2006-876: DEVELOPING METACOGNITIVE ENGINEERING TEAMS THROUGHTARGETED WRITING EXERCISES AND STUDYING LEARNINGPREFERENCESKevin Dahm, Rowan University Kevin Dahm is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rowan University. He received his Ph.D. from MIT and his B.S. from WPI. Among his areas of interest are computing and process simulation in the curriculum, and integrating economics and design throughout the curriculum. He has received the 2005 Ray Fahien Award, 2003 Joseph J. Martin Award and the 2002 PIC-III Award from ASEE.Roberta Harvey, Rowan University Roberta Harvey is an Assistant Professor in the Writing Arts Department at Rowan University. She holds a Ph.D. from the
Paper ID #10128Improving learning productivity and teamwork skills in freshman engineer-ing students through conative understandingDr. Elizabeth A Adams, Arizona State UniversityMs. Claire Louise Antaya, Arizona State UniversityDr. Thomas P Seager, Arizona State University Associate Professor in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment, and Director of the Sustainable Energy and Environmental Decision Sciences (SEEDS) studio.Prof. Amy E. Landis, Arizona State University Dr. Landis recently joined ASU in January 2012 as an Associate Professor in the School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built
multiple disciplines, the integration of stakeholder considerations into the engineering design process, and mixed methods research designs.Dr. Cliff I. Davidson, Syracuse University Wilmot Professor of Engineering Director, Environmental Engineering Program Syracuse Center of Ex- cellence in Environmental and Energy Systems and Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringDr. Sharon Dotger, Syracuse University Sharon Dotger is a Dual Associate Professor of Science Education at Syracuse University and Chair of the Department of Science Teaching. Her research interests focus on teacher and student learning in science and the relationships between instruction and learning outcomes for students
Page 8.547.1the importance of the CAD/CAM systems to the future of their companies. Tremendous effortProceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Educationwas done and still is being done to design, implement, and integrate computer systems specificallyCAD/CAM into almost every company’s backbone structure.The Impact of the continuous development of CAD/CAM hardware and software had a greatimpact on the characteristic of the users. In the early CAD/CAM systems the user was self-trained. Nowadays users have to go through specialized certificate programs that can go as longas 12 months to allow them to be CAD or CAM specialists [1
AC 2011-563: ACADEMIC PREPARATION IN A CO-OP PROGRAM AS ACAREER ENHANCEMENT TOOL FOR INTERNATIONAL ENGINEER-ING GRADUATESSandra Ingram, University of Manitoba Sandra Ingram, Ph.D., is an associate professor in Design Engineering and adjunct professor in Biosys- tems Engineering at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. Dr. Ingram is responsible for teaching an integrated approach to technical communication in Biosystems Engineering and Electrical and Computer Engineering. Her research interests include mentorship and networking within engineer- ing, integrated approaches to technical communication and post-graduate training of engineers, . Address: E2-262 Engineering and Technology Complex, University of
paper draws on a qualitative dataset of student responses to biweekly “reflection questions”integrated into routine course activity in a pilot implementation of a Wright State-likeEngineering Mathematics course. Alongside auto-ethnographic data from the course instructorand coordinator, this dataset illustrates the transformations involved in the scale-making process,and enables tracing the consequences of these transformations for the identities of people andsocial collectives involved in the course.IntroductionThis paper reports on the results of a study of an implementation of the Wright State Model forEngineering Mathematics at one university. Consistent with the LEES call for proposals, weadopt a human science theoretical approach to the
, Satisfactory, and Outstanding.The BME program is an integral part of the Mechanical Engineering (ME) Department whichhas been accredited since 1965. Hence, many courses are offered as part of the mechanicalengineering curriculum. Thus, it was necessary to separate the assessment of the BME studentlearning outcomes from the assessment of the class. By using the program-specific rubrics, onlythe students enrolled in the BME program were evaluated within each class, even though theclass contained a larger number of students. It is important to note that the ME program hasemployed several different methods of assessment throughout the years. During the last visit,rubrics were employed.2. Formative versus Summative AssessmentThe separation of Student
3 4 In order to develop leadership skills, technical skills and other essential soft skills requestedby industry, the program requires that the students attend a team building week during the summer,go to weekly workouts, develop and join leadership workshops, read leadership books, write bookreports, practice giving presentations, participate in a summer internship, take extra classesimportant to an engineering curriculum and maintain a 3.0 GPA. The results of all those activitiesare recorded and analyzed using a powerful tool called the Hoshin Kanri X-Matrix for strategicplanning to evaluate the success of the program and to teach
EducationThe Program Educational Objectives (PEO) of the Electrical Engineering (EE) programare:1 To provide the student with the knowledge of natural sciences, mathematics, engineering and computer science so that the student has the ability to systematically delineate and solve electrical and related engineering problems.2 To provide the student with a broad-based background in electrical engineering with experiences in the design, development and analysis of electrical and computer systems, subsystems and components.3 To provide the students with an engineering education to function as educated members of a global society, with awareness of contemporary issues, professional responsibility, ethics, impact of technology on
courses. That is, the need toevolve traditional classroom courses into dispersed virtual learning experiences.Much of the motivation for writing such a report hinges on globalization. Without the currentstatus of globalization, the report would not have been written. The process of globalization hascreated an environment where we must do more for engineering education to influence the USeconomy such that the United States is able to retain its leadership position.Globalization will drive more uniformity in the educational systems between that of the UnitedStates and those around the world. We will require additional knowledge to remain globallycompetitive and maintain that global leadership.Globalization also levels the playing field for
; use ofvideo technology for both teaching and learning in a laboratory setting; and incorporation ofprofessional collaboration for specific classroom activities. The universities initiated this projectto enhance student learning in geotechnical engineering. Specifically, these exercises wereconducted to challenge students in new ways and broaden their fundamental skill sets includingprofessional skills associated with communication and global awareness. These components,which are critical in the ASCE Body of Knowledge (BOK) and ABET Criteria, are generallydifficult to integrate across the curriculum in conventional classroom environments. Interaction
students and professors alike.Specifically, in terms of engineering courses, access to resources such as laboratories, institution-specific software, and classroom technologies are severely limited and difficult to replicate forremote settings. New and revised classroom structures have been created to accommodate publichealth concerns while continuing to deliver effective education. Universities have adapted curriculum to be completely virtual or a combination of virtualand in-person learning. The combination of remote and traditional face-to-face learning,sometimes referred to as a hybrid or blended structure, integrates online discussion with limitedin-person class times [1]. Due to reduced capacities in classrooms, groups of students in
supportsmultiple training and education needs related to data analytics across biopharmaceuticalmanufacturing hubs. As a first-step, our project identified a subset of achievable near-term tasksand objectives needed to develop and pilot an introductory series of active-learning boot campsdesigned to upskill incumbent employees serving in established biomanufacturing scientific andengineering roles (e.g. not trained data scientists) to utilize multivariate analysis tools and extractvalue from complex data sets. Our proposed solution is differentiated by its active collaborationwith industry, and commitment to mentored employee knowledge integration into corporateworkflows.Objectives and Value PropositionsWe propose the development of a workforce
exploratory studyto evaluate the student’s perception in the BIM adoption in the construction management curriculum andused students’ perception of BIM modules in their curriculum. The authors concluded that the exploratorystudy of students’ perceptions provides motivations for integrating BIM in the construction managementcurriculum. Moreover, Azhar et al. analyzed perceptions of students in an ACCE accredited constructionprogram who completed a BIM centered capstone project (thesis) at the culmination of their undergraduatedegree [6]. Through the survey with students who completed the BIM in the undergraduate capstone project,the authors found that the students lack understanding of all aspects of the BIM technology and the BIMallows them to
surveys, and behavior rubrics.Bibliography1. Ng, Y. (2005). Taste of Engineering, Integrating Engineering into a Liberal Arts Institution. Proceedings of the 2005 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Session 2192.2. http://www.stkate.edu/~ysng/PROJECTS/METoo/index.html3. Steadman, S., Dewey, B.R., Jacquot, R.G., & Marquard, P.J. (2001). Enhancement of an introductory computing course with experiential and cooperative learning. Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Session 3553.4. Beder, S. (1999). Beyond technicalities: Expanding engineering thinking. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 125, 12
federal funding fortraining grants that facilitate the comprehensive education of students, the National ScienceFoundation implemented the Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training (IGERT)program. Catalyzed by an IGERT grant, a comprehensive graduate education and researchtraining program has been developed within the Center for Multiphase Environmental Researchat Washington State University. The program is designed to produce students who:6 • have a broad cross-disciplinary education and awareness • readily integrate interdisciplinary knowledge • work in a collaborative mode • have a global perspective • have effective communication skills, both oral and written • benefit from professional conferences
launch of the GPD course did not pose any problem. This is due to theinbuilt flexibility in graduate programs in the U.S. and Korea. The course was started as an Page 11.46.3“experimental” course in UM (ME 599) and as a “temporary” course at SNU (Advanced MEDesign Problem II with the subtitle of GPD). Such courses at the graduate level can be offeredby any faculty at UM and at SNU and require minimal approvals.The integration into the curriculum (i.e., conversion from experimental/temporary to a regularcourse) did require formal paperwork and approvals. There were unique issues that had to beaddressed during this process. First, the offering of
— model, observation, and interpretation— for constructing assessments1. In thecontext of an engineering classroom, design performance produces two different andcomplementary types of outcomes: learner development and solution development. Further,design is: open-ended, iterative, creative, collaborative, goal-driven, process-intensive, product-focused, customer-oriented, value-added, and constrained by society. Learner and solutiondevelopment usually progresses from a state of students’ fragmented understanding and ideas toa more mature state of integrated understanding and design solutions.The proposed conceptual model for engineering design identifies four areas of performance thatdescribe design: (1) personal capacity, (2) team processes, (3
toward the Civil Engineering/Structural Engineering curriculum, and as such, students are further introduced to the use ofdesign codes from ASCE, AISC, and AASHTO. The exercises and projects are delivered in theconsecutive courses of Statics and introductory (sophomore level) Mechanics of Materials(MoM). The culminating project in Statics vertically integrates with MoM because it provides apreview of elementary stress analysis and also because the project context (the design of a steelsignpost) forms the basis of further projects in MoM. Initial results from the implementation inStatics were published last year.5 Page 24.753.2 With
lifelong learning is an outcome that is difficult to assess butalso manageable as a pilot effort, the committee decided to evaluate the college’s process ofassessing graduates’ ability to recognize the need for and to engage in lifelong learning as thepilot focus.The team began work in June of 2008 and decided the scope of the project would focus onimproving the assessment of ABET Criteria 3h (lifelong learning) and continuous improvementin accordance with a documented process. Using the evaluators’ ratings and Six Sigma tools, theteam attempted to improve the process by evaluating three surveys and the feedback loop forcollection, evaluation and use of assessment data.The team met all of its intermediate project goals by improving the survey
Paper ID #26069Work in Progress: Enable Digital Thread and Digital Twin Learning Envi-ronment for Cybermanufacturing EducationDr. Zhenhua Wu, Virginia State University Dr. Zhenhua Wu, is currently an Assistant Professor in Manufacturing Engineering at Virginia State University. He received his PhD in Mechanical Engineering from Texas A&M University. His current research interests focus on cybermanufacturing, sustainable manufacturing, adaptive machining. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Work-in-Progress: Enable Digital Thread and Digital Twin Learning Environment for
statisticallysignificant lower sense of belonging than their counterparts [18]. In response to these data, theEngineering & Design Department First Year Program (FYP) has recently implementedstrategies focused on supporting pre-major students, increasing student sense of belonging, andcreating inclusive work environments. Efforts have included updating the first year curriculum toincorporate social justice [19], integrating inclusive practices into the departmental makerspace[20] [21], creating a summer bridge program for engineering students [22], conducting researchon impacts of curricular and co-curricular changes on belonging and identity [23] [24] [25] [26],and this project, an National Science Foundation project which seeks to increase student sense
, manyinteresting and non-trivial electrical and computer engineering problems require a strongprogramming background or knowledge of advanced mathematics.Digital logic, however, is an area of computer engineering that requires more transferableskills—such as critical thinking and problem-solving—than advanced theoretical knowledge.Digital logic uses discrete mathematics instead of the calculus that many students struggle withearly in the engineering curriculum. Although new knowledge has to be acquired in the area ofBoolean algebra, this new content is a very natural extension of the regular algebra that mostengineering students are already very comfortable with. Because of this non-reliance on calculus,digital logic projects make prime candidates for
studied the impact of engineering design integrated science on student learning. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Evaluation of Targeted Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering Assessments in a Freshmen-Level Mechanical Engineering CourseAbstractDeveloping high performing, cutting edge products and systems requires engineers that, inaddition to being proficient in their specific discipline, have a solid background in productdevelopment, systems engineering (SE), and systems thinking (ST). Introducing ST/SE skillsgradually throughout a traditional mechanical engineering curriculum has the potential to
Misconceptions in Physics,” European Journal of Physics (in press).24. Ericcson, K. A., and H. A. Simon, Protocol Analysis. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1984.TERESA L. HEINTeresa L. Hein is an Assistant Professor of Physics Education at American University. Dr. Hein received her B.S.and M.S. degrees in Engineering Physics from South Dakota State University in Brookings, SD in 1982 and 1985,respectively. She received her Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction with special emphasis in Physics and ScienceEducation from Kansas State University in Manhattan, KS in 1997. Dr. Hein’s research interests involve variousaspects of student learning in physics and includes strong learning style and multiple intelligence components. Inaddition, her research involves
it’s viewed as being integral tothe success of the course, in that an assignment must be accessible, engaging, challenging onlywith respect to the material it is intended to teach, and be worthy of the time and effort invested[3]. Additionally, a 2001 study on factors contributing to the success of students in introductorycomputer science courses concluded that the best predictor of success was the students’ comfortlevel and recommended that instructors should provide a welcoming environment [4]. A 2017literature review on students’ misconceptions in introductory programming provides an additionalperspective: that an ability to apply effective instructional approaches and tools in addressingstudents’ difficulties is vital to successfully
A Systematized Literature Review of Scholarship on Ethical Development and Perspective-taking in Engineering Students Brooks M. Leftwich* Purdue University bleftwic@purdue.eduAbstractThis report is a systematized literature review of published journal articles about frameworks,models, theories, and approaches that support one’s ethical development with a focus onperspective-taking as an integral part of that experience. Ethical development is essential toengineering students because the decisions they make – whether good or bad, right, or wrong –impact individuals, communities, the environment, and even the world
synthesis, multiphysics analyses,prototyping, testing, and evaluation. Although the current design experience satisfies the minimumABET requirements, we strongly believe that the design experience could be enhanced by givingstudents the opportunity to interact with practicing engineers from industry and to work on a year-long design project. Through this enhanced engineering design experience, the students would bein a position to assume more responsibilities in an industrial environment upon graduation.This paper describes our recent experiences with the expansion of a unique program that enhancesthe design experiences at The University of Iowa. The program is integrated with the existing designcontent of the curriculum and allows students to
Spoofing. Each game development followed a similar implementation process. The projectteam produced a detailed storyboard for the targeted security topic, and then developedprototypes, which were reviewed, assessed, and refined. The following sections will brieflypresent each game. Game Design & Development Integrating Games to Computer Science Curriculum Project Assessing the Games at WSSU Scientific Assessment Assessing the Games at NCA&T Dissemination Project
-formal learning environment. In thebeginning of the workshop, teachers and students were positioned as learners who received shortlectures and presentations about robot components, robot building, and robot programming.Moreover, teachers and students worked in teams to engage in hands-on structured learning, whichaugmented the robotics fundamentals from corresponding lectures, reinforcing and imparting agreater sense of understanding. Next, the teacher-student teams were directed to solve a givenchallenge by designing, building, and programming an integrated robotics solution. Within eachteam, teachers and students had the freedom to organize their teamwork with no guidelines fromthe research team. Thus, within each team, an informal learning