engineering work, with over 60%of engineering seniors surveyed rating communication among the top five most importantengineering skills, in a 2010 study reported in Enabling Engineering Student Success [1].Chemical engineering educators have long recognized the need to educate students in written,oral, and interpersonal communication, and technical communication training has manifested inprimarily two different forms. Some university departments have provided supplementalcommunication training across multiple technical courses in the curriculum. Others have createdcourses dedicated to teaching Technical Communications (TC) to students. By necessity,technical courses that have a strong communication emphasis prioritize the instruction andmastery of
institutions. Withimplementation of GCSP now in different stages at our four schools, all are finding evidence oftransformations occurring at the student, institute, and community level. We illustrate thesetransformations in this paper and suggest that they were driven by development of liberalarts-infused GCSPs.1. IntroductionThe National Academy of Engineering’s Grand Challenges Scholars Program (GCSP) wascreated to better prepare students to tackle the immense and immensely complex challenges ofthe twenty-first century. The program does this by providing education and experiences in fivecompetency areas: talent, multidisciplinary, viable business/entrepreneurship, multicultural, andsocial consciousness [1]. These competencies align well with
knowledge[1] . Within a year, this project expanded to be included in a required junior level chemicalengineering course (and was no longer a part of the Introduction to Biomedical Engineeringelective). Over the past twenty years, this project is a required project for a wider spectrum ofrequired chemical engineering courses and has grown to include presentations to K-12 students –and has impacted almost one-thousand undergraduate chemical engineering students and over10,000 K-12 students. This is a work in progress, since the author would like to gather input as to what informationwould be helpful to provide to the community to enable this program to be transferable to otherinstitutions.Project Description The outreach project
Engineering Problem Solving: A Preliminary Study 1. IntroductionEngineering students are trained to be effective problem solvers. Specifically, engineeringstudents are expected to become skillful at synthesizing and applying information across multipleknowledge domains to generate optimal solutions to problems of varying levels of difficulty.Unfortunately, many engineering students graduate with discernible gaps in their problemsolving skills. Research has attributed these gaps, in part, to specific cognitive processingchallenges that students face during problem solving activities [1]-[10]. For example, Hadwin [4]and Lawanto et al. [6] [7] found that students exhibited incomplete or inaccurate taskunderstanding during problem
know anecdotally at our institution that studentpopulations pursuing ASMT programs are distinctly different from those pursuing engineeringprograms in terms of performance on college entrance assessments (ACT, SAT etc.). Themajority of faculty who teach ASMT programs have engineering degrees, which could limit theirability to anticipate ASMT student challenges. Faculty can be more effective in their teaching,advising and mentoring if they understand clearly the specific challenges of their students. Therehave been no prior published work related to success of students pursuing ASMT programs,although there has been some work in related topics for agricultural/biological engineeringstudents: a study assessing motivation to pursue their majors [1
that aims toidentify whether engineering identity and academic motivation are correlated to the extent thatone may predict the other. Engineers face challenges which can result in both failure andtriumph. Studying the source of an individual’s motivation in conjunction with how theyperceive themselves as an engineer may provide long-term insight into ways in which one canpositively enhance the other. Previous work suggests that establishing a strong sense of identityin the workplace can result in greater career motivation [1]. We hypothesize that a stronger senseof engineering identity correlates with stronger academic motivation, and that ultimately onemay be used to measure the other with acceptable validity and reliability. This connection
material, students often times do not spend an adequate amount of time outside ofclass reviewing the material. This lack of perquisite knowledge leads them to start learning newmaterial on a weak foundation. As the semester progresses and the material builds, these studentsare more likely to fall further behind, which can place them in jeopardy of failing the class.This project seeks to improve students' recall and mastery of prerequisite knowledge andultimately decrease failure rates, by creating an accessible library of short videos on various MEprerequisite topics. The review videos are currently being implemented in 3 ME courses (1required undergraduate course, 1 undergraduate technical elective, and 1 graduate level course)in Spring 2019 at
whether intentional, verticalalignment of engineering experiences ultimately better prepares BME undergraduates for theirsenior design capstone projects and their professional pursuits.IntroductionInductive teaching methods have encouraged higher levels of student cognition [1]-[2], improvedstudent teamwork and communication [3], and allowed increased student confidence duringengineering design prototyping [4]. Paired with a resurgence of hands-on learning in theengineering community [5], inductive teaching methods allow instructors to incorporate realproblems that require physical prototype solutions. Our work aims to incorporate one specificinductive teaching method, project based learning (PBL), into sophomore and junior levelBiomedical
governance refers to the diffuse processinvolving negotiation of institutional priorities, accreditation standards, and the content of blue-ribbon panel reports that often occurs out of the public eye. The goal of the larger researchproject is to develop a better understanding of the complex, interdependent structure ofeducational governance in engineering education. Unlike Europe where the Bologna Process [1]sets common standards for higher education, engineering in the US has a complex ecosystemconsisting of many entities—some looking to support broad policy goals and others focused onnarrow disciplinary interests—that together create the structural conditions that shape changes inengineering education. The project as a whole looks broadly at
needs of the students and institution. Recently, Reid, Reeping, andSpingola (2018) introduced a taxonomy, or classification list, for an introduction to engineeringcourses. The FYE classification list details the content areas in which first-year course elementsmay include: (1) Design, (2) Professional Skills, (3) Engineering Profession, (4) AcademicAdvising, (5) Math Skills, (6) Engineering Tools, (7) Global Interests, and (8) Communication.First-year courses do not necessarily include all of those elements, but typically most courseelements can be mapped to the classification list.For example, one element of a first-year program is that of engineering design, which is introducedin the first-year to students to get a better understanding of
of intuition whenthey made ethical decisions. We anticipate the findings of this study will help engineeringeducators and researchers design better engineering ethics courses by considering the emotionsand intuitions of engineering students, which have previously been ignored but may influenceethical decision-making.IntroductionEngineering ethics education has typically focused on teaching ethical reasoning skills toengineering students by providing them with knowledge (e.g., codes of ethics, moral theories)and opportunities to practice reasoning (e.g., case study). Engineering codes of ethics, since theirexplicit formulation from the initial third of twentieth-century [1], have provided a guidance ofbehavior for engineers. For instance, in
, graduate students, andundergraduate students provides a baseline for the moral foundations of engineers across andwithin a range of engineering subdisciplines. Our objective is to analyze whether and to whatdegree “moral foundations” are shared within these subdisciplinary cultures. We hypothesize thatthe variance in moral foundations among engineering stakeholders will be significant and thatthe moral foundations of members within a specific subdiscipline will be more closely sharedthan with those outside the subdiscipline. The Moral Foundations Questionnaire providesrespondents with a scaled response to their reliance on and endorsement of a refined set of fivemoral foundations: 1) harm/care, 2) fairness/reciprocity, 3) ingroup/loyalty, 4
training opportunity exists does not mean it will benefit the relevant stakeholders. Forexample, when and how frequently should an employee be entitled to training opportunities?How does the agency recover its investment? What are the agency’s philosophies and overallbudget allocation with regard to training? What are the philosophies of individual managers andsupervisors [1]? A range of criteria must be considered regarding the decision to participate intraining or professional development.For civil (and transportation) engineers, there is added recognition that “civil engineers mustlearn and apply new technologies that (may not have been) included in a traditional (academic)curriculum [2]. Such issues become amplified as the design of
enables all these sectors to respond todemand fluctuations. It encompasses two subsystems; one is inventory planning and control andthe other is material handling 1. The inventory planning subsystem is concerned with buildingorders for the suppliers and dispatching materials to the customer wherein material handling ismore involved with transferring the goods inside the warehouse. There are different functionslike labeling, breaking bulk, light assembly, order entry and fulfillment, packaging, pick andpack, and transportation arrangement necessary to carry out material handling activities 2. Allthese operations are cost intensive; the most expensive is the pick and pack process whichgenerally constitutes about 50%-75% of the total warehousing
integration of entrepreneurship education andtraining in the undergraduate biomedical engineering curriculum.MethodsInternship Selection and Program StructureApplications were solicited from biomedical engineering undergraduate students. Applicationsconsisted of a resume, transcript, and personal statement. Following in-person interviews, fourlower division and four upper division students were selected to participate in the inauguralseven week summer innovation internship (Figure 1).The internship began with a two-day workshop focused on needs-finding, needs statementdevelopment, conducting observations, ethics in observations, value exploration and designthinking. Over the course of seven weeks, students were immersed in full-time
) courses. Despite the emphasis placed by theAccreditation Board of Engineering and Technology (ABET) on developing engineeringstudents’ mastery of communication skills [1], we found a number of obstacles to teaching theseskills in our engineering courses, including large class sizes, lack of faculty and teaching-assistant (TA) training in teaching or grading writing, widely varying opinions about whatconstitutes “good” writing, and already crowded individual course content and departmentalcurricula [2]. Similar obstacles have been reported at other institutions [3].To address these issues, our team implemented a voluntary “Writing Across Engineering”(WAE) program for interested faculty that integrated concepts of “community of practice”models [4
life, effectiveness oflearning, scheduling and class hours, and evaluation. 2Assuming academic responsibility may be among the most difficult transitions highschool students face in the first year of college. In fact, American high school studentsspend about 30 hours in class per week and 5 hours per week studying; while collegestudents spend approximately 15 hours each week in class and are expected to studyabout 30 hours.3 Although this 2:1 ratio of hours studying to hours in class may be typicalfor most college students, the demands of engineering programs are even higher,requiring better time management. But not all students enter college with the same studyskills and discipline. In fact, many first year students do not put in adequate
) educational programs and careers [1]. This underrepresentation is reflected in the normsand culture existing in STEM fields. The perception of a white-men dominated environment canoften result in unfair stereotypes and biases imposed on women and people of color. These studentscan face assumptions of inferiority and be considered as part of the STEM field only as part of arequirement or quota [2],[3],[4]. Group based project learning is a common tool used in the engineering classroom topromote the acquisition and development of skills that prepare students for engineering careersrequiring significant collaborative effort. Working in groups and collaborating towards acommon goal allows students to develop their communication, leadership
domore poorly in their courses and have lower graduation rates than other students. In looking forways to meet the needs of these underprepared college students, one-to-one tutoring has becomea service that is most often provided to them. Tutoring has sometimes been called the goldstandard to supplement effective instruction [1]. Many universities have also adoptedSupplemental Instruction programs to help students reach their academic goals. SupplementalInstruction works in conjunction with the tutoring program to provide multiple levels ofacademic aid. Some universities have First-Year engineering programs and Bridge programs thatare designed to improve the preparation and ease the transition for students into college [2].These programs are
among these threeinstitutions. The results also show the changes across the past 30 years. However,investigating the outcomes of each of the curricula patterns needs further investigation usingstudent data – particularly as more institutions are added to the study.Keywords—Curricular pathways, Course requirements, Higher education I. INTRODUCTIONFirst-Year Engineering (FYE) programs are formal programs that teach students introductorycourses along with science and mathematics courses such as calculus, physics, and chemistry [1].The intention of creating FYE programs is to provide students with early engineeringexperiences, help them make an informed choice about their future engineering discipline
related to students' culture and the technology. Instructorswho have taught this course have adopted the same course objectives but have used differentapproaches. The paper includes experiences from different instructors who have taught thecourse at our location, the changes that we have introduced and the reasons behind them, as wellas a brief literature review. The paper also discusses challenges associated with offering thecourse from faculty and students prospective.IntroductionMany of today’s engineering educators have recognized the need to develop a first-yearengineering course [1]-[8], which would help students in areas such as: making a successfultransition from high school to college; recognizing the importance of academic performance
detached from such a situation. We intentionally developed activities thatchallenge students’ thoughts and beliefs, so they connect their actions as students to their lives asworking professionals.We first examine ethics on a global scale by considering engineers’ roles in promoting globalhealth and wellbeing through sustainability. Students learn about green design andmanufacturing strategies through assigned readings, a video on cradle-to-cradle design, andgameplay. Students play the In the Loop ® board game, which teaches players about the finiteresources necessary for devices such as LCD screens, MRI machines, and wind turbines [1].Throughout the game, players develop strategies to manage limited resources using circulareconomies. A reflective
average laptop computer.The video demonstrated and introductory physics using the relationships between the propertiesof density, specific gravity of materials, weight and force. An example was developed thatutilized a spreadsheet for basic calculations and graphical analysis and introduced forceprinciples and the concept of a distributed force, the data for the example is shown in Table 1.The introduction to the fundamental relationships between force, mas and weight was reinforcedwith a hands-on design and build balance project. A balance is a simple mechanical device thatillustrates many fundamental principles and can be easily built and assembled. Students weregiven a series of assignments to design, draw and build a simple mechanical balance
three CATME dimensions: Contributing to theteam’s work; Interacting with teammates; Keeping team on track.IntroductionIn the first year engineering class where we collected teamwork peer evaluation data, 55.56% ofthe total number of teams include at least one international students. As Joseph Distefano pointedout, diverse teams typically perform worse or better than homogeneous teams and betterperformance for diverse teams is conditioned on proper management and training because“Compared to homogeneous teams they (multicultural team) can be more creative, generatemore and better alternatives to problems, and generate more and better criteria for evaluatingalternatives”. [1] It implies that if a team has more complexly cultural background, then
conference paper.Introduction:To ensure a diverse and well-educated workforce, we must increase the number of women andethnic minorities enrolling and graduating from programs in engineering. The College ofEngineering and Applied Science (CEAS) at UC has 4,214 undergraduate students, with 16.9%women, and 1,217 graduate students, with 24.6% women, who are taught by 170 full-timefaculty members. Virtually all, 89.1%, of UC's CEAS undergraduate students reside in Ohio. InOhio, the total K-12 population is 1,692,347. Gender makeup is ~ 50-50 (male-female); majorethnic groups are white and African-American, with an average of 73% white, 25% ethnicminorities, and 48.5% from low-income families [1]. However, our efforts to recruit from thispool of ethnic
Engaging Escape Rooms in First Year Engineering Courses: A Pilot StudyIntroductionThe use of game-based learning in classrooms as a means to foster motivation, communicationskills, promote problem solving, and to encourage student interaction is well established [1],[2].In game-based learning environments, rules structure the learning, rewards are given when goalsare achieved, and trial and error is promoted [3]. Game-based learning can be particularlybeneficial to those students who are already intrinsically motivated [3]. Games have been usedin engineering classrooms to teach a variety of concepts ranging from programming skills andlogistics engineering to engineering ethics [4]. One type of game that has not been
(PBL) project introduces first-year students to electrical, computer, mechanical, civil,and environmental engineering topics while addressing ABET Outcomes stressing design,teamwork, communication, and experimentation. PBL is a high impact teaching method wherestudents are given open-ended, complex problems that promote their understanding of conceptsand principles while improving critical thinking [1].Teams consisting of four or five students with diverse individual strengths (identified through theClifton Strengths Inventory) [2] are treated as small consulting firms tasked with evaluating thecondition of residence hall windows, as requested by their client, the energy auditor of theCollege. As part of their work, students build sensors to
. In addition,student training is constrained to the area surrounding the campus due to safety andtransportation issues. This reduces students’ comprehension on how to apply techniques and usesurveying instruments in real-world environments. The advent of cost-effective head mounteddisplays marked a new era in immersive virtual reality, which sparked application in science,engineering, education, etc. For instance, in environmental chemistry immersive virtual reality isutilized to conduct virtual field trips [1]. In construction engineering virtual reality is used forarchitecture visualization, safety training, and equipment and operation training [2]. Other recentapplications examples include geohazard assessment [3], geovisualization of