adepartment head or a Dean. The NSF call says that this is to “establish institutionalaccountability.” For change to occur, it is critical to have someone in administration who cansupport change or provide leverage. An expert in engineering education or computer scienceeducation research is needed--this person should be familiar with the literature in this area and beable to ground the project plan within that literature. For example, have similar ideas been triedat other institutions? What are best practices? An expert in social science must be included--thisperson could be from a number of different departments including sociology or education. Thisperson should be familiar with the literature on organizational change. They need to be able toadvise
, transportation planning, civil infrastructure management, and Lafayette’s introductory first year engineering course. Dr. Sanford Bernhardt serves on the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Committees on Education and Faculty Development and the Transportation Research Board Committee on Education and Training. She previously has served as vice-chair of the ASCE Infrastructure Systems Committee, chair of the ASEE’s Civil Engineering Division, and a member of the Transportation Research Board committees on Artificial Intelligence and Advanced Computing, Asset Management, and Emerging Technology for Design and Construction. She received her Ph.D. and M.S. from Carnegie Mellon University, and her B.S.E. from Duke University.Dr
advance our efforts in sociotechnical integration with a form ofunderstanding and practice that best aligns with category 4 of the framework provided by Smithet al: with social and technical dimensions of a given phenomenon not only mutually shaped, butfully mutually constituted. What we came up with was a surprisingly discrete model of facultyprofessional development for our department, whose faculty identifies primarily as scholars in a)engineering and design education or b) the social sciences. This model extends from the team-teaching efforts described above but goes further to require instructional teams to define“integrated lessons” building upon each of their mutual disciplinary instructional traditions.Our proposed instructional
criteria for qualification and enrollmentprocedure, format of the course, three forms of the engineering practice; industrial internships,in-house engineering and research projects, and off-campus research work. A variety of positionsand projects will be covered in the paper that are focused on the furthering of the active learningexperience for the engineering students through in-house projects, where it is important to allowstudents to formulate their own ideas about the subject matter using hands-on experiences andengineering knowledge. 3 The impact on student preparation through faculty course assessmentreports (FCARs), student feedback, and work supervisor feedback will also be included in thispaper. The additional benefits to the program
, graduate student training and mentoring, and the evaluation tools for all participants. The resultsfrom the study will also help the academic community to initialize a practice of the One Teach, OneEngage co-teaching model, through demonstrations of the benefits for all participants and addressing thechallenges of implementing a similar program at their institutions.References 1. ABET. “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2021 – 2022.” abet.org. https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering- programs-2021-2022/ (accessed Jan. 7, 2022). 2. S. Van Ginkel, J. Gulikers, H. Biemans, and M. Mulder, “Towards a set of design principles for developing oral presentation
second phase involved reviewing some of the more recent curricular modifications inengineering education, and in general, research data supported that idea that successfulmodifications include a variety of approaches designed to work together and reflect theindividual learning styles of the students. Randolph’s4 recent review of Kolb’s5 and Bloom’s6work regarding individual learning styles suggests that engineering educators should designcurricular methodologies that are more student-centered and less teacher-centered. At the sametime, Randolph4 proposes that writing can be used as a powerful tool for learning byincorporating more psychologically active writing activities to promote transfer from contentknowledge to application of content
(though it isopen to all) that introduces students to mentors and campus resources, there is a residentialcampus with a living-learning community program, there is a “University 101” class that allstudents take that acclimates them to university life and study, and there is a robust tutoringcenter which is free of charge. One possible explanation for the lack of differences betweengroups in the current research may be the efficacy of these programs in alleviating gaps foundin previous research. However, since this research was not designed to test the efficacy of anyor all of these programs, such an explanation is clearly speculative. In any case, the effects ofthese programs might be short term. Once students get further into their college
Session 2526 Meeting ABET EC 2000 Criterion 3 Outcomes with a Laboratory Course Drs. R. H. King and J. P. Gosink Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines1 IntroductionColorado School of Mines (CSM) is a public research university devoted to engineering andapplied science that has distinguished itself by developing high-quality graduates andscholarship. The U.S. News and World Report Inc. rated CSM 26th in the Top National PublicUniversities and 50th in the Best Undergraduate Engineering Programs with Ph.D. Programs in20011. The school’s mission as written in the Colorado statutes
survey of industry needs, researchers conclude that systems thinking is one of themost important characteristics sought in university graduates hired by manufacturing firms.2Systems thinkers are adept at understanding dynamic interdependence.3 Manufacturing processesare linked and intertwined and changes in one part of a system have effects and consequencesthat cascade through the entire system. As one factor changes, there are interactions across thesystem the leads to dynamic complexity.In order to facilitate the development of systems thinking in students, educational practice mustinclude activities that allow students to explore system dynamics and develop skills in theassessment of dynamic complexity. Traditional teaching methods that
actions are designed to gain and maintain the respect of the students,which is necessary to keeping the students engaged in the course, thereby allowing for thestudents to learn. While the actions alone will not turn every faculty member into a greatteacher, they will allow the teachers to become effective teachers. In turn, this opens the door toimproving the education received by their students.Bibliography1. Marshall, J., and Marshall, J. “Pedagogy: Review of Best Practices,” Proceedings of the 2008 ASEE AmericanSociety of Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, Pittsburgh, PA. (2008).2. Chickering, A.W., and Gamson, Z.F. (1991). Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice inUndergraduate Education. New Directions for
; Measures impact and outcomes (good intentions are not enough) > Identifies areas for improvement (formative evaluation) > Helps you tell your story to stakeholders > Helps you make a logic model for your project There are lots of different ways to work with an evaluator.Evaluators are not really meant to grade you or to fill out a checklist. An evaluator’s role isto holistically measure your impact, identify areas of improvement, and gather data to helpyou tell your story. 18 Examples of Various Logic Models The best ones are somewhere between very simple to very complex There is
, Architectural Technology, and a Master’s in Facility Management. His field experience includes residential and light commercial construction. He has been an architectural designer as well as superintendent for single and multi-family residential construction projects. Mr. Ray worked as an engineering design manager in the Building Components Manufacturing Industry for over fifteen years.Dr. Brandon Sorge, Indiana University - Purdue University, Indianapolis Brandon Sorge is an Assistant Professor of STEM Education Research in the Department of Technology Leadership and Communication at the Purdue School of Engineering and Technology at IUPUI. His research interests include all aspects of STEM education, espeDr. Katrenia Reed
doctorate in engineering education. She previously conducted research in Purdue University’s First- Year Engineering Program with the Network for Nanotechnology (NCN) Educational Research team, the Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs) Educational Research team, and a few fellow STEM education graduates for an obtained Discovery, Engagement, and Learning (DEAL) grant. Prior to attending Purdue University, she graduated from Arizona State University with her B.S.E. in Engineering from the College of Technology and Innovation, where she worked on a team conducting research on how students learn LabVIEW through Disassemble, Analyze, Assemble (DAA) activities.Dr. Matthew A. Verleger, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona
insights from the humanities that couldinform their technical designs [3]. Their efforts, however, were met with some resistance fromstudents in the class, who struggled to appreciate the value of Shelley’s novel for their work asengineers. Although 59% of students surveyed at the end of the course conceded thatFrankenstein had “expanded their understanding of ethics,” only 11% claimed to have read it inits entirety, and several students commented that they found the novel neither enjoyable norespecially relevant to engineering practice [3].To address the challenge of how best to motivate engineering students to invest in a criticalreading of Frankenstein, I drew on insights from the book How Learning Works: 7 ResearchBased Principles for Smart
) mentorship (M=3.68) 2. Overall: Promoting long-term career 7. Research: Translating research into real-world satisfaction (M=3.84) impact (M=3.64) 3. Student engagement: Enhancing 8. Student engagement: Promoting student engineering student motivation and accessibility and belonging in engineering interest (M=3.84) (M=3.6) 4. Overall: Reducing burnout and stress 9. Overall: Mental health and work-life balance in your work (M=3.84) (M=3.56) 5. Mentorship: Building effective 10. Mentorship: Faculty mentoring best practices mentor-mentee relationships (M=3.72) (M=3.52)trying to be on the top
University of Petroleum & Minerals M.S. graduateMr. Bahir Mohamad Alhashem Page 25.810.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Integrating Sustainability in the Curriculum through Capstone Projects: A Case StudyAbstractThe construction research, education, and practice are increasingly adopting the concepts ofsustainability that apply to both design and construction phases of projects. The challenges facedin such adoption are a function of the maturity of the local industry and the support that it canlend to the sustainable initiatives. The
; but engineering will only contribute to success if it is able to continue toadapt to new trends and provide education … to arm [graduates] with the tools needed for theworld it will be, not as it is today.”4Strategies and ChallengesEngineering educators are well aware of the need to provide students with an education thatextends well beyond the fundamentals and design-oriented, practical embodiments of thestudents’ particular area of specialization. Indeed, the new ABET criteria clearly articulate that“engineering programs must demonstrate that their students attain … (c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical
@bucknell.eduThank you for your help!Page BreakQ1.2 Departmental CharacteristicsQ1.3 Name of your institution ________________________________________________________________Q1.4 Name of your department ________________________________________________________________Q1.5 Number of faculty / instructors who teach in your department.(please use this value as a snapshot of the number at the time this survey is completed; pleaseinclude professors of practice, visitors, adjuncts, instructors, and tenured/tenure track in thisvalue; please do not include graduate teaching assistants or research faculty.) ________________________________________________________________Q1.6 Does your department offer more than one undergraduate degree program?(for
, 4) block scheduling of courses, 5) active studentlearning strategies, and 6) strong articulation agreements with regional four-year institutions.This paper will explore these six elements that define the Itasca engineering learning communitymodel. Student graduation rates will be used to compare the success of the model with otherprograms in the region and across the nation.IntroductionThe value of learning communities within higher education is now well documented1. Suchevidence has thrust this concept into curricular redesign efforts across the United States.Numerous publications and the demand for information is so high that a peer-reviewed journalon the subject now exists, The Journal of Learning Communities Research
choice; pedagogically it is a first opportunity to emphasize themultidisciplinary nature of contemporary engineering practice. Therefore, the pilot course wasdelivered with the expectation that it will replace the current introduction-to-major courses.The course objectives address both first-year pedagogy and the overall first-year experience.Accordingly, this paper is presented in two major parts. The first part describes the design andpilot of the new GEEN 1500 Introduction to Engineering course in Fall 2011. The second part isfocused on a broader look at the first-year experience with research from Teaching as Research(TAR) projects supported by the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning(CIRTL).Part 1: Pilot of the New
/6283-01: Microelectronics Process Design. This module focused on modern techniques forthe top-down fabrication of micro-/nano-electronic devices and integrated circuits. While theclass had historically focused on the top-down fabrication techniques used in themicroelectronics integrated circuit industry, the novel top-down (including self-assembly)techniques were added and covered in 1.5 lectures. In addition, new information on nano-fabrication aspects, predominantly but not limited to fabrication of sub-micron transistors, wasincorporated in different topics/lectures covering different fabrication techniques. For this split-level course, a new module was tested on the graduate student enrolled during the Fall 2014semester. A computational
asthe outstanding student chapter in 2003 and 2004. Cadets find the program to be relevant anddynamic, as evidenced by the growth in enrollments from 15 majors in the Class of 2004 to 64majors in the Class of 2008. Opportunities for applied research by both cadets and facultyensure the program integrates the curriculum with real-world application. The balanced EM program strives to produce graduates able to apply a disciplinedproblem solving process to complex, multidisciplinary problems. The program is designed tosupport the USMA mission and Academic Program goals. To meet the Dean’s vision for theUSMA academic program and the accreditation criteria established by the ABET7, the programis designed with specific outcomes (Table 1) in
Solving (CPS); and to communicate the potential impact of thisscaffolding on underserved minority students’ higher-order skill development through Project-Based Service Learning (PBSL). It contends that adoption of engineering design process inexperiential learning could promote students’ demands for cognitive and metacognitive strategiesof Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) and Creative Problem Solving (CPS), and scaffolding withquestion prompts based on cognitive research findings could better facilitate SRL and CPSprocess of underserved minority students, and lead to their enriched metacognitive experience,meaningful accomplishment, and improvement of self-efficacy and higher-order skills. Theoverall goal of the presented scaffolding instruction is
, job shadowing programs still exist and have been documentedin the literature.In engineering, most job shadowing experience is in connection with industry. Job shadowingprograms have been found to have impacts on student career trajectories. Engineering programsare expected to help students find internships and job shadowing opportunities in industry becauseit is considered a best practice for students to have this experience early in their careers [3]. Whenpaired with a near-peer mentor and participating in a job shadowing experience, research showsthat there is a positive impact on student retention in STEM programs [4].Many different aspects can influence a successful job shadowing program. As in the definition,job shadowing should involve
Southern University. She has published extensivelyand has won numerous awards at the national and regional level in the area of educational research in China. Sheteaches Measurement and Assessment in Education at the University of Florida. Her research interests involveapplied quantitative research designs, categorical data analysis, and structural equation modeling.TIM ANDERSON is Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Programs in the College of Engineering, andProfessor in the Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Florida. He received a Ph.D. at the Universityof California-Berkeley in 1979. His research interests include electronic materials processing, thermochemistry andphase diagrams, chemical vapor deposition, bulk crystal
Kwak Tanguay is a Ph.D. Candidate in Multicultural Education at the University of Washington. Her research examines how educational policy & practice, curriculum, and instruction mediate cross- racial and cross-ethnic peer relations among students, and how these peer relations shape students of color’s educational experiences, trajectories, and access to opportunities.Dr. Joyce Yen, University of Washington Joyce Yen, Ph.D., is the Director of the ADVANCE Center for Institutional Change at the University of Washington where she focuses on advancing women and underrepresented minority faculty in STEM fields and leading faculty professional development programs. Her diversity and faculty work has received over
initial research questions (RQs) can be addressed as follows:RQ1: The primary objectives of participants include making friends and fostering curiosity aboutother cultures. These could be a great motivator even for engineering students to encourageparticipation in mobility programs, in addition to the educational benefits. While earning studycredits is also an essential incentive, it is a secondary factor in encouraging their actions to travelabroad.RQ2: Regarding WA11GAP, mobility programs are great opportunities for team work,communication, and awareness of lifelong learning, which can be more effective to acquirethrough practice rather than traditional educational studies.RQ3: The most influential factor for participants' learning outcomes is
contractors practice construction today, but it has robust implicationsfor curriculum designers as well. As a pedagogical tool, information technology can facilitatecross-disciplinary collaboration, communication, and inquiry based, interactive learning thatenhances the educational experience. How is it effectively integrated into the curriculum?Implicit in the list of top outcomes is a need to address uncertainty and its effect on constructionprocess and management. Stochastic problem-solving skills are necessary in an environmentcharacterized by constraints and a concern for the impact of engineering solutions in a global andsocietal context. Page
remote instruction. We close with feedback fromparticipants on the effectiveness of the workshop.In the near future, “normal” teaching is likely to extend beyond traditional classroom instruction.We hope that our case study in adapting traditional practices to new modes of delivery will be ofvalue to others trying to do the same.BackgroundWhile the foundational principles of education remain the same, research has shown that onlinedelivery has areas that require special attention. Therefore, understanding the common issues inonline education and extended issues related to remote learning was the first step taken toprepare for the workshop transition. Additionally, the group also reviewed best practices inonline quality standards to develop a
across a broad swath of American manufacturing industriesincluding the machine tool and auto industries. Many of those that remained are reaching the ageof retirement and will take valuable expertise with them when they leave their companies. Forthis reason the education of new engineers remains a critical need for many states across the US.As important as this need is, budgetary constraints occurring simultaneously with the economicdownturn, have resulted in challenges to four-year schools graduating engineers in sufficientnumbers. In particular manufacturing engineers, whose expertise is best matched to theproduction of goods, only graduate from fewer than 20 programs here in the United States.Part of the need for manufacturing engineers is