst K12 students. The goal is to develop immersiveapplications and use them to address four of the fourteen engineering challenges. Figure 7: Waterfall Model A virtual camp, conducted online due to Covid-19, wasn’t quite effective to quanti-A literature by Pombo, L. and M. M. Marques [1] presents a survey study regarding use of
commonlyfail in higher education institutions [1], and this failure is typically attributed to facultyresistance, ineffective leadership, competing values, and conservative traditions [2]. Recentnationwide National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded efforts to revolutionize engineeringdepartments provide insight into the salience of power dynamics as drivers of or barriers toequitable, lasting change. REvolutionizing engineering and computer science Departments(RED) grants specifically required the unit lead (chair or dean) to serve as the principalinvestigator (PI) and required inclusion of social scientists with expertise in organizationalchange and engineering education researchers. This interdisciplinary team composition provideda venue for examining
Engineering Education and Outreach. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Practicing Engineers’ Definition of Their Expertise: Emergent Themes and Frequency by Gender Identity and Role Change into ManagementIntroduction & BackgroundThis full paper seeks to characterize how gender identity and role change into management affectpracticing engineers’ descriptions of their expertise. Expertise is defined through three mainattributes: (1) expert knowledge – depth of knowledge (2) expert reasoning – deductive processthat is inferentially based on an expert’s knowledgebase, (3) and expert memory – workingmemory rather than short-term memory [1]. Development of
Progress)IntroductionThis study examines the experiences of two pre-service teachers (PSTs) as they implement anengineering curriculum in their practicum field experience. Portraiture methodology wasemployed to frame the entire research process, from protocol development and data collectionand analysis to presentation of the findings as an “aesthetic whole”, or final story that capturesthe unique classroom contexts and processes faced by the PSTs [1]. This study is part of a largerproject focused on increasing awareness and preparedness of youth to pursue engineeringcareers. The first portion of the project involved working with elementary pre and in-serviceteachers in rural communities to connect local funds of knowledge (FoK) with
pushed out (forms of latent diversity that are difficult to see but foster equity andinclusion nonetheless). Second, it can allow us to better tailor courses to fit students’ interestsand needs, thus increasing student belonging, innovation, and adoption of new ideas.To this end, we explore two research questions: (1) Do students’ engineering beliefs, careerpriorities, and field interests predict interest across several disciplines of engineering?; and (2)Are the relationships between students’ beliefs and discipline interests moderated by patterns ofrepresentation and parity?Data for this study were collected from 32 U.S. ABET-accredited institutions, with a totalsample size of 3,711 undergraduate engineering students. We focused on students
becomeacclimated to their chosen undergraduate institution, and more. Accordingly, experiences gainedthrough differing pathways (e.g., FYE programs, transfer programs, major specific courses)impact students’ community and engineering identity development in different ways during thefirst year and beyond.Nationally, there is no standard format, content, or timing with regard to FYE experiences.However, engineering education researchers have created ways of classifying FYE differences(e.g., [1], [2]). We used those existing classifications to identify diverse engineering pathwaysand understand how those pathways impacted engineer formation with respect to participation inengineering communities and developing engineering identities. The knowledge our
Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Preparing Future Engineers Through Project Based LearningAbstractA significant amount of research suggests the common reasons students leave an engineeringmajor include lack of faculty mentoring, lack of a sense of belonging, financial hardships, andcourse difficulties in the prerequisite STEM courses [1]. Project-based learning (PBL)potentially addresses several of these reasons and increases the chances of a student completingan engineering major.Engineering students are more likely to persist when they feel a sense of belonging andcommunity engagement, when they have early interactions with faculty mentors, and when theyexperience a series of successes [2]. The research question involves whether
Engineers (ASCE) has employed a methodicalapproach to aligning its standards for education and practice with the needs of the civilengineering profession [1]-[9]. The primary tools involved in this approach are the CivilEngineering Body of Knowledge and the Civil Engineering Program Criteria (CEPC) which areapplicable to all baccalaureate-level ABET EAC-accredited civil engineering programs [10].Both are periodically updated through a rigorous process incorporating input from a broad cross-section of practicing civil engineers, civil engineering educators, and accreditation experts. Toenhance predictability and promote effective change management, these updates are performedon a published eight-year cycle [11].The most recent iteration of this
feeling better informed aboutcollaborative robots, how they are used in manufacturing, how to program them, as well as how to operateindustry standard machine tools. This work in progress study may serve as a valuable guide for K-12 STEMeducators and policy makers interested in developing programs which inspire and equip pre-collegestudents to pursue engineering careers. Future work will enlarge the sample size of participants throughadditional offerings and include quantitative evaluations of instructional effectiveness in addition to thestudent surveys.IntroductionGlobal manufacturing is undergoing a paradigm shift towards flexible automation in the form of internet-enabled machinery and collaborative robots (cobots) [1]. Previously, due to
Curriculum, Teaching, and Educational Policy graduate program at Michigan State University in 2010. Her current research focuses on three key areas: (1) de- signing, developing, and conducting validation studies on assessments of content knowledge for teaching (CKT) science; (2) examining and understanding validity issues associated with measures designed to assess science teachers’ instructional quality, including observational measures, value-added measures, student surveys, and performance-based tasks; and (3) extending and studying the use of these knowl- edge and instructional practices measures of science teaching quality as summative assessment tools for licensure purposes and as formative assessment tools
Educational Policy graduate program at Michigan State University in 2010. Her current research focuses on three key areas: (1) de- signing, developing, and conducting validation studies on assessments of content knowledge for teaching (CKT) science; (2) examining and understanding validity issues associated with measures designed to assess science teachers’ instructional quality, including observational measures, value-added measures, student surveys, and performance-based tasks; and (3) extending and studying the use of these knowl- edge and instructional practices measures of science teaching quality as summative assessment tools for licensure purposes and as formative assessment tools integrated within teacher education