. Each sketch should be accompanied by a brief written description and credit to the artist/creator. Your report should demonstrate contributions from all group members.3: Compare A typed mini-report with a description of the process used to select the best possibleDesigns and solutions among the multiple presented. Your selected designs will be used during milestoneMake 5, so the report should also include detailed documentation of your plan for parameterDecisions testing. You must also describe the planned construction process in words.4: Hand Deliver hand drawn dimensioned sketches of your team’s alpha designs that will be used inDrawings parameter testing. The hand drawings
HEI contexts is the one previously published as Work-in-process19.Methodology The SLR methodology used for this study considers the same used previously19, whichwas developed by Tranfield and colleagues in 20031. This methodology considers three differentstages with multiple phases on each. First, planning the review, where the main goal is toidentify the need for a review, the respective preparation, and the development of the reviewprotocol. The second stage of conducting a review considers the identification of research,selection of studies, their quality assessment, data extraction, and progress monitoring, to endwith the data synthesis. Finally, the third stage considers the report and recommendations, andgetting evidence into
attention is frequently focusedon individual creativity and other personality traits, organizational cultures, and other non-technical capabilities. We argue here that the typical descriptions of innovation competencies arecorrect but incomplete, lacking critical dimensions that are essential for planning an educationalcurriculum and assessing progress within it.The foundation of our model of innovation competencies rests on our definition of innovation:The ability to develop novel solutions to problems that result in significantly enhancedstakeholder satisfaction. As engineering educators, we believe that innovation is only effectivewhen it includes the full cycle leading to delivery of improved stakeholder outcomes, and thisintroduces challenges
student use the information in a new way?)4. Analysis: analyze, appraise, calculate, categorize, compare, contrast, criticize, differentiate, discriminate, distinguish, examine, experiment, question, test (Analyzing: Can the student distinguish between the different parts?)5. Synthesis: arrange, assemble, collect, compose, construct, create, design, develop, formulate, manage, organize, plan, prepare, propose, set up, write (Evaluating: Can the student justify a stand or decision?)6. Evaluation: appraise, argue, assess, attach, choose, compare, defend, estimate, judge, predict, rate, core, select, support, value, evaluate (Creating: Can the student create a new product or point of view?)Various assessment tools that map to the three
teacher is well known. Our SolutionOur solution to these problems is to provide a Socratic software mentor** capable of providing asimilar service that Dr. Walsh provides his students. We are providing a rule-based system thatwe believe has an easier method of providing it with domain and pedagogical knowledge thanmany traditional knowledge based ITS programs. Our plan was to install it on personalcomputers previously used only for lab data collection. Students can interact with these mentorsand get assistance when their professor is not available. Through that mechanism each studentgroup in the lab can get assistance directed to their current needs, at any time they need it. Thesystem being Socratic enables it to help students debug
eliminating all methods except QFD, Brainstorming and FMEA. • A lack of requirements for the application of engineering analysis in design. The use of engineering analysis being what distinguishes engineering design from craftsman or artistic design.6 This was exemplified by a number of projects, which failed to meet the customer requirements, often due to a lack of design analysis on the part of the project team. • A number of design projects that did not contain appropriate material for a capstone design experience and/or emphasized non-engineering aspects such as the development of marketing materials and business plans
neering and technology education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011Thomas F. Wolff, Michigan State University Dr. Thomas F. Wolff is Associate Dean of Engineering for Undergraduate Studies at Michigan State University. In this capacity, he is responsible for all activities related to student services (academic ad- ministration, advising, career planning, women and diversity programs, etc.) and curricular issues. He is principal investigator on several NSF grants related to retention of engineering students. As a faculty member in civil engineering, he co-teaches a large introductory course in civil engineering. His research and consulting activities have focused on the safety
women? 6) How successful are existingstructures at addressing these barriers? Climate survey results, in conjunction with objectivehuman resource data review and benchmarking of policies and benefits against peer schools witha focus on elements that have been tied to potential barriers are used to address each question.This paper explores answers to each research question and summarizes accomplishments madeover the grant period and plans for institutionalizing various initiatives.BackgroundRIT currently employs 95 women tenured and tenure-track (T TT) faculty in the science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, or 22.8% of the total STEM TTT faculty (Table 1); this is significantly below the 30.10% represented by the 2006
for the San Jose Children’s Discovery Museum. Puettat the United States Military Academy (USMA) worked the problem of limited teachingresources by designing a course with LEGOs at its heart [32]. Working with Ullman’s designtext [42], Puett’s students are required to progress through three phases: specificationdevelopment & planning, conceptual design, and product design. Every design team has ahypothetical budget that must be used to “purchase” LEGO pieces, and each type of piece has aset cost associated with it. Further, teams can only purchase their LEGO parts at three specifiedtimes during the semester. Puett notes that this forces the teams to “work in a constrained designenvironment in which cost is a realistically important
the‘You’re Hired!’ project is then described. This is followed by presentation and discussion of theresearch project results, including a comparison of results for male and female students. Weconclude with a summary of key findings and plans for future research.Project Description/DesignThe ‘You’re Hired!’ project is designed to engage students in an intense, coherent set of STEM-focused experiences, which requires the use of the engineering design process and infuses 21stCentury Skills to solve real-world problems. The age of students participating in ‘You’re Hired!’ranged from 7th grade to 12th grade. While engineering outreach programs are being implementedthroughout the entire K-12 range nationwide, [14,16-21] many programs focus on middle to
. Have the ability to plan the design process. 3. Have the ability to generate, evaluate and develop design concepts by applying knowledge of facts, science, engineering science, and manufacturing principles. 4. Have the ability to use analysis and simulation tools to understand design performance and then improve the design. 5. Have experience in manufacturing a design prototype. 6. Have generated solid models and engineering drawings of their final design using 3D modeling software. 7. Have given an oral presentation and demonstration of their design project. 8. Have experienced working on a team to complete a design project. An overview of topics covered in the course is
. Each project mentor works closely withSFSU faculty in designing the project and planning daily activities related to project completion.Below is an overview of each of the SEI group projects used for the last three years.Computer Engineering Project: Introducing Computer Engineering via Making an iPhone AppThe computer engineering project is to design and create an iPhone App that has an academicapplication (e.g, unit conversion, periodic table of elements, math formulas). The goals of thisproject are to (1) attract high school students into the field of computer engineering, (2)demonstrate the fundamentals of computer engineering, and (3) encourage innovations ondesigning human-computer interface. The project is carried out in the following
Paper ID #6753Those who can, teach. Immersing Students as Peer Educators to EnhanceClass ExperienceDr. Beverly Kristenson Jaeger, Northeastern University Beverly Kris Jaeger, PhD has been a member of Northeastern University’s Gateway Team, a selected group of full-time faculty expressly devoted to the first-year Engineering Program at Northeastern Uni- versity. Recently, she has joined the expanding Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at NU to continue teaching Simulation, Facilities Planning, and Human-Machine Systems. Dr. Jaeger has been the recipient of several awards in engineering education for both
beused to support the design process approached during the charrette. A charrette is anintense period of design planning or activity, often collaborative in nature. It served asa vehicle to engage professionals and push students to produce at least three fairlydeveloped design schemes to inform their first round of simulations. The charrette tookplace over the course of six hours and provided at least one professional from eachdiscipline to work with each of the three student groups throughout the day. Theprofessionals played a key role in helping guide the student‟s communication with theother disciplines. The charrette was critical in reinforcing the need for students todesign quickly and iteratively at a pace that would carry throughout the
data collected by the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009(HSLS:09) conducted by the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). This com-prehensive longitudinal quantitative study involves base and follow-up surveys throughoutsecondary and post-secondary years (the first follow-up was in 2012, the second in 2016, andpost-secondary transcripts were collected in 2017-18) [19]. The longitudinal nature of thisstudy allows us to address questions about students’ transition to and persistence withintheir post-secondary studies — our variables of interest are derived from the 2016 secondfollow-up instrument.Sampling Plan HSLS:09 utilizes two-stage sampling. In the first stage, public and privateschools were selected with stratified random
Teamwork (e.g. leading, planning, contributing) (SO5) 8.5 + 1.7 Planning & conducting testing & analysis (SO6) 8.0 + 1.5 Learning & applying new information independently (SO7) 8.6 + 1.4 Average grades for overall course performance, final project reports, and peer evaluationsfor students in Capstone 1 and Capstone 2 are shown in Table III.2 for graduating classes from2020-2024. Each class enrolled 30-40 students. In the “Sem.” column, a prefix F indicates a fallsemester, while S indicates a spring semester. There is a marked increase in course and reportgrades from Capstone 1 to Capstone 2 for nearly every class, while peer evaluation averages arein the
experiences. Civil,electrical, and mechanical engineering courses are full year experiences working on a singleproject. The chemical engineering courses also span a full year but include multiple projects.General engineering students are not required to complete a capstone course but sometimeschoose to participate in the capstone experience. The differences in structure and in assessmentbetween departments have required careful planning for interdisciplinary collaboration, asmaking a separate, interdisciplinary course was not currently feasible.Both the electrical engineering senior capstone course and the mechanical engineering seniorcapstone course allow students to choose their own teams and to develop their own projects(with faculty approval
areopportunities for social interaction such as talking about concerns and emotions, sharingexperiences, and making plans [20]. Following these social events, the mentors providedfeedback to their mentees on their applications for REU programs or graduate school. Table 2. Length and Frequency of Meetings and Modes of Communication (n = 11) Time Spent Per Month on Frequency of Meeting Per Modes of Communication Mentoring Relationship Month Less than 1 hour 18% Less than once 18% Email 91% 1 hour 45% Once 36% Text 55% 2 hours 36% Twice 45% Zoom 45
of how important they deem elements of the eight constructs, using aLikert-type scale as follows: 1: Not important at all 2: Mostly not important 3: Neutral 4: Somewhat important 5: Extremely importantThe pre-intervention version of the survey (Form A) includes nine demographic questions and37 items asking participants to rate importance of a specific construct element (see Appendix1). The post-intervention version (Form B) includes the same 37 importance-rating items,followed by three follow-up questions for each of the eight constructs that explore studentincorporation of constructs in capstone designs (yes or no), preferred timing of educationalintervention (planning, design, or implementation), and possible challenges to
challenges related to course load and time management for students.Understating these better will help inform our recommendations in the course syllabus for overallcourse planning and optimizing streaming requirements and inform those who may be interestedin streaming in general.Ultimately, understanding students’ use of live streaming for informal learning and the associatedbenefits and challenges allows us to advocate for informal learning in formal softwaredevelopment education. Recognizing this enables us to justify the significance of informallearning as a viable avenue for both novices’ and experts’ education in the software andtechnology fields.Course Design To address our research questions, we conducted an in-situ study withundergraduate
internships or co-opprograms, which are crucial for their future careers. Optimal times to engage in internships and co-ops can conflict withstudy abroad timelines. Third, engineering students often prioritize gaining specialized skills or knowledge in their field,and they may perceive study abroad programs as less beneficial for their career development compared to other academicpursuits. Fourth, some engineering students may not be adequately informed about study abroad opportunities or may lackguidance on how to integrate these experiences into their academic plans. Finally, engineering professors, advisors, andacademic leadership may conceptualize study abroad programs as frivolous and unnecessary vacations, and deter studentsfrom participating
coverage, cybersecurity, sharing, cloud certifications, azure, vulnerabilities security, stackguard, enterprise cybersecurity, counter- measures, risk analysis, model assessment, analysis, internship, automation mgmt, systems basics, software planning, project, iot risk, ip, mobile analysis, security subject, tcp, java, scripting basics, systems shell, computing network, administrating computing, python, internet, computer design, computer ethics DS data science, data analysis, internship, data mining, robotics, visualizations, introduction ai, ai problems, force computing, programming, planning mul- tiagent, models assessment, learning, algorithm runtime, certifications cloud
participates in events or projects that improve people's quality of life I believe that engineers should be involved in public discussions about the impact of civil engineering projects on society A responsible civil engineer educates others about environmental issues associated with the planning, design and implementation of civil engineering projects To achieve a fairer society, the most important contribution that engineers can make is to behave honestly and with integrity in their professional work A responsible engineer is
careers.In this paper, the general evolution of the 2TO4 project is described, along with lessons learnedand major remaining questions. Projects involving faculty and students from multipleorganizations have challenges continuing once initial funding runs out. However, the IEC hasfrom the beginning planned to build the future of 2TO4 around its Pathways program whichhelps students find good paid internships or similar experiences sponsored by IEC IndustryPartners, which will continue to provide direct funding to students. IEC is also developingmodels that can be adopted by industry and increasing its foundation funding.Clearly new sources of funding need to be identified. However, there is another feature of thisproject that will likely play an even
education, demonstrating our ontology-based reasoner’sapplication in student-centered course planning and instructor-centered curriculum developmentand advising. In this paper, we adopt two key perspectives, as illustrated in Fig. 1: a bottom-upapproach focusing on student-centered aspects and a top-down approach addressinginstructor-centered aspects. Throughout our discussion, the term “instructor” encompasses bothinstructors and administrators who oversee coursework. Instructors Top-down approach Bottom-up approach Instructor-centered Student-centered educational perspectives
with my friends and family. 16 It is safe to save my university login credentials on my school lab computer. 17 If I do not share my password, my account will be safe. 18 It is okay to respond to spam messages or emails. 19 Saving your social security number in your phone contacts or notes is safe and easier to fetch when required. 20 Cyberbullying occurs when you talk to strangers. 21 It is safe to use an administrator account on desktops and laptops. 194 Results and DiscussionsThe findings will be based on pre-and post-surveys completed before and after mod-ule sessions. We plan to use this module in the communication system course
careful planning, open communication, and ethicalconsideration throughout the research process enabled by high levels of psychological safety andtrust among the group.ResultsEquity through communicationEquity-minded teaching involves creating environments in which students can access content ina manner that does not exclude anyone. Gaining information from the students in the manner thatthey process information or other aspects that could reduce their accessibility of the informationis important to creating and sculpting these learning environments. There are many examples ofthe use of surveys to gather this information during or before the semester to course-correct ordesign the lessons for the students (Giacobbi, 2002, Gummer, 2022, Tucker 2013
across six corecourses and one advanced technical elective in an undergraduate biomedical engineering (BME)program curriculum. Our collaborative autoethnography examines the following researchquestions (RQ):RQ1: Why do faculty revise their BME courses to incorporate health equity concepts?RQ2: How do BME faculty integrate health equity concepts into undergraduate BME courses?RQ3: What best practices can be illuminated to support further health equity-focused curricularreform?Conceptual Framework: The Academic PlanTo establish a shared vocabulary for exploration of our research questions, we leverage Lattucaand Stark’s [23] Academic Plan Model to underpin our collaborative reflections. The AcademicPlan Model is a framework for understanding
(10) 3 RQ5: Are there interaction effects (IV2 × NV1) between completion (first or replay) (IV2)and video game title (NV1) nested under video game battle type (IV1)? 𝐻𝐻05 : 𝜌𝜌(𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼2 × 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁1) = 0 (11) 𝐻𝐻15 : 𝜌𝜌(𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼2 × 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁1) ≠ 0 (12) This study is important as the findings will help engineering management and Departmentof Defense (DoD) training and evaluation community on the path forward for test planning,execution, and reporting.2