program, theory vs. application (hands-on), 2) faculty issues such astenure and reward systems and staying current with field and pedagogy, 3) specific curriculumcontent issues of communications, teamwork, technology use, ethics and 4) concern regardingstudent preparation and retention of information. Objective 3 Students will be able to recognize the options for types of instructionalapproaches.. Results from a pair of questions related to types of instructional approaches theypreferred as a student and then how they are or have been teaching demonstrate that a gap doesexist between the two (Figure 2). The largest gap occurs in the areas of active learning exercisesand laboratory
productive manner. The teamagreed on one approach and all left the room feeling it was a win-win.Earlier in her career, Ellie was a project manager who had constant personality problems with thequality manager. Nothing she did seemed to be right. She learned to understand the social styleof this manager and through persistence and active listening broke down the communicationsbarriers in three months. They are now enjoying a great working relationship as the result ofEllie‟s perseverance.Doing the right thing is a trait that pervades those interviewed. Marsha Salter was an engineer ata company that produces fluid handling equipment. She believes that to be a good leader one hasto be ethical, do what is good for business and be able to sleep at night
term (see Table 1) and takes the student through the stages of conceptual design and meta-design (planning), through detailed design, to construction, demonstration, and even a littlemarketing. Table 1. ME3110 Class Periods Because teaching such a course Period Weeks Description ID presents serious logistical, Bid 1.5 Bid: Newly formed student teams must submit a report detailing their team’s work ethic and their statement of the problem, resembling a contractor bid. cognitive, and motivational DR1 1.0
-Austin, USAFA, and MIT. Course Institution and Methods and Theories Activities and Outcomes LevelME 202 UT-Austin; Survival skills, professions in ME, world-wide Skill exer., web search, teamIntroduction Freshman web, email, modeling, ethics, first team dynamics, MBTI, air-waterto Mech. experience, intro. to engr. design, simplified rocket analysis, reverse engr. ofEngineering reverse engineering mech. products (toys, etc.)EM 290 USAFA; Design processes, customer needs, functional Incremental design notebookIntroduction Sophomore
manuscripts:research investigations and research reviews. Research investigations should state the questionsaddressed and their context relative to the body of knowledge on the subject. The relevanttheories should be presented, research design described, limitations acknowledged, and researchmethods and instruments discussed so as to permit evaluation of the validity and reliability of theevidence offered. Ethical considerations in data collection, analysis, and reporting involvinghuman subjects should be addressed. A description of any statistical analyses, discussion of theuncertainties, and the significance of the results to advancing engineering education research orpractice should be provided. Research reviews should state the propositions addressed in
of materials on the Internet, there isalso the ever-present danger of plagiarism. Consequently, the instructor should clearlyexplain the ethical and judicial repercussions of plagiarism. This will hopefully guide thestudents to police their own practices.10 Because OEPs require the students to doindependent study on the subject and to define a unique idea using limited knowledge,another good resource is the US patent database. Because each patent must have at leastone cookbook-type recipe concerning how to implement the idea, this makes patents avaluable source for students working on OEPs. However, in the case of patents theinstructor needs to very carefully guide the students in their selection of good qualitypatents. Even though most high
contribute to understanding. It isappropriate to set aeronautical education in the context of aerospace product development forseveral reasons. First, it is what our graduates will do when they graduate. It culturally preparesthem for the activities of engineering, and excites them by satisfying their desire to perform theroles of an engineer. Secondly, it aids in teaching the skills that they will need in the workplace.If we are to teach students to communicate and work in teams, and especially to act ethically andcreatively, it is far easier to impart this understanding while working on authentic engineeringactivities. Finally, and most subtly, learning in context better supports the learning of the criticalaeronautics core competencies
AC 2011-1860: A STUDY ABROAD IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC:MENTORING UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AS THEY PREPARE AND TEACH6-12 GRADE STUDENTS TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING CONCEPTSSteven L Shumway, Brigham Young UniversitySClaudina Vargas, Complex Systems Optimization LabGeoff Wright, Brigham Young UniversityRon Terry, Brigham Young University Ron is a Professor of Technology and Engineering Education at Brigham Young University. His scholar- ship centers on pedagogy, student learning, and engineering ethics and has presented/published numerous articles in engineering education. Page 22.108.1 c American
of the graduate engineeringprocess and intended to address professional skills such as practicing effective time management,gaining familiarity with ethical issues and practices, and learning strategies for attending andleading meetings. We addressed these skills through articulating and modeling behaviors thatmay not, at first, seem to belong in a communication framework. For example, it might soundobvious, but we told students to bring their calendars and a notebook and pen to every meeting.We also created a form that incorporated both writing milestones and task-related milestones totrack progress and completion of task components and the entire task. Beginning in the secondsemester of the program, both the writing coach and the faculty
AC 2010-1860: ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF USING A COMPUTERGAME TO BRIDGE A RESEARCH AGENDA WITH A TEACHING AGENDAKristen Sanford Bernhardt, Lafayette College KRISTEN L. SANFORD BERNHARDT is an Assistant Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Lafayette College, where she teaches courses related to transportation, civil infrastructure, and engineering ethics and researches issues related to infrastructure systems modeling. Dr. Sanford Bernhardt received her Ph.D. and M.S. from Carnegie Mellon University and her B.S.E. from Duke University, all in Civil Engineering.Sharon Jones, Lafayette College SHARON A. JONES is a Professor at Lafayette College in both the Department of Civil
ofparticipation leads to a lack of community “ownership”, wasted resources and a discouragedcommunityIf the necessity of interdisciplinary work has been well established, the process by which it isaccomplished remains poorly understood. For example, in a textbook intended to guideengineering students in the design of community-based service-learning projects instructsstudents that “.. people should be involved in the engineering process. You should always knowyour community partner, your stakeholders …. and their needs and desires. Frame yourengineering project within these parameters, and work with these groups throughout the project.”The text goes on to talk about understanding the project from historical, cultural, ethical, societal,educational
• Cognitive Domain: Instrumentation, Models, Experiment, Data Analysis, and Design • Affective Domain: Learn from Failure, Creativity, Safety, and Ethics in the Laboratory • Psychomotor Domain: Psychomotor and Sensor AwarenessHigher-level learning3 will be planned into each module (see Section III.C.). The ‘Learn fromFailure’ area will be addressed via built-in failure experiences, where students will be providedjust-in-time help to address a problem. Audio/visual elements will be added to target theSensory Awareness area and therefore positively increase the impact of these experiences o theaffective and cognitive domains.49 Biomedical applications will be emphasized to increasestudent interest, optimize module re-use in ECE 772, and maximize
information from the Yes = 10 No = 0 REU homepage? 5. Do you want to see any additional Yes = 4 No = 6 information on the REU homepage? 6. Was it easier for you to select faculty Yes = 10 No = 0 mentors based on the information available on their websites? 7. Do you have any prior research experience? Yes = 4 No = 6 8. Have you taken any courses on how to write Yes = 6 No = 4 technical papers and make technical Page 15.1038.12 presentations? 9. Have you taken any courses on ethics? Yes = 6 No = 4 Table III: Results of Pre-Program
. Personallearning outcomes (Section 2) focus on individual students' cognitive and affective development, forexample, engineering reasoning and problem solving, experimentation and knowledge discovery, systemthinking, creative thinking, critical thinking, and professional ethics. Interpersonal learning outcomes(Section 3) focus on individual and group interactions, such as, teamwork, leadership, and communication.Product and system building skills (Section 4) focus on conceiving, designing, implementing, and operatingsystems in enterprise, business, and societal contexts.Rationale: Setting specific learning outcomes helps to ensure that students acquire the appropriatefoundation for their future. Professional engineering organizations and industry
Engineering Education”different way of designing/developing courses and programs. It called for involving allstakeholders (students, industry, faculty, administrators) in the design phases, having toreach a consensus in defining the graduating engineer skills, his/her competencies andvalues, as well as the desired learning outcomes. To enhance the learning experience,courses had to include hands on activities, industry projects and other non-traditionalexperiences, which emphasized skills development, like teamwork, ethics and effectivecommunication. Students had to learn to not only solve a problem in teams, but alsodefine and characterize the problem, to build a prototype, write a business proposal andmake effective presentations. Finally yet
, Newton’s solving concurrent spring Structure report, and Laws, statics simultaneous engineering constants discussion on systems of related issues cost modeling equations in satisfying indetermin- in engineering and control Matlab conflicting ate strutures ethics constraints finite elements economicsAs the table illustrates, a number of
sustainability factors. 2. Apply simplified model equations for specific applications using appropriate approximations. 3. Solve heat transfer problems using engineering calculations, simulations, and numerical methods. 4. Collaborate effectively as a member of an engineering team while considering ethical, engineering, and professional responsibilities. 5. Advance proficiency in professional communication. 9 Proceedings of the 2024 ASEE North Central Section Conference Copyright © 2024, American Society for Engineering EducationStudent Design Solution ExamplesThe project design
as the Advisory Board for the NAE Frontiers of Engineering Education.Dr. Larry J. Shuman, University of Pittsburgh Larry Shuman is senior associate dean for academic affairs and distinguished service professor of in- dustrial engineering, Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh. His research focuses on improving the engineering educational experience, emphasizing assessment of learning and problem solving abilities, and studying the ethical behavior of engineers and engineering managers. He was the principal investigator for a seven university NSF sponsored study on Models and Modeling that focused on using MEAs in engineering classrooms. Dr. Shuman is the founding editor of Advances in Engineer
be grounded in research, periodically evaluated, andadapted to reflect the developing knowledge base. (11) Implementation of learning stylepractices must conform to accepted standards of ethics, and be carried out by competentinstructors, who can provide suitable activities that appeal to each learning style. Topromote effective learning, within the context of varied learning styles, it is important toform groups within the class. How do you form effective groups? How do you makegroups work? What do groups do? The answers to these questions will differ from onecourse to another, depending on: course type, course content, course level, prevailingculture, available resources, and applicable guidelines.Research has shown that some learners have
good work ethic can achieve success in a STEM-related field. To helpalleviate these preconceived, negative stigmas about engineering, the STEM teachers plan tospend more time informally educating their school staff about the field of engineering, that it isfor any student who is willing to work hard and dedicate themselves to it; it is not just for “reallysmart” people who are good at math.Limitations of Study/Further QuestionsThe findings of these analyses should be placed within the limitations of this study. The cohortof participants is drawn from students attending Skyline High School in Longmont, CO. Studentsself-select into the program at this high school by applying to the STEM Academy during their8th grade year. While 8th grade
Paper ID #8496Student Perceptions of Connections between Statics Class and Co-op WorkExperienceDr. Diane L Peters, Kettering University Diane L. Peters is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Kettering University in Flint, MI. Her engineering education research focuses on the links between industry and academia.Dr. Joy Arbor, Kettering University Joy Arbor is assistant professor of communication in the Department of Liberal Studies at Kettering University. She teaches communication, public writing, and ethics
computing onsome fields might still be in its infancy.Like engineering, computing is a very creative process involving innovative design that isconditioned by business, economic, social, political, ethical, and technical constraints1,3 generallywithin the setting of a team structure. Therefore, one could conclude that the computingprofessional should at least be educated and trained on a comparable level as the future engineer. Page 24.1177.3One way to ensure that computing professionals are sufficiently well educated and trained inbusiness and economics is to expose them to entrepreneurship education and training in thecontext of teamwork
. The linking of the CS1 problem-solving course in an LC withEG1 further integrates narrative elements into computer problem-solving courses; thisintegration should result in improved and more transferable computer problem-solving skills.2.3 Introduction to Computer Systems (CS0)In this foundational course for Computer Systems, students engage in an overall inspection of theworld of computing. As part of this course, students also learn introductory concepts related to theinner workings of the computer, such as operating systems, networks, and database systems. Thisoverview of machine architecture, software development, data organization, ethics, computersecurity, and the theory of computing is presented to introduce students to the key threads
intentions to persist in male-dominated fields, such as engineering. 5 However, women who have had internships or otherforms of engineering-related employment tend to be less likely to perceive conflicts betweencareer and family, which can influence their decisions to persist in engineering.16Professional Development and SocializationStudents’ socialization or learning about the professional culture within engineeringorganizations can contribute to their professional development.17 Just as important is learninghow to function within an organization.15 Researchers argue that internships and co-ops providestudents with organizational and cultural experiences that facilitate mastery of communicationskills, professional ethics, and collaboration.17-19
choosewhich topic was most interesting and join the team. Timing was such that the first item (theAgreement of Cooperation19) was due at the end of the first week of class so that the teams werestarted quickly with a clear, immediately milestone. Feedback was given on these agreements sothat students had all discussed how to deal with conflict, differing work ethic, and how to bestrespect each other’s ideas. The schedule and plan of progress reports were outlined in thesyllabus on the first day of class for the students. The progress reports were: • Team’s Agreement of Cooperation: Outline goals and guidelines of group participation. • Progress Report 1: Introductory description of proposed, novel analytical
thought in ModerateInnovative Thinking imaginative and creative waysGE-6 Assessing and weighing of moral and political beliefs and MinimalEthical Reasoning practices, and their applications to ethical dilemmasGE-7 Locating, evaluating, citing, and effectively using ModerateInformation Literacy informationGE-8 Applying mathematical, statistical, and symbolic reasoning StrongQuantitative Literacy and Symbolic to complex problems and decision makingReasoningTable IV represents the connections made to the 3 area-specific learning objectives. Area
. Lelli Van Den Einde, University of California, San Diego Lelli Van Den Einde is a faculty lecturer (LPSOE) in the Department of Structural Engineering at UC San Diego’s Jacobs School of Engineering. Dr. Van Den Einde’s interest in teaching has influenced her current research efforts towards improving engineering education pedagogy through the use of technology in the classroom. She is involved in promoting academic integrity as a way to prepare our students to be ethical practicing engineers, and is the chair of the External Advisory Committee for the IDEA center, which promotes inclusion, diversity, excellence and advancement in engineering. She has conducted research in performance-based earthquake engineering and
young folks who are coming to [university] before graduating high school to have some kind of confidence based on the fact that they are smart enough to do that, like that's pretty incredible. But [S2] obviously didn't feel that way.” (S4)S1 discussed how there’s several ways a student can be more competent than others and howthese play into power dynamics of how students view and treat one another, “I think another part in there is competency, whether a student is more competent than another, whether it's in their engineering, or even their own, English or verbal skills or their work ethic, you know. I think there are a lot of, power dynamics there in play where you know, peers can see things differently and