Bucknell University. He is currently interested in engineering design education, engineering education policy, and the philosophy of engineering education.Dr. John Heywood, Trinity CollegeDublin, The University of Dublin John Heywood is professorial Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College Dublin- The University of Dublin. He is a Fellow of ASEE and Life Sen. Member of IEEE. he has special interest in education for the professions and the role of professions in society. He is author of Engineering Education. Research and Development in Curriculum and Instruction (Wiley/IEEE),and The Assessment ofLlearning in Engineering Education: Practice and Policy. c American Society for Engineering Education
business models through the development of emerging continuous improvement methodologies. Specif- ically, Dr. Walton’s unique systems-thinking approach to Leadership strategies for Lean, Healthcare, and Product Lifecycle Management has cultivated multi-disciplinary collaborations, generating research and scholarship on innovative organizational strategies and best practices for engineering and innovation initiatives.Amy S. Van Epps, Purdue University, West Lafayette AMY S. VAN EPPS is the Engineering Librarian, Coordinator of Instruction at the Seigesmund Library, Purdue University, West Lafayette. She is a graduate of Lafayette College (B.A., 1991), The Catholic University of America (M.S.L.S.,1994) and Rensselaer
Tibetan villagers to ascertain what direction the programshould take to best support the target community. Students researched water quality problems inthe developing world and defined methods to test for pathogens and contaminants. Since it wasunclear, before the visit, what problems the community may be experiencing, the studentsdeveloped a strategy to test for basic watershed parameters for the assessment visit. Plans toinclude more advanced tests, such as arsenic, were to be accomplished in later visits. Studentsalso constructed two prototype solar cooking devices and tested them to compare to an analyticaltransient heat transfer model developed by the team. After validating the model, studentsconducted sensitivity analyses to develop a
forEngineering and Technology) or any other accreditation board criteria. In fact, it reinforces thegoals of accreditation; of the eleven criteria required under ABET Criterion 3, stating therequirements for engineering graduates, IP knowledge would be included in seven, including “anability to design,” “a knowledge of contemporary issues,” and “an understanding of professionaland ethical responsibility.” IP encompasses design and identifies the latest contemporary issuesassociated with engineering. More importantly, it is an engineer’s professional and ethicalresponsibility to research claims prior to publication or use. Also, it the engineering educator’sresponsibility to teach future engineers how to protect his or her rights of creation. For example
financial need who arepursuing associate, baccalaureate, or graduate degrees in STEM. It also helps the institutionsdevelop and implement activities that support their recruitment, retention and graduation in STEM[7]. Many institutions have applied funds from this program either exclusively or along with otherfinancial resources to support academically talented low-income students.Although research supports the positive impact of financial support on recruitment, academicperformance, retention, and graduation rates of STEM students [6], [8]–[14], financial supportalone is not enough for student success and retention. In one S-STEM program, scholars rankedthe program components in terms of importance to them remaining in a STEM major. Although itis
electivecourse in structural dynamics. The motivation for the innovation derived from multiple sources,including a departmental and institutional focus on hands-on learning; the joy of playing with an AirZooka; evidence-based best practices including active learning approaches, problem-based learning, and experiences favoring experimentation and inquiry over verification [1-4]; ABET outcome 6: “an ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions,” specifically the ability to develop experimentation, which has been particularly challenging to assess and incorporate into instruction [8]; and considerations regarding
Paper ID #42138To Build or to Buy, That is the QuestionDr. Wanju Huang, Purdue University Dr. Wanju Huang is a Clinical Associate Professor of Learning Design and Technology at Purdue University. Her research interests focus on online learning, professional development in STEM, augmented reality/virtual reality, and the integration of artificial intelligence in education. She has contributed to three NSF-funded projects as co-PI and key personnel. Additionally, she has been a co-PI for grants funded by the Susan Harwood Training Grant Program of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) and
particular because they feltthat how the various scores were weighted did not appropriately reflect what they had spentthe most time on. There were also concerns over group grades versus individualcontributions. Implementation of PBL in the Course MAE 3200 Engineering MaterialsSupported by a NSF grant (DUE-0836914), we have designed, developed, and initiallyimplemented a PBL version of MAE 3200, Engineering Materials. The initialimplementation of the course for purposes of research was a traditional lecture courseenrolling 62 students in the fall of 2009. That version of the course introduced conceptswith instructor lectures following the textbook (Callister, 2007). Topics covered are shownin Table 1. The course is taught by two instructors
-order application of a systematic Proceedings of the 2013 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual Conference, The University of Texas at Arlington, March 21 – 23, 2013. Copyright 2013, American Society for Engineering Educationproduct development life-cycle methodology. A generic methodology has been developed tosupport research portfolio planning and its execution for evolutionary and revolutionary N+3generation commercial subsonic large long haul aircraft concepts and associated with past,present, and future technologies.This study investigated in total 5 case studies for 5 unique technology portfolios, 1 marketsegments (Boeing B777-300ER, 335 PAX), and 2 design scenarios
disregard their role in student satisfaction by focusingexclusively on intrinsic motivation factors.IntroductionCore courses in mathematics and science have a significant impact on the retention ofengineering students. For students majoring in science, mathematics, and engineering, thegreatest attrition occurs between the freshman and sophomore years1. Learning more aboutstudents’ perceptions of their core courses will enable us to improve these courses, as well aspositively influence the retention of engineering students. For this research, freshman students ina large introductory engineering design course were asked to identify five ways in which theirCalculus, Chemistry, or Physics course could be redesigned. The question was asked as part of
has continued to seek out research opportunities. Current collaborations include work with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development and Homeland Security on the Analysis for Coastal Operational Resiliency (AnCOR) project to assess the USCG’s preparedness to respond to a wide-area biological contamination incident impacting stormwater infrastructure and work with CGA and USCG Health, Safety and Work-Life (HSWL) to develop COVID-19 sewage surveillance protocols. Additionally, CAPT Fleischmann is actively involved with the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Excellence in Civil Engineering Education (ExCEEd) program and spends time each summer mentoring civil
techniques. Second, the studentsgain the insight of real-world application of these devices. Third, the student gets one finalopportunity (before graduation) to hone their presentation skills.While as a concept, using PTCs in the classroom in this manner appears to be beneficial, it wasunknown if the PTCs are a good learning tool. Therefore, an assessment has been completed todetermine if the PTCs are worthwhile and practical documents for the students to increase theirknowledge of measurement techniques and test uncertainty. PTCs 19.1, 19.2, and 19.3 wereevaluated as a learning tool based on an indirect assessment (i.e., a survey of student opinions).Students were surveyed after completing their research and presentation exercise. A copy of
not easily practiced in cookie-cutter labs [5,6,7]. Collaborative learning includingpeer-teaching has also been shown to increase student learning [10] in a laboratory environment[3]. Though collaborative, student-led inquiry and peer-teaching has been shown to supportmultiple learning outcomes, it remains unclear how much support students need in laboratorycourses and how such pedagogical methods can influence students’ confidence in their learning.In this approach, inquiry-based learning followed by peer-teaching was used in a QuantitativePhysiological Signal Analysis Lab course for 4 offerings. An iterative, design-based approachwas used to continually analyze and improve the implementation of this pedagogical technique.Continuing from a
., Tabbers, H., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2009). Towards a frameworkfor attention cueing in instructional animations: Guidelines for research and design. EducationalPsychology Review, 21(2), 113-140.[9] de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010a). Attention guidancein learning from a complex animation: Seeing is understanding? Learning and Instruction, 20(2),111-122.[10] de Koning, B. B., Tabbers, H. K., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Paas, F. (2010b). Learning bygenerating vs. receiving instructional explanations: Two approaches to enhance attention cueingin animations. Computers & Education, 55(2), 681-691.[11] Dorman, J. P. (2002) Classroom environment research: Progress and possibilities.Queensland
engineering, engineering practices, and quality control. Quality oriented with a strong sense of integrity c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 Evaluating the Evolution of Construction Management Students’ Conflict Management Styles as a Result of Andragogical Methods David W. Martin, Ph.D, CPC Central Washington University Ellensburg, WA Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) is becoming common in construction thought and practice. Although IPD has its success stories and continues to grow, IPD failures exist. Much of the research on IPD focuses on both the
you keep in mind that some of the respondents graduated 16 years ago.In order to increase response-rate we took multiple actions that were developed based on pastexperiences and best practices [40]: • The invitations and survey featured clear but appealing design with photos of the course • We ensured concise content without unnecessary details. The content of the three e- mails varied slightly, highlighting various values for the respondent each time: the opportunity to give something back to their alma mater and prospective students by further improving the curriculum; the chance to reflect on their own educational and career goals; and an opportunity to win a prize. • The initial drafts took 20
. Faculty use of instructionaltechnology is encouraged to facilitate and enhance student learning. ZU has recently adopted anacademic framework that is driven by learning outcomes while still using the grade point averagesystem.2,3 The ZU academic program model is a hybrid approach that can accommodate learningoutcomes to measure the learning process and uses grades to accommodate the classic academicsystem4. The College of Information Systems (IS) has developed a curriculum based on theacademic program model and driven by a set of well-chosen learning outcomes. This curriculumis designed to reflect the UAE needs for graduates that are well prepared to enter the workforceand to assume their place of responsibility in the nation. The goal of the
enrollment in many majors.NEET is based on the following four principles: 1. Our education should focus on preparing our students to develop the new machines and systems that they will build in the middle of the 21st century. 2. We should help our students prepare themselves to be makers, discoverers or positioned along this spectrum, and we should teach engineering fundamentals as a foundation for careers in both research and practice. 3. We should build our education around the way our students learn best, engaging them in their learning, and implementing pilots to understand the desirable balance of classroom, project, and digital education for the digital natives. 4. In view of the speed of scientific
course. This change was introduced because offaculty frustration that too often students did not applyconcepts of good writing, documentation and research topapers for other courses. Figure 1. Students and classes In the fall of 2002, a so-called “accelerated” programwas introduced. In this program, courses are organized into “suites” of three courses. The suitesmeet for four hours ever Wednesday evening and all day on alternative Saturdays. Appendix IIsummarizes the accelerated program. While courses in the suites have the same expectations and rigor as their regularequivalents, they are designed to be blended, reducing the total class time somewhat compared
initiated a engineering education research project on the impact of online activities on mechanics self-efficacy and achievement.Dr. Sheri D. Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research on engineering education and work-practices, and applied finite element analysis. From 1999-2008 she served as a Senior Scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, leading the Foundation’s engineering study (as reported in Educating Engineers: Designing for the Future of the Field). In addition, in 2003 Dr
previously served as Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies in the School of Engineering at Virginia Commonwealth University and was a faculty member and administrator at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL). Her research interests include: Teamwork, International Collaborations, Fac- ulty Development, Quality Control/Management and Broadening Participation. She is an honor graduate of North Carolina A&T State University, where she earned her BS in Mechanical Engineering, in 1988. In 1991 she was awarded the Master of Engineering degree in Systems Engineering from the University of Virginia. She received her Ph.D. in Interdisciplinary Engineering from Texas A&M University in 1998. She is the recipient
at post-survey might be the key to further study - as this trend was observed for a larger number of students across the university’s whole gPBL offering.Research objectives In this paper, we investigate if there are further identifiable issues which can be foundwith the design and format of the Online Robotics workshop. Our research questions (‘RQs’)for this paper are as follows:1. Can the MGUDS-S assessment tool be used to investigate weaknesses in the current design and format of the online gPBL programs?2. Do MGUDS-S scores actually have a stronger correlation with students’ ‘self-described’ satisfaction than the traditional ‘how would you rate this course out of 5’ Likert-scale satisfaction questions?3. Can Slack-based
Paper ID #9583Nature/Society: Situating student learning outcomes in a first-year Sustain-ability Studies courseMr. James E Wilcox , Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute James Wilcox is a doctoral student in Science & Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, where his dissertation project investigates the practices and politics of energy policy interventions. From 2011 to 2013 he was the Program Coordinator for Vasudha, an Undergraduate Living & Learning Com- munity dedicated to sustainability at RPI. Prior to coming to RPI, he served as an Education & Outreach Fellow in the Office of
active learning. We believe that engineering education needs fundamental modifications and new approaches to match the needs of the 21st Century. In previous papers and presentations, we have discussed classes and curricula that are based on the Deweyan pragmatic philosophy and argued that they have tremendous potential for creating critical thinkers and lifelong learners and therefore more adaptable problem solvers than the current crop of engineering-‐education graduates. Authors have also identified the studio model as the best course structure for accommodating Deweyan philosophy. However, a shift to that model requires a comprehensive review
continuum of student supportservices, resources, and opportunities for professional growth, and prepare scholarship recipientsfor graduate school or careers in computing. COF-IMPRESS-C will facilitate dual-enrollment ofstudents in the Honors College, allowing an additional focus on developing leadership,entrepreneurial skills, and a success mindset. The goals of the project are to (1) increase the numberand diversity of students pursuing degrees in computing; and (2) Add to the body of knowledgeregarding best practices in computing education and promote the employment of computinggraduates to meet the local and regional workforce needs.The project team is led by the College of Engineering and includes Lorain County CommunityCollege. The project
thoughresearch has shown the importance of including and promoting education about the value ofengineering to society, other studies point to a culture of engineering still characterized by a lackof empathy, social relevance, and emotion16–18. Students seem to internalize this environment asthey progress through college, and graduate with decreased social responsibility and publicwelfare beliefs16,19.While engineering clearly does have a large impact on society, and the positive aspects of thisimpact can be tools for recruitment and retention of underrepresented students, it is still unknownhow students perceive and value the impact they could have on society through their careers.Research QuestionThis research seeks to understand how fourth year
the projects were performed in a rapid fire modeduring which approximately 100 student projects were presented during two hours of scheduledlecture time. The best five projects were installed at a museum exhibition six weeks after theproject completion and remained on display for viewing by 50,000 visitors in 2005. Anintroductory exhibit panel provided information about Rube Goldberg and the steps in theengineering design and product development process.3.2 Technology Exhibition, Second SL Project, Fall 2005The second SL project was motivated by the history of engineering technology, especially as itpertains to the history and future of local industry. In this project, the students were asked tobring relevant engineering technologies to life
. Previously, he conducted research as a Student Summer Fellow in the Hypersonic Sciences Branch at the Air Force Research Laboratory under the direction of Dr. Roger Kimmel. Carson is a Graduate Associate for the Kaneb Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of Notre Dame, where he designs, prepares, and delivers workshops on effective teaching strategies and pedagogy for faculty, postdoctoral students, and graduate students. He is also a Graduate Fellow with the Research and Assessment for Learning (ReAL) Design Lab at the University of Notre Dame, where he conducts research to create predictive learning analytics and dynamic driven admissions criteria to better serve underprepared and underserved engineering
(such as what each studentmight need to best ensure his or her own spiritual, social, physical wellbeing); and a designcomponent where student cohorts are tasked with creation of a solution to a real-world problemexperienced by a local non-profit organization. The seminar meets once per week, with someadditional out-of-class activities, devoting approximately half of all class time to design, and therest split among professional and personal development activities. Out-of-class activities includethe tours mentioned, invited lectures and purely social activities. To-date, SEECS has granted217 student-years of scholarship funding and has seen 40 students graduate from the program.Current SEECS enrollment is 25 students.Section III: Evolving Goals
. However, these very traits oftenlead to problems when building large scale software systems. As has been reported by Felder[2], most engineering students tend to be introverted and sensing in their nature. This makes itdifficult for students to interact with others and can lead to problems when building complexsoftware systems. Software engineers often fail to understand the human aspects of the systemsthey design, yielding non-optimum results when finished.We know from the research that appropriate requirements gathering, and elicitation are critical tothe success of software engineering projects. Efforts in effectively defining requirements pay offin both faster deliveries and more successful projects [3]. Thus, it is essential that a