had three years of teaching experience, but thatteacher had worked in the industry for 23 years. Five of them taught in suburban schools;one taught in a rural school; none of them taught in urban schools. Only one teacher taughtin a Title 1 school. The subjects they taught included science, biology, anatomy, andhealthcare. A summary of participants’ information can be found in Table 1 and Table 2.Data Collection Murphy et al. (2013) used interviews to study how female students perceived theircompliant or non-compliant behaviors and how their interactions with teachers shape theirview on their behaviors. We similarly conducted our six interviews. When doing theinterview, we used a phenomenographic methodology, which allows us to get
are provided. These examples of reflection activities may help engineering educatorsdetermine the best ways to integrate reflection into their teaching practices. The different typesof reflection described in the literature -- including critical, dialogic, and descriptive – provide aframework to contrast different goals for student reflection.BackgroundReflection has been used to facilitate student learning in higher education [1-4], includingengineering [5-8]. Rogers [2] examined many theories and definitions related to reflection andsummarized that reflective thought is a “cognitive and affective process or activity that requiresactive engagement by the individual while examining one’s responses, beliefs, and premises,resulting in
truss, testing waterquality, performing a traffic study, and attending a public planning commission meeting instead of usingArduinos. The students were often registered for the version that matched their schedule rather thanbased on the version that matched their discipline of interest, so all three sections in both semesters had adistribution of the student’s preferred programs.The survey results after 1 semester of each delivery method (114 students completing the survey fromboth semesters) did not show any statistical difference between the discipline-specific and the generalizedversion of the course. The survey regardless of which approach was delivered did verify that 65% of thestudents felt it was engaging, 72% said it increased their
student can perform the entiresimulation process in 15 minutes, whereas the actual laboratory takes about two hours.Instructors are freed up to provide more instruction and in-depth learning as they don’t have tocarefully monitor the students in the lab to preclude them from making costly mistakes. Thisfreedom, for both instructors and students, creates a unique learning atmosphere that wouldnot be possible otherwise.Sputter Deposition and Vacuum SystemBefore entering the virtual reality module, students are instructed in the functionality and useof the sputtering system as well as the vacuum system through lectures and homework.Sputtering SystemDC sputtering systems are composed of anode and cathode electrodes [1, 2]. The front surfaceof the
systems to differentexcitations help students understand the characteristics of various responses, such as transientresponses and steady-state responses, resonance and damping effect on the responses excited byharmonic forces. As an application, an airplane has been modelled by using a three-DOF system(fuselage and two wings) in this paper for studying its inherent properties and vibrationresponses to various inputs.1. Introduction Vibrations are undesirable and harmful in most cases in mechanical systems and structures[1]. Noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) control, for example, has long been an importantresearch in automotive industries. Vehicle NVH characteristics influence customer’s perceptionof quality and comfort. The annoying
preparing technical reports and PowerPoint andposter oral presentations. On the last day of the program, students presented their group projects.We report on a 9-year exercise conducted using the WOW project including detailed studentfeedback from the most recent year. 1. IntroductionEngineering design is defined as the communication of a set of rational decisions obtained withcreative problem solving for achieving certain stated objectives within prescribed constraints [1].The role of design in an engineering curriculum is a key factor contributing to its success [1]. 1Engineering design projects provide students with a broad view related to the material presentedin lectures. Through project-based
, Industry 4.0 focus, and research targetedindustry. Introduction The rise of Industry 4.0 transforms the workplace [1]. New technology reducesproduction costs while increases the product quality with more efficient work processes[2]. While it is plausible that Industry 4.0 improves people’s overall life satisfaction, atthe meanwhile, this rapid change causes anxiety among employees because advancedtechnology may replace human workers, especially blue collar workers [1, 3]. Forexample, in a traditional warehouse, workers’ job, which includes operations of pickup,delivery, and bookkeeping are highly repetitive [4]. Even for those who stayed,cooperating with machines or using new technologies bears
in each circuit state. The terminal values of each circuit state are matched with beginning values of theobjects in the next circuit state. Details of classes, methods and functions will be presented in the full paper. Thepaper presents examples of Buck, Boost, BuckBoost, and other converter topologies. This methodology is generalenough to generate waveforms in several DC-DC converters and inverters.1. INTRODUCTIONThe steady state operation of power converter is fairly complex and require clear understanding of circuitconfiguration which may not necessarily be constant over a period of time. Analysis and Spice simulation are twowell-known methods of obtaining the time-domain waveforms of voltages and currents in different parts of
studies are anticipated to serveas a guidepost for aligning educational strategies and developing effective training for futureethical practitioners. In our paper, we present an overview of the study (background andmethods), progress to date, and how we expect the results to inform engineering ethics educationand industry ethics training.IntroductionEngineering degree programs recognize that ethics is essential in preparing students forprofessional practice. However, current efforts in ethics education often “decontextualizes ethicspractice from the situated contexts in which ethical theories are ‘applied’” ([1], p. 667), and thusmay not adequately prepare engineers for the types of situated ethical issues they will likely facein practice. The
resulted in the increase inpersistence to graduation [1], [2]. More recently, researchers have shown that such participationis related to positive outcomes across a wide range of dimensions, including social capital andbelonging [3], design [4], [5], teamwork [4]–[6], communication [4], [6], [7], ethics [8], andleadership [4], [9]. This paper examines the relationships between participation in a variety oftypes of co-curricular activities and a number of social, academic, and professional outcomes.Conceptual FrameworkFigure 1 shows a schematic of the conceptual framework guiding this work (Authors, submitted).It is largely based on Astin’s Input-Environment-Output theory [10] and Weidman’s conceptualframework of Undergraduate Socialization [11
alreadyincorporated into engineering education. Four prominent virtues in undergraduate engineeringeducation are detailed in this paper: (1) critical thinking (an intellectual virtue), (2) empathy (amoral virtue), (3) service (a civic virtue), and (4) teamwork (a performance virtue). Byconducting a literature review of these four virtues, we gain insight into how engineeringeducators already infuse virtues into engineering education and identify the gaps andopportunities that exist to enrich undergraduate engineering education through a virtueframework. Although virtues are part of engineering education, our findings reveal that mostengineering educators do not explicitly describe these concepts as “virtues” and tend to treatthem instead as “skills.” While
of their partnerengineering students. Both groups reported gaining new perspectives from working ininterdisciplinary teams and seeing benefits for the fifth and sixth grade participants, includingexposing girls and students of color to engineering and computing.IntroductionIn addition to amassing expertise in their field, engineering students must learn to collaborateacross disciplinary lines if they are to successfully negotiate today’s complex challenges [1].Increasingly, engineering solutions must integrate knowledge and practices from multipledisciplines and engineers must be able to recognize when expertise from outside their field canenhance their perspective and ability to develop innovative solutions. Tomek [2] discussed
the intrinsic motivation of students. Thus,arguably it also has a positive impact on learning experience. Existing literature does not identifywhat attitudes and practices can be implemented in schools of engineering to promote effectivecare in teaching. This paper describes the progress of an ongoing research currently carried out ata large engineering school in Chile. The investigation has two main objectives. First, tounderstand what does it mean to care in teaching; second, to understand what is the influence thatcaring teaching has on the students’ learning experience.IntroductionFrom a philosophical perspective [1], the ethics of care involves attending to and meeting theneeds of who we take responsibility for. It particularly values
fundamental concept that is commonly taught in foundational engineering classes inthe “middle years” where students often struggle to find relevance [1], [2]. Instructors deliverlectures on the processing, production, storage and delivery of energy for industrial andhousehold purposes. There are discussions about the resources used to create energy and how tobetter use those resources. Sometimes engineering considerations of energy focus on quantitiesand numbers involving efficiency and costs. Energy continues to be one of those engineeringtopics that is siloed and discussed in isolation without a social, cultural, or environmentalcontext.The conceptualization of energy within a sociotechnical framework is critical for the formationof future
Case Study of Elementary Students’ Conceptions of Engineering Across STEM and Non- STEM SchoolsIntroductionWith the inclusion of engineering practices in A Framework for K-12 Science Education [1] andengineering standards in the Next Generation Science Standards [2], engineering instruction isgrowing increasingly common in elementary classrooms in the U.S. One approach to increasingengineering instruction is through schools with an explicit focus on science, technology,engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and national policy documents in the U.S. have calledfor the development of such schools [3]. However, a clear vision for what K-12 engineeringeducation should include and how it should be implemented is
of these more difficult topics [1-15].The discrete-time equivalent of the impulse response, the unit sample response, can bejust as onerous for students to understand, since it’s regularly viewed as “just a computersimulation” and not related to anything that’s practical or happening in the real-world.To illustrate this point, for several years, the authors have presented to students a questionsimilar to, “In your own words, define the term, impulse response.” The average score onthis question was routinely the lowest of any of the questions on the Signals & Systemsfinal examination. This improved significantly when real-time demonstrations, otherhardware demonstrations, and laboratory exercises were introduced in the
[1] [2] [3]. Such reward systems are incongruous with institutional missionsthat include teaching, service, and community engagement in addition to knowledge production.Moreover, such reward systems have been characterized as gendered, since theydisproportionately value activities typically or stereotypically dominated by men and undervalueactivities often undertaken by women [4] [5]. Other studies have found that ambiguities inpromotion systems disadvantage women more than men [6] [7]. Still others have identifiedgender biases in a range of data considered in faculty evaluation, including research quality andproductivity [8] [9], student ratings of instruction [10] [11], and review letters [12]. All of thesefactors no doubt contribute to
theEngineering Education and Centers Division of the Directorate for Engineering and as aCAREER PI (2010). There are many resources for PIs that focus on NSF’s review criteria andthe mechanics of writing a strong proposal. This paper concentrates on three topics that are lessoften discussed: articulating how your CAREER proposal fits into your career vision and goals;meeting with NSF program officers; and building a network of support for developing theproposal.1. Articulating how your CAREER proposal fits into your career vision and goalsTo write an effective CAREER proposal, you need to articulate how your five-year project fitswithin your long-term academic career plans and that that you are the only person to do the workyou propose [1]. Your CAREER
. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2020What will you do to help elementary students who struggle in the engineering design process? Analysis of teachers’ reflections. (Fundamental)IntroductionThe next generation of STEM workers and leaders requires knowledge and skills in order toeffectively contribute and compete in the global workforce [1], [2]. More importantly, thesustainability of our planet requires citizens who can work collaboratively to think critically,make ethical and moral decisions, and solve problems [3]. The science and engineering practicesdescribed by the Next Generation Science Standards [4] can provide a framework for teachers toengage their students in
(often surface-level) similarities betweenindividuals. A good match can provide essential support, whereas a poor match can leave anindividual feeling continued (or increased) isolation. Because of differences in cultural capitalbetween various identity-defined populations, even the initial ability to access the support is apotential issue beyond the quality of the match itself [1]. There are fewer URMs in STEMcompared to other populations [2], and thus, limited individuals to serve in these capacities whenseeking demographics-based matches.In previous work, the authors developed a profile format for role models (STEM alumni of apredominantly white institution who identified as URMs) to communicate their personal andprofessional narratives to
motivation, and negative emotions on both student andprofessional teams can be linked to misunderstanding caused by communication errors,specifically differences in how individuals interpret language used by team members [1][2][3]. Asource of this problematic interpretation results from use of ambiguous terminology, oftenrelated to probability (i.e “probably”, “maybe”, “often”, “unlikely”) or time (i.e “ASAP”,“soon”, “right away”), but can also include other wording that is somewhat vague inunderstanding (“good”, “alright”, “bad”). Brewer and Holmes previously investigated ambiguousterminology and the variability of responses across both probability and time-based languageambiguity and whether a relationship existed across demographics (specifically
represent 38% of astudent’s time in the degree, the expected proportion of pre-construction students to allconstruction students is approximately 40% of the population. Figure 1 presents the program’senrollment trends over the last nine years, which shows the unexpectedly high proportion of pre-majors to matriculated majors.The pre-construction program was introduced when the degree was modified from an IndustrialTechnology major to an Engineering Technology/Construction Management major, it wasinitially implemented as a series of pre-requisites to take upper level courses. When the pre-construction program was modified to be a pre-major program in the Fall 2014 Catalog (so thatstudents enrolling in the Construction - Matriculated
whitepaper on the future of the Division. As part of hisstudy for the whitepaper the author responded [1] to nine comments in the Division’s fourthhandbook [2] on a previously published paper by him on “Why technological literacy and forwhom? [3]The principal axiom drawn from this analysis was that “the general aims or purposes ofprograms in engineering and technological literacy are far from clear, and in so far as they aredeclared or implicit, are a function of the audience to whom the course or program isdirected”.In order to better understand the problem a comparative study is made with an innovativecurriculum in liberal studies that took place in the UK, as they are roughly analogous. Itconfirms that any attempt to develop technological
drawupon the skills they learn in Statics throughout their engineering education. Students with astrong understanding of statics will likely have an easier time with related and more challengingconcepts in subsequent courses. Specifically, Statics has been shown to be an effective predictorof how students will perform in Dynamics [1], and instructors in Capstone Design courses oftenstate that lacking an understanding of statics concepts hinders achievement in design [2]. It istherefore worthwhile to examine common teaching practices in Statics and to developinstructional methods that will enable students to confidently apply the skills they learn in Staticsto a wide variety of engineering problems.In many courses – Statics as well as others – it
study the experiences of students on teams that have the goal of participating in anational or international competition versus those of students on non-competition teams. Usingsurvey data from students in the project ecosystem, paired with institutional data on studentdemographics, we conduct an exploratory analysis to understand whom our projects ecosystem isserving.IntroductionProject-based learning is often used in engineering classes to allow students to practicecollaboration, communication, and teamwork. These skills are considered essential professionalskills in the field of engineering and are often emphasized in engineering education curriculums[1]. At the University of California, Irvine, (UCI) students in the Department of Mechanical
, then move on to discuss transitioning from bell-curve gradingto specifications grading in a statistics class, and finally creating a first-year engineering coursefrom scratch using specifications grading. In all three cases, the move to specifications gradingtook a few twists and turns, but overall, we plan to continue to use specifications grading.Through the diversity of course types, we hope to show how specifications grading can be usedflexibly in different types and levels of engineering courses. As we explain, in each case studythere are particular goals, benefits, and challenges of specifications grading in different types ofcourses that can help faculty guide implementation.Case StudiesCase Study 1: Senior Capstone DesignAt a small
correlated with amotivation. However, amotivation was buffered by the intervention condition; students in the intervention condition did not have their performance affected by their amotivation. Students in the control condition still did. This work is supported by NSF grant 1540627.IntroductionThe demand for engineers in the market is increasing as technology continues to increase incomplexity. However, college students in engineering fields often experience decreases inmotivation due to loss of interest and reduced competence beliefs [1, 2], which leads to thereduced retention in an engineering major and career [3].Motivation is an important component in predicting a variety of academic outcomes such asperformance
and opportunities for improvement, we highlighttargets for future research. The paper concludes by laying a groundwork for future inquiry in thecontext of this Statics study abroad program.Why Statics? Statics acts as a critical, core course for a number of engineering disciplines both withinPUWL curricula and more broadly among engineering institutions [1]. Some describe Statics as a‘gatekeeper’ course, a bottleneck in student’s curricular pathways that can make-or-break theirgraduation timeline, potentially deterring students from continuing their engineering studies in theprocess [2]. Statics acts as a curricular lynchpin, and access to Statics courses can drasticallyinfluence students’ enrollment decisions during their early years
outlined in the present work provides positive experiences for students and potentiallymore fully prepares them for success beyond the classroom. Importantly, because assigning teamsmight be perceived as disempowering to students—at least initially—engineering educators shouldwork to be transparent in their team formation practices and explain to students the rationale forsuch approaches.1. Introduction As engineering students graduate and enter the workforce, they are expected to possess numerous skills necessary for long-term success in the field. Chief among them is the ability to work collaboratively in teams [1]. This is because modern engineering practice requires proper collaboration and communication. It is therefore not surprising
writing prompt: personal experiences with biasWhile discussions of bias and limitations in model-based reasoning appear in analytical problemsthroughout the course, the main intervention took place during an open-ended team project thatoccurred after the first midterm. As part of the intervention, students were asked to writereflections about their own experiences of bias. They were instructed to choose one of the twofollowing prompts: 1. Please describe a time when you, or someone you know, were personally impacted by bias in an engineering design. What was the value to society the design was intended to create? How did bias affect how the design worked for you (or the person you know)? How did this impact you (or the person you