importance that life-long learning and intellectual curiosity have on people’slives.Our experience has been largely positive and we plan to expand our capstone project list toinclude more such projects.Project #1: EZ Loader – Fall 2017This project was developed by five students enrolled in the Engineering Technology Department.Two of them graduated with a major in Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET), two with amajor in Electrical Engineering Technology (EET), and one with a major in EET with MEconcentration. The mechanical engineering majors designed and laid out the EZ Loaderprototype, including developing designs, machining, fabrication, and assembly for the mountingpoints, bevels, housings, the conveyor and the roller assembly. The electrical
the question below to establish a baseline.RQ1: What is the current balance between open content and traditionally publishedcontent in engineering mechanics courses?Second, in order to understand how the adoption of OER might be expanded in engineeringmechanics courses in the future, we ask the second research question.RQ2: What barriers exist to the adoption of open resources in engineering courses, andhow might those barriers be overcome?To address the above research questions, the authors developed a plan to gather data from twosources: the first is publicly available information regarding the required course materials fromrandomly selected institution websites; the second is a survey instrument distributed toinstructors of engineering
institutionscontinue to push their goals and strategic plans of increasing the science, technology,engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. Attempts to increase STEM enrollment atUniversities consistently include the same concepts; bridge programs, learning communities,research experiences and group projects [1]. While attempting to increase undergraduateretention of (URM), these experiences often focus solely on first-year students. In order to meettheir needs, diverse students must matriculate through the Colleges and Universities via thepipeline from secondary education to employment. NSF [2] reports show the attrition rates forblack and Hispanic or Latino students in STEM fields from 2007 to 2013 is low. When lookingat all the students earning
added during the review process to provide sufficient choices for review by content experts.It is planned to include one nonsense consideration in its final state. Rest et. al. described thatmeaningless items, or M-items, are used to detect unreliable data.9 M-items are items on theDIT2 that are written with similar complexity and vocabulary to the other considerations but arenot relevant to the dilemma in question.9 The nonsense items on the EPSRI will serve as M-items, and will be used to detect unreliable data from the data pool in the further validation studythat will be conducted.Instrument Content ValidationThe validation of the EPSRI followed the content validation process outlined by Devellis.10 Theprocess involves having people
classes with a letter grade of C- or better. Thelong-term assessment of this study will track the success rate among tutored students in thetargeted courses throughout the school year. We will also monitor the retention rate of studentswho have used the service in their freshman and sophomore years. Given that 60% of ouradmitted students drop out or change major during the first two years of their academic career[3], the service is expected to improve retention rate through offering support to students in theirfirst engineering classes.References:[1] “California State University Graduation Initiative 2025, CSU Systems and Campus Completion Goalsand Plans”, September 9, 2016. https://www2.calstate.edu/csu-system/why-the -CSU-matters/graduation
disciplines and student groups. The survey also included an open-ended responsecomponent that will also be analyzed for themes and in the context of the survey subscale results.We also plan to use the quantitative survey data to identify candidates for interviews to furtherunderstand the relationship of stress, engineering identity, and engineering culture. Interviewswill allow participants to describe their individual experiences and allow us to identify commonthemes and triggers of student stress, anxiety, and depression as related to being an engineeringstudent.Ultimately, the results of the study will produce recommendations for faculty, advisors, andadministrators, who directly impact the climate and reputation of engineering programs
imInternationalen Kontext” since 2002, Member of International Monitoring Committee in IGIP since 2004, Memberof Strategic Planning Committee of Education Society of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc(IEEE- EdSoc) since 2009, Board Member of “Global Council on Manufacturing and Management” (GCMM) since2004 and Director of Brazilian Network of Engineering (RBE) since 1998. He is also Member of Board ofGovernors of International Council for Engineering and Technology Education (INTERTECH) since 2000 andMember of Board of Governors of Education Society of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc(IEEE-EdSoc) since 2001.Prof. MELANY M. CIAMPIDr. Melany M. Ciampi is Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Session ETD 506Figure 2: Photograph of the Golden Gate Bridge. (Max Pixel, n.d.)The builders of Tacoma narrows were under strong pressure to economize. The original plans forthe Tacoma Bridge Incorporated many safety features. These were considered to be tooexpensive at the time. The plans were revised by an award-winning engineer. Because thisnew design met existing code and it was much less expensive than the original design, it wasselected (Othmar, Kármán, & Woodruff, 1941). In 1936, construction costs were $6,400,000,adjusted for inflation $113,602,000Shortly after construction, the bridge began to rise and fall whenever there was moderate wind. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration
evaluation findings, unexpected challenges,and planned modifications to continue to improve the program. I will share a bitabout our model and impact to date, including how that model has evolvedover time to best serve our community. Throughout this discussion, we’llengage in a few of the community-building activities we utilize within LATTICE. 3This program developed through two earlier iterations:WEBS: women in biological sciences, with an emphasis on ecology and evolutionarybiology. Five cohorts, 2007-2013BRAINS: for individuals belonging to racial/ethnic groups underrepresented withinNeuroscience and/or individuals with disabilities. Running biennially
computer science and engineering departments on diversifying their undergraduate student population. She remains an active researcher, including studying academic policies, gender and ethnicity issues, transfers, and matriculation models with MIDFIELD as well as student veterans in engi- neering. Her evaluation work includes evaluating teamwork models, broadening participation initiatives, and S-STEM and LSAMP programs.Dr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University-Main Campus, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Joyce B. Main is Assistant Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Teaching, and Social Policy from Cornell University, and an Ed.M. in Administration, Planning, and
Paper ID #24879The Effectiveness of Engineering Camps as Pre-College Recruitment ToolsMalle Schilling, University of Dayton Malle Schilling is planning to pursue a PhD in Engineering Education. As an undergraduate mechanical engineering student at the University of Dayton, she explored the effects of engineering camps on par- ticipants’ self-efficacy in engineering and other issues of diversity and inclusion in engineering. She is interested in engineering education, diversity in engineering, outreach and policy.Dr. Margaret Pinnell, University of Dayton Dr. Margaret Pinnell is the Associate Dean for Faculty and Staff
Poshtan, Cal Poly Dr. Majid Poshtan obtained his PhD in EECE from Tulane University, New Orleans, USA in 2000. Dr. Poshtan has over 20 years of wide-ranging experience in EE academic and industry. He is an expert in electric power systems, transmission planning, short circuits studies and protection, condition monitoring of generators, induction motors, transformers and power cables, substation design, power system com- puter simulators, and Real Time simulator. Dr. Poshtan is currently an associate professor at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, CA, USA. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Development of Versatile Buck Converter Module for
five female undergraduate students who have hadengineering internship experiences and are currently enrolled at a Large Public Southwestern R1Institution. The research project described in this work-in-progress paper details the plans toaccomplish the following research objective: to document and describe the industry experiencesof female engineering undergraduate students in relation to their learning experiences back in theclassroom. The narrative stories, which have not yet been constructed until the IRB is approvedfor data collection, are guided thematically by examining the female students’ perspectivesbefore, during, and after their internship experience. This paper serves to explore how thediffering experiences of classwork and
teams that exist inworkplaces within the United States and abroad. As such, the purpose of this paper is to describethe process of creating and subsequent plans for implementation of an interdisciplinary capstonecourse at a large research-intensive institution in the Southeast US. The challenges associatedwith developing a course that meets the need of each disciplinary capstone experience and spansthe boundary of different approaches to pedagogy, knowledge structure and learning will beexplored as well.Background and ObjectivesOne of the most common complaints among recruiters of engineering graduates is a failure ofuniversities to properly prepare their students to collaborate within a diverse workplaceenvironment [1], [2]. Students typically
sought to identify what features if any were consistent throughout all thedocuments. The features identified in the summaries from the semesters of the interventionwere used to review the summaries from the previous year(s). Once the structural features ofthe summaries were identified, one of the second authors read the summaries looking for thesame structural elements to confirm the structural patterns. Then the board comments/scores were also collected for the semesters used to identifyany patterns of improvement. This strategy did not work out as planned due to a few anomaliesinvolved in the semesters included in the study. There was no clear evidence of improvementbetween the semesters studied. As a result, word counts of the
institution wide efforts being made to positively impact the entire engineering collegeand university. As the grant enters its final years, the poster will also discuss plans on engagingthe broader engineering academic community in order to establish best practices forimplementing diversity and inclusion initiatives in other programs.IntroductionRowan University’s Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE) Department was awarded theNational Science Foundation’s Revolutionizing Engineering and computer science Departments(RED) grant back in 2016. The purpose of the grant is to change the department’s ability to serveunderrepresented minorities (URMs) and underserved groups over the course of the next fiveyears. The grant provides funding over those
on effective interventions that will promote studentlearning and positive grade outcomes in first year engineering courses. This historically difficultcourse (EE 306) has warranted multiple forms of academic support, including undergraduate TAoffice hours, tutoring and Supplemental Instruction (SI). Careful attention has been paid toindividualize these programs to emphasize the content and study skills students need to besuccessful in these specific courses. Encouraged by Shew et al’s findings [2], we wanted toimplement the collaborative mock exam reviews as a new and innovative option to assiststudents in their planning, preparation and overall actual exam performance.Limitations of StudyLimitations of assessing correlations between grade
the MET 4100 curriculum. The subject of this newly developed project is todesign (start-to-finish) an HVAC system to satisfy the heating load requirements for the twoMET laboratories in the ET Department. This course is a senior level course, and at this level,the students already have prior general knowledge of technical drawing and drafting, heattransfer, psychometric chart, and duct design. To better facilitate the access to the technicalinformation, a lesson plan discussing the benefits of using the University’s library resources andan online LibGuide webpage (https://libguides.utoledo.edu/MET4100) were created and added tothe course’s Blackboard platform. The webpage lists some of the resources required for theHVAC design project, like e
PhD in Electrical and Computer Engineering at North Dakota State University. He previously earned his MS in Systems Engineering from the University of Saint Thomas and his BS in Electrical Engineering from the University of Minnesota.Ms. Lauren Singelmann, North Dakota State University Lauren Singelmann is a Masters Student in Electrical and Computer Engineering at North Dakota State University. Her research interests are innovation-based-learning, educational data mining, and K-12 Out- reach. She works for the NDSU College of Engineering as the K-12 Outreach Coordinator where she plans and organizes outreach activities and camps for students in the Fargo-Moorhead area.Mary Pearson, North Dakota State University
, whois a senior faculty member, this mentoring program has been evolved and expanded over many years upto a point where it has become a very effective and helpful system for both the incoming and the outgoingundergraduate students [7].School of Engineering, Polytechnic University of Puerto Rico (PUPR), Puerto RicoSeven (7) fulltime faculty members offer mentoring. Each mentor is assigned certain number of studentsand receives compensation for up to two (2) credit hours per semester. Students with eighty (80) or moreapproved credit hours are assigned a mentor for discussing their career plans, progress in the academicprograms, optimal or alternative choices for course selection, and so on [8]. In addition, the office ofStudent Development and
initialimplementation in an IEG has been discussed and is shared at our course websitehttps://hub.wsu.edu/me-116/pdm/ to promote further implementation across academic institutionsand provide reasonable insight into implementation.Our university will be sharing our implementation with a club shortly, and we also plan to utilizethe data mining capabilities associated with SWPDMS in future educational research.References[1] E. Wiebe, "Impact of Product Data Management (PDM) trends on Engineering Graphics Instruction," 1998.[2] D. S. Kelley, "Product Lifecycle Management Philosophies Within a Computer-Aided Design Program of Study," 2003.[3] R. T. Frame, C. Pezeshki, and M. Grant Norton, "Integrating PLM Methods into the Undergraduate
example, the emergent of industrial 4.0 or smart factory comes with a very complicatedinformation flow and man-machine system [2]. This necessitates to rethink the way of educatingengineers for the future. Considering this fact, this paper investigates an approach of integratingthe simulation-based activities in the classroom to bring changes in the learning outcomes ofmanufacturing course.Over the last few decades, traditional manufacturing/production engineering educational programshave long depended on curricula based on concurrent engineering methodologies covering productand process designs, functional design development, concept selection for product design,materials and process selection, process planning including assembly analysis, etc
the beams. Despite this,prompting the students to think about shear failure in this context improved their understandingof this topic. It should also be noted that a few students commented in the survey that theywished lecture had provided more guidance as to how to layout reinforcing prior to beamfabrication. While the request is understandable, the variety in reinforcing configurations alsoadded a creative component and a wider sample of results. This would not be the case iflectures had a more prescriptive approach to reinforcement for the lab. The individuals thatrequested this may have brought down the score for lecture preparedness slightly, but the overallscore was still strong and there are no plans to modify this approach in future
self-efficacy surveys before andafter giving students the AR application and also gathered their feedback on the engagement andusability aspects.The majority of students gave positive response in terms of being interested in AR andrecognizing its value. AR helped students to be more engaged in solving the problems. However,several students indicated that the activity was “exhausting” and they were “lost” during theactivity. The authors believe that this can be improved by streamlining the practice and trainingstudents in the use of the tool.The responses of students to the self-efficacy questions showed that there was no statisticaldifference in assisting students in understanding the problems. We plan to continue to use AR inthe same course
professional engineer in Construction and Structural Engineering. Her masters and doctoral degrees are from the University of Oklahoma in Construction Administration and Engineering respectively.Dr. Sandeep Langar, The University of Texas at San Antonio Dr. Sandeep Langar is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Construction Science in College of Architecture, Construction, and Planning at The University of Texas at San Antonio. He received his Ph.D. in Environmental Design and Planning from College of Architecture and Urban Studies at Virginia Tech. He is also a licensed architect in India. Dr. Langar has authored multiple publications analyzing the implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) and its impact
structured onboarding program (i.e., initial InstructorSummer Workshop); 2) strong leader emphasis on department-internal faculty developmentevents; 3) faculty development seminars; 4) strong emphasis on completing the Master TeacherProgram; 5) formalized developmental plans; 6) classroom observation programs.As stated, faculty development programs in both departments have several similarities. Identifiedstrengths for each department’s program included: a structured onboarding program, leaderemphasis on faculty development, one-on-one mentorship opportunities, course directorship, andclassroom observation programs. Identified areas for improvement included the need for refinedfaculty development goals, outcomes, or objectives at a department-level
will first complete the standard operating procedure tutorial problem and correspondingVR challenge. They will be split into two groups and a cross-over study approach will beemployed as seen in Figure 3, one group will complete the paper-based problem first, and thengo through the VR challenge, while the other group will complete the VR challenge first. Thisprocess will take place a second time when the students complete the tutorial problem and VRplant troubleshooting challenge. An assessment will be made for each of the four activities andthe grades of the research study participants will be collected.Figure 3: Session plans for the paper tutorial and VR tutorial in phase two for participant groupsA and BParticipants will be invited to an
forthe internship, attitudes towards company-sponsored events, as well as additional items relatingto innovation and engineering self-efficacy and their views of the company and their workassignment, their interactions with co-workers and supervisors, and future plans. It should benoted that several changes were made in the two post-internship survey instruments across thetwo administrations in 2017 and 2018 and as a result, there is no direct parity in several of thesurvey items and constructs.3.1 Key Measures Across DatasetsThis study focuses on four scales that were included in the Engineering Majors survey as well asthe two Post-Internship Surveys. The scales are described in greater detail in [11]. A Cronbach’sAlpha was calculated for each
make electric vehiclesmore efficient in terms of investigating novel methods for increasing energy recovery for therecharging of the battery or power accessories such as a radio. The plan entailed capturing aportion of drag in the engine compartment and using it to generate additional electrical energy byplacing a rotating fan blade in the compartment of a vehicle and attaching it to a generator. Thefan blade would spin as the car was driving, and the student would calculate how muchadditional power it could generate. At the beginning of the first semester of the project, the student and two engineeringfaculty mentors with expertise in energy recovery met and developed a timeline for the study.The first semester would focus on planning
problem [4].A number of rubrics have been developed to assess problem solving skills in students.Parematasari and colleagues implemented a 4 indicator problem solving rubric based on:Identification of the Problem, Planning a Solution, Implementing a Solution, and Evaluation [5].The rubric, which implemented a 1-4 scoring scale, was tested in a Physics class with senior highschool students. Another rubric implemented in Physics uses 44 sub-skills split in threecategories: knowledge, beliefs, expectations and motivations, and processes [6]. That rubric wasused to evaluate problem solving skills in students enrolled in courses College Algebra toIntroductory Calculus. Many other problem solving rubrics are available [7]. B. Assessment of Problem