Illustrator, Microsoft Word, Excel, Origin American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Paper ID #31061AWARDS • Chancellor’s Award at University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee • Texas A&M University Engi-neering Scholarship • Dean’s Honor List at Korea UniversityACTIVITIES/COMMUNITY SERVICE • Volunteer Judge at Texas Science and Engineering Fair • Trea-surer of International Christian Fellowship at Texas A&M University • Volunteer Teacher at Vision Ko-rean School in College station, TX • Volunteer Teacher at Saenal Night School in SeoulPUBLICATIONS 1. H. Kim, X. Huang, I. Guo, S. Cui, Z
categories depends on the type of institution andwhether the faculty member is tenured/tenure-track (Table 1). While these categories arecommonplace, the compartmentalization of the categories will allow this framework to beapplied to tenure and nontenure-track faculty.Table 1. Type of Faculty Member and Emphasis on Career Development Categories Type of faculty member/Categories emphasized Teaching Scholarship Service Tenure track X X X Nontenure track: teaching-focused X X Nontenure track: research-focused X XInstitutions Involved in this EffortThree
engineering. Dr. Wood aims to recover the benefits of classical-model, literature-based learning in civil engineering education. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Three Model Framework for Engineering Problem SolvingAbstractA three-model framework provides a foundation and context for developing engineering analysisskills. The three models are 1) reality, 2) mental models, and 3) engineering and math models. Adiagram of these models supports the engineering problem solving format (Given, Find,Procedure, Solution, Answer) and illustrates the interaction between engineering application(reality), engineering judgement (mental model), and scientific theory
domains.IntroductionConcept maps, as facilitative tools for learning, was developed by Novak and others in the late1970s [1]. The idea was to represent ‘knowledge domains’ in a visual, logical sequence with anemphasis on the relationship between the various elements or ‘concepts.’ At the very least,concept maps help to organize the contents of a knowledge domain. At its best use, concept mapshelp students recollect prior knowledge, link the various courses in liberal arts, science and math,engineering, and economics and summarize their learning. A list-based syllabus does not connectthe previous knowledge to the one pursued in the current course. The syllabus also does notenlighten the student about the holistic nature of transdisciplinary education in the
1 To Be, or Not to Be, a Professor: Views of Engineering Postdoctoral ScholarsAbstractThrough an embedded, multiple-case study design, this interpretivist research paper explores theways in which 22 engineering postdoctoral scholars describe the appeal of pursuing a career inthe professoriate. Interviews, grounded by social cognitive career theory (SCCT) (Lent et al.,1994), offered an in-depth understanding of the nature, meaning, and ways in which theirpostdoctoral scholars’ learning experiences influence their view of the professoriate and,consequently, their career decision-making process. Data analysis strategies established bySilverman (1993) and Stake (1995) were utilized to examine the
thespecific activities in the context of innovation and entrepreneurship competitions that may berelevant when exploring students’ entrepreneurial intention. Next, the report proposeshypotheses of possible pathways of how the constructs of PBT may have an impact onengineering students’ entrepreneurial intention for later verification.IntroductionInnovation and entrepreneurship, as major driver and new engine for economic developmentand growth, have been regarded as critical by counties around the world to facilitate nationaleconomic transformation and upgrading as well as international competitiveness [1].Accordingly, world-class universities devote to cultivating innovative and entrepreneurialtalents and current innovation and entrepreneurship
. The students werealso administered the Godwin Engineering Identity (GEI) survey. Data analysis indicated thatstudents’ tolerance of ambiguity increased on only few items of the RRAT instrument with thetime spent in college. The analysis of the engineering identity indicated positive changes onseveral of the items of the instrument for the freshmen while reduction on some items of the GEIsurvey were observed. This research is supported by NSF Grant# 1832041..IntroductionIt is expected that by 2025 the US will require an additional 3.5 million science, technology,engineering and mathematics (STEM) qualified persons to fill the growing need [1]. However, thechallenge being faced is the retention and subsequent graduation of students in STEM
James Christopher Foreman1 1 Department of Engineering Fundamentals Aly A. Farag2 , Asem Ali2 , Islam Alkabbany2 2 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Marci S. DeCaro3 3 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences Thomas R. Tretter4 4 Department of Elementary, Middle & Secondary Teacher Education University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292 April 29, 2020AbstractThis paper is a work in progress, supported by NSF funds, applied to first-year engineeringmathematics courses. An approach to
University since completion of the program. Weanalyzed the transcripts from the interview using an inductive approach to coding the data touncover themes. Results suggest that the Summer Scholars program impacts areas ofundergraduate engineering students’ university experience in the intended ways.Introduction Many colleges in the United States offer summer bridge programs to their students toincrease retention and preparedness to promote student success [1]. Since 2012, the College ofEngineering has conducted a first-year summer bridge program for 30-60 entering engineeringstudents to get a head start on their transition from high school to university. The program,entitled Summer Scholars, is a residential program where students take any in
and promulgates three sets of criteria for accrediting engineeringprograms [1]: I. General Criteria for Baccalaureate Level Programs II. General Criteria for Master’s Level Programs III. Program CriteriaThe General Criteria for Baccalaureate Level Programs, which are applicable to undergraduateengineering programs in all disciplines, are organized into the following eight criteria [1]: • Criterion 1 – Students • Criterion 2 – Program Educational Objectives • Criterion 3 – Student Outcomes • Criterion 4 – Continuous Improvement • Criterion 5 – Curriculum • Criterion 6 – Faculty • Criterion 7 – Facilities • Criterion 8 – Institutional SupportABET has classified Criteria 1, 2, 4, 7, and 8 as harmonized criteria—meaning that
lead to varying career outcomes. BWEF are lesslikely than men to be employed in tenure-track positions [2], earn tenure [2,3], or become a fullprofessor [2,3]; and the findings of a recent study report perceptions of disparities in salary andawards [2]. On the other hand, the receipt of a promotion, tenure, and professional autonomy arethings that have been found to contribute to the retention of BWEF [2]. Existing literature identifies four types of factors that significantly influence their experiencesand career outcomes: (1) the impact of mentoring; (2) aspects of a chilly organizational climate andacts of incivility; (3) clarifying role expectations; and (4) personal attributes. (See “ConstructsOverview” for additional information
a continued attempt to construct and maintain a shared conception of aproblem [1, p.70]”. The role of the teacher in implementing collaborative problem solvingactivities in face-to-face STEM classrooms has received increasing attention in recent years [2],[3], [4], [5]. According to these researchers, teachers must implement strategies that can facilitatestudent interactions in groups which, in turn, can positively impact the group progress towardsthe goal of solving the task during the activity. These strategies must take place prior to thebeginning of the activity, during the activity, and at the end of the activity [3]. Empirical studiesthat focus on examining these strategies are limited [6], [7], [8], [9]; they all recommend
contributing to student’s perceptions of their competence, autonomy,and relatedness. Implications for mathematics faculty about how to make course structures moremotivationally supportive for calculus students will be discussed.IntroductionCalculus I serves as a gatekeeper course to STEM majors [1],[2]. In addition to having a highfailure rate, students leave this course with a decreased confidence and enjoyment ofmathematics, with students at research universities showing the greatest decrease in these aspectsthroughout the course [3]. This poses a significant challenge since these universities are the mainsource of our future scientists and engineers, and our nation is in need of more STEM majorsentering the workforce in order to sustain our global
several identity theories to describe a form of identification that operates across thepersonal, role, and group-bases of identity (Burke, 2003), and involves a three part process wherebyindividuals (1) internalize self-meanings that position them as similar to others (i.e., sameness), (2)stigmatize personal characteristics, roles, and groups viewed as out-groups (i.e., differentiation), and (3)rank the relative importance of a given identity within the broader self-concept (i.e., centrality).Moreover, the relevant meanings attached to the self (i.e., the content of the identity), and bases ofidentity most relevant at a given moment (i.e., personal, role, or group-bases), are presumed to vary acrossdifferent social, cultural and institutional
overlooked by practitioners and researchers. Additionally, the platform has supportedworkshops organized across the country. Workshops are co-organized with organizations thatoperate large backbone networks connecting research centers and national laboratories, andcolleges and universities conducting teaching and research activities.1. IntroductionGeneral-purpose enterprise networks are capable of transporting basic data, e.g., emails,multimedia, and web content. However, these networks face many challenges when movingpetabytes (PBs) of scientific data, e.g., genomic, climate, imaging, and high-energy physics, [1].As a response, network architects have developed the concept of a Science Demilitarized Zone(Science DMZ or S-DMZ) [2] as parts of a
welcoming climate as well as nurturingprofessors and students. The current study focuses on transfer students in engineering at a publicuniversity in the MidAtlantic. The data are drawn from a baseline survey about the climate fordiversity and inclusion administered to all engineering college students in the Fall of 2016 andrepeated mid-year 2018-9. Suggested supports for transfer students are discussed in the paper’sconclusions.IntroductionThe proportion of vertical transfer students from two-year to four-year institutions of highereducation has been increasing over the past several decades, and most recently since 2008 [1].This pipeline is especially important for minorities and underrepresented groups in highereducation, especially those of
while satisfying the need for institutional accountability.ePortfolios help to facilitate deeper understanding of course content, make the curriculum morerelevant for students, and build connections between classroom and professional learningcompetencies. Of importance to this investigation is the emphasis placed on 1) personalreflection in the context of developing required competencies in engineering practice and 2) theinterconnected roles of emotional engagement and cognitive engagement. Results from studentevaluation questionnaires suggest that ePortfolios effectively connect teaching, learning, andindividualized assessment, making them a valuable pedagogy in engineering education.IntroductionePortfoliosEmployers nowadays focus less on
approach hasbeen used in two sections of a linear circuit analysis course in Fall 2019, and student survey datais presented to show preference for the new method over the usual textbook method. Aninteractive multiple-choice tutorial describing the new method has been integrated into a step-based tutoring system for linear circuit analysis.1. IntroductionElementary linear circuit analysis is one of the most widely taught gateway courses in virtuallyall engineering schools. For example, such a course was taught to 1364 students in 26 classsections in Summer 2019 through Spring 2020 at the author’s institution alone. Such coursesvary in that they may sometimes include topics in electronics or signal processing, but in generalthey tend to cover a well
math instructors. Acrossthe variety of types in undergraduate mathematics, exams are primarily seen by students andfaculty as summative assessments. Dixson and Worrell [1] describe summative assessments ascumulative exams that “capture what a student has learned” (p. 156). Formative assessments, bycomparison, “provide feedback to teachers and students to help learn more effectively” [1], page154). When students are expected to both perform and learn from their mistakes on exams, thoseexams are both summative and formative in nature. However, when student grades dependheavily on exam averages, which is typically the case in undergraduate math courses, studentsare most likely to view exams as summative assessments unless otherwise
to be a useful tool for connecting and organizing course topics forboth students and instructors.IntroductionConstructivist learning theory, in which learners create their own meaning of new material andmake connections with prior knowledge, is the basis for a variety of active learning approaches[1], [2]. Creating a concept map is one way for students to represent connections between ideas.Concept maps, or mind maps, are visual representations of the organization and connectionsbetween pieces of information [3]–[5]. Relationships between various concepts are shown byconnecting lines or arcs. Concept mapping has been used as an educational tool for more thanthirty years, but has recently gained attention in STEM (science, technology
foundthat team conflict is highly negatively correlated with team performance and team enjoyment incapstone design courses, with 1 in 4 students reporting that they experienced significant conflict,with the majority of cases consisting of conflict of a personal, or relationship, nature [1].In 2015, a series of teamwork training modules were developed by the Teamwork Clinic throughthe collaboration of various departments on campus [2]. Each of the six modules were designedto integrate seamlessly into courses with large or lengthy design projects, with the goal thatstudents apply what they learn directly to their team processes and team projects. This papercontinues to expand on work that has been published about the first four teamwork modules inthe
projects.BackgroundTeamwork is an important skill for engineers, recognized by inclusion among the studentlearning outcomes in ABET [1]. Teamwork incorporates an array of skills including verbalcommunication, listening, and respectful collaboration. Being a good teammate alsoencompasses a variety of attitudes including honesty, open mindedness, tolerance, diligence,reliability, and being considerate [2, pg. 147]. Engineering teams may include individuals fromdiverse demographic groups (gender, race/ethnicity), as well as an array of characteristics thatare not visible. Cultural differences among teammates may be significant as engineeringbecomes increasingly globalized [2, 3]. The American Society of Civil Engineers included in itsBody of Knowledge (CEBOK3) [4
to measure usability and user experiences, a survey wasadministered to student laboratory employees and student end users. Open survey questions werealso included and analyzed for common themes to identify future improvements to the system.Student end users who also utilize lab resources in other areas of the School of Engineeringcompare and contrast their experiences between systems in terms of usability. Lab staff andinstructor perspectives will be discussed.Background Our Bioengineering, also referred to as Biomedical Engineering, educational laboratory,serves as both a teaching laboratory for regular laboratory courses, while at the same timeremains open for general use, as a “MakerSpace.” 1 While some of these classes use
is ensuring a student begins a project with most of the skills needed to complete it,this paper outlines an extreme counterexample. We demonstrate that by taking advantage ofstudent motivation, projects requiring skill sets far beyond those possessed by students at thebeginning of the project can be both feasible and highly educational. Our hope is that readers ofthis paper will be able to use the design and construction of a low-power HET or similar projectsin their own education as an applied way to learn fundamental physics while also customizing thisproject structure to address individual students’ learning goals.1 IntroductionOver the course of a single semester, from September to December of 2018, we—a group of fourundergraduate
details in this work. One project’s goal was to identify Soybean (Glycine max)in its Cotyledon (VC) and 1st -5th trifoliate stages, the other project’s goal was to identifyHemp (Cannabis sativa) in its three variations. The databases used in these projects werebuilt from real field images, which contain 9 common weed species. The students’achievement, as well as discovered issues, are assessed and reported in this work. Thestudents’ projects will be further used to support our 1890 Land Grant and CBG research.1. IntroductionIn recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has become one of the most intriguing researchtopics in the world. As one of the most successful AI structures, deep learning was appliedto various fields including computer vision
orallyand in written form at local or national conferences.Using computer-aided technology, the design and manufacturing of boat propellers are one of thefocuses of undergraduate research projects. The goal is to identify the effects of geometriccharacteristics and the efficiency of blades shape on the propeller's thrust force. The project is intwo phases: In the first phase in summer 2017, a MANE sophomore student was involved in thisproject to redesign a propeller model using a Coordinates Measurement Machine (CMM) andNX 11.0 CAD software. This phase enhanced the student’s hands-on experience in application ofCMM and solid modeling in design process of parts with complicated geometric characteristics.Figure 1 provided the CMM setup for geometry
Society for Engineering Education, 2020Undergraduate STEM Students’ Role in Making Technology Decisions forSolving Calculus Questions and the Impact of These Decisions on LearningCalculus 1 Emre Tokgöz, 1Berrak S. Tekalp, 1Elif. N. Tekalp, and 2Hasan A. Tekalp1 Emre.Tokgoz@qu.edu, 1Berrak.Tekalp@qu.edu, 1Elif.Tekalp@qu.edu, 2Hasan.Tekalp@qu.edu 1 Industrial Engineering, School of Engineering, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, CT, 065182 Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering, Quinnipiac University, Hamden, CT, 06518 1. IntroductionThere are challenging problems in STEM research that can be solved by using differenttechnologies. STEM students are usually expected to have a good
exacerbates this problem is that this infrastructure still runsmainly on legacy control, monitoring, and protection systems that may not realize its fullpotential. Smart grid has emerged as a powerful promise for improving the reliability, efficiency,security, and sustainability of the next generation power system [1]. It has attracted interest fromfields such as engineering, computer science, economics, sociology, and policy (see, amongothers, [2]–[8]). Despite this diverse interest, there are still critical gaps in the availabletechnology for smart grid. For example, while environmental concerns and energy independencerecommend utilizing renewable resources in the power system, one of the U.S. grand energychallenges remains to integrate large
activities is often focused on the impacts to the K-12 kids (e.g. [2-4]): Do they gain knowledge about engineering? Increase their interest inengineering? In contrast, the research question explored in this work was: What benefits doundergraduate engineering students derive in association with their activities with K-12 students?Undergraduate student development is a common goal for K-12 outreach programs [1],particularly when these programs are aligned with service-learning activities embedded incourses (e.g. [5]). Some studies have examined the impacts of programs engaging with K-12students on the college students. Carberry et al. [6] used surveys, knowledge assessments, andobservations to determine that students participating in the Student
. I. I NTRODUCTIONHigh Performance Computing (HPC) stands at the forefront of engineering innovation [1, 2].With affordable and advanced HPC resources more readily accessible than ever before,computational simulation of complex physical phenomena is an increasingly attractive strategyto predict the physical behavior of diverse engineered systems [2], such as systems in nuclearsafety [3], outcome of cancer treatment [4], or multidimensional flight stresses on aircraft. Tomaintain the U.S.’s leadership position in HPC production and application [2], and to meet theneeds of the rapidly growing HPC market [5], American institutions of higher education mustproduce a sufficient supply of highly-trained HPC professionals. Sadly, at current rates