and professional Engineers,” ASME J. Mechanical Design, vol. 120, pp. 636-642, 1998.[31] C. Atman, J. Chimka, K. Bursic, and H. Nachtmann, “A comparison of freshman and seniorengineering design processes,” Design Studies, vol. 20, pp. 131-152, 1999.[32] R. Kolar, K. Muraleetharan, M. Mooney, and B. Vieux, “Sooner City – Design across thecurriculum,” J. Engineering Education, vol. 89, pp. 79-87, 2000.[33] R. Hamade and N. Ghaddar, “Impact of team functions in an introductory design course onstudent performance in later design courses: A longitudinal study,” Intl. J. Engng. Ed., vol. 27,pp. 101-113, 2001.[34] K. Krippendorff, “Estimating the reliability, systematic error and random error of intervaldata,” Educational and Psychological
. Anderson, and J. I. B. De Jesus, “Increasing engagement in materials laboratory with backward design and quadcopters,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2017, vol. 2017– June.[2] H. Dillon, N. Schmedake, K. E. Eifler, T. A. Doughty, and K. Lulay, “Design of a curriculum-spanning mechanical engineering laboratory experiment,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2016, vol. 2016–June.[3] T. A. Doughty, H. Dillon, K. Lulay, K. E. Eifler, and Z. Y. Y. Hensler, “Design and implementation of an aspirational ethics laboratory course,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2017, vol. 2017–June.[4] U. of California, “Laboratory
, MD.[2] Pape, D., “A Progressively Open Ended Laboratory to Promote Active Learning,” Proc. 2006 ASEEAnnual Conf., 2006.[3] Anagnos, T., Komives, C., Mourtos, N., and McMullin, K. M., “Evaluating Student Mastery of Design ofExperiment,” Proc. 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conf., 2007.[4] Sawyers, D., and Marquart, J., “The Use of Student-Generated Lab Plans in the Thermal Sciences,”Proc. 2006 ASEE Annual Conf., 2006.[5] Satish, J., Lakkundi, A., Gaitonde, V., Burli, S. B., Madhusudhana, H., “Attainment of ProgramOutcome ‘3b’ of ABET through Laboratory Experiment for the Undergraduate Program,” Journal ofEngineering Education Transformations, Jan. 2015, 182-187.[6] Alvarado, J. “Design Your Own Thermodynamics Experiment, a Problem
Moral Patterns” Child Development, vol. 47.7 pp. 1204-06, 1976.[8] M. Brabeck, “Moral Judgment: Theory and Research on Differences between Males and Females,” Developmental Review vol. 3, pp. 274-91, 1983.[9] B. Puka, "The Liberation of Caring: A Different Voice for Gilligan's 'Different Voice,’" Hypatia vol. 55.1, pp. 58-82, 1990.[10] C. Card, “Caring and Evil,” Hypatia, vol. 5.1, pp. 101-8, 1990.[11] V. Davion, “Autonomy, Integrity, and Care,” Social Theory and Practice, vol. 19.2, pp. 161-82, 1993.[12] J. Rachels, The Elements of Moral Philosophy. San Francisco: McGraw-Hill, 1999.[13] M. McLaren, “Feminist Ethics: Care as a Virtue,” in Feminists Doing Ethics, P. DesAutels and J. Waugh, eds. Lanham, MD: Rowman &
75 11.95 5.549 .641 .05). Although significant differences did not exist acrosssection type, there were fewer failing grades (C, D, and F), and a larger percentage of B grades inthe SLA-aBLe sections than the non-SLA-aBLe sections as shown in Figure 3. The data from thepublic institution shows same trends [12]. Final Grade Comparison 40% 36% 35% 35% 29% 30% 27% 25% 25% 25% 20% 15% 10
Paper ID #21505A Pilot Study of the Development of Empathy within a Service-learning Tripfrom a Qualitative PerspectiveLinjue Wang, The Ohio State University Linjue Wang is currently a graduate research associate in engineering education department at The Ohio State University, USA. She received her B.E. in Built Environment & Equipment Engineering from Ts- inghua University, China. She has various service learning experiences as volunteer and curriculum de- signer in high schools from undeveloped areas in China. Her research interests now focus on service- learning and community engagement, as well as empowering
haveimproved dramatically post-enrichment. Moreover, for section B (Technology TeachingOutcome Expectancy), none of the teachers had a median score of 3 post-enrichment, unliketheir pre-enrichment response. These results seem to indicate that the E3 program was successfulin improving the teacher’s efficacy beliefs and attitudes. However, further hypothesis tests needto be carried out in order to determine whether the improvement in scores is statisticallysignificant, which the next objective of this study as is discussed below.Table 3 provides a summary of the mean scores provided by the teachers to the T-STEM questionnaire.The ‘Pre’ columns refer to the scores given by the teachers prior to participating in the E3 program whilethe ‘Post’ columns
, and their presence in the media and consequences for viewers. Her primary research interest is science identity, STEM education, and participation in online communities.Mr. Matthew Bahnson, North Carolina State University Matthew Bahnson is a doctoral student at North Carolina State University in Applied Social and Com- munity Psychology. His research interests include engineering identity, diversity, bias, stereotypes, and STEM education. He works with Dr. Cheryl Cass at NCSU.Ms. Rebecca Mills, University of Nevada, Reno I am an undergraduate research assistant studying Chemical Engineering with an emphasis in Biomedical Engineering.Amber B. Parker, North Carolina State University Amber Parker is an
dissertation, which documented the lived experience of nonprofit executive directors, pro- vides a foundation for her focus on leadership as a way of being for staff and volunteer leaders in the sector.Dr. Brandy B. Walker, University of Georgia Dr. Brandy Walker is public service faculty at the J.W. Fanning Institute for Leadership Development at the University of Georgia. She holds a Ph.D. in Learning, Design, and Technology and is interested in applied research on perspective changes in community contexts, experiential learning in higher education, and community-engagement.Dr. Julie A. Coffield, University of Georgia c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 2018 AEEE
distribution of graduate and undergraduate students. The undergraduatestudents had an average grade of 88% and the graduate students had an average grade of 94%. Table 3: Grade distribution of graduate and undergraduate students Graduate Students Undergraduate Students A 93+ 5 5 A- 90+ 2 B+ 86.7+ 1 B 83.3+ 2 B- 80+ C+ 76.7+ 1 1 C 73.3+ C- 70
J. McCullough, “Benefits of Undergraduate Research Experiences,” Science, vol.316, pp. 548-549, Apr. 2007.[3] K. Yaffe, C. Bender, and L. Sechrest, “How Does Undergraduate Research Experience Impact Career Trajectories and Level of Career Satisfaction: A Comparative Survey,” Journal of College Science Teaching, vol. 44, no. 1, pp 25-33, Sep./Oct. 2014.[4] K. O’Donnell, J. Botelho, J. Brown, G. M. Gonzalez, and W. Head, “Undergraduate Research and Its Impact on Student Success for Underrepresented Students,” New Directions for higher Education, no. 169, pp. 27-38, spring 2015.[5] D. F. Carter, H.K. Ro, B. Alcott, and L.R. Lattuca, “Co-Curricular Connections: The Role of Undergraduate Research
were comparedagainst course grade (converted to Grade Points, so A=4, B=3, C=2, D=1) and subject to a linearor multiple linear correlation. The relationship between total score and course GPA aresomewhat correlated (α<0.05). The individual and predicted results are shown in Figure 2.Notably for this sample, the highest mind map rubric score for students earning D’s in the classwas 4 points; however, there were also several students with higher grades that also scored 3 or 4points on the rubric. The predicted course grade increases with increasing rubric score with aslope of 95% confidence interval 0.52 ± 0.46. More significant discussion will be added after alarger number of mind maps are assessed
, while the service-learning component will enable the students to recognize theimportance of STEM education and building a STEM pipeline in the community, as well asproviding key opportunities to put their coursework into practice.Technical Outcomes - Students will be able to... 1) Design and construct robotic sub-systems to fulfill competition requirements and specifications by being able to: a) Analyze a complex task and identify subsystems needed to accomplish that task considering the use of commercial off-the-shelf vs. fabricating custom parts b) Apply basic concepts of mechanics such as gear ratios, gearboxes, motors, belts, and materials c) Compare different methods of manipulating game objects using motors vs
with hardware at the end of the semesterwere minimized in terms of their impact on student course grades, and significant learningoccurred regardless of whether the final product was functional in all aspects.Therefore, for this paper, the authors chose instead to focus on assessments that relate to studentperceptions of the learning experience as determined from (a) differential scoring on pre/post-project surveys and (b) student responses to open-ended questions offered as part of the post-project survey. The survey itself is attached as Appendix 1, where comparative pre/post ratingsare included to save space. In each tabular listing, the last four columns represent the following: Pre ̅ : Pre-survey mean (average of the responses for
in mind, we developed a design project that a) had a meaningful purpose, b) utilizes andintegrates many of the topics from the course, and c) is likely to be of interest to a broad array ofstudents. The project is an integrated health monitoring system. The health monitor determinesand displays a user’s heart rate and measures a user’s reaction time (the latter of which can beuseful for diagnosing diseases like Parkinson’s disease). A complete, digital implementation of thehealth monitor will incorporate topics including combinational logic, common combinationalbuilding blocks, finite state machines, counters, adders, shift registers, and hierarchical design.On the first day of the course, students are shown a functioning health monitor and
assurance in online learning,” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 11-24, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v17i4.402. [Accessed Jan. 4, 2018].[3] B. Brown, S. E. Eaton, D. M. Jacobsen, S. Roy and S. Friesen, “Instructional design collaboration: A professional learning and growth experience,” MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 439-452, Sept. 2013. [Online]. Available: http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no3/brown_0913.htm. [Accessed Jan. 10, 2018].[4] I. T. Chao, T. Saj and D. Hamilton, “Using collaborative course development to achieve online course quality standards,” The International Review of Research in Open and
Paper ID #21861’It was a Failure, But a Good Failure’: A Qualitative Study Exploring Engi-neering Students’ Critical Entrepreneurship Experiences and Their ImpactsMr. Mark V. Huerta, Arizona State University Mark Huerta is a second year PhD student in the Engineering Education Systems & Design (EESD) program at Arizona State University. Mark is also the Chairman and Director of Projects of a non-profit called 33 Buckets, which empowers rural communities in developing countries to develop solutions for their drinking water problems. Before enrolling in the EESD program, Mark obtained a BS and MS in Biomedical Engineering
learning-centered approach. This approach first decides what students should learn given their backgroundand future goals, and then figures out how the learning can be facilitated. A way to implement thelearning-centered approach is the integrated course design shown in Figure 1. The integrated course design begins with identifying the key factors related to the contextof the course, nature of the course and characteristics of the students and the instructor. These arecalled situational factors and listed in Figure 1. They are used to make the following three key setsof decisions: (a) learning outcomes: what students should learn in the course (b) assessments and feedback: how the students and the instructor will know if the
piezoelectrics, nanomanufacturing, optical measuring techniques, and intercultural design.Dr. Jeffery J. Leader, Rose-Hulman Institute of TechnologyMiss Jessa B. Ward, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Jessa Ward is a master’s student in the Biology and Biomedical Engineering Department at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. She is interested in biomechanics, prosthetics, and orthotics. More specifically, her thesis work is examining the biomechanics of Kinesio tape. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2018 Creating Laboratories to Aid Student Modeling Ability in Calculus IAbstractIn this paper we will report on the development and deployment of a laboratory sequence forCalculus 1 students
Military Academy. His current research interests include laboratory and field determination of geotechnical material properties for transportation systems and the use of remote sensing techniques to categorize geohazards. He has published over 85 peer reviewed articles relating to his research and educational activities. Dennis holds BS and MS degrees in Civil Engineering from the University of Missouri-Rolla (now Missouri University of Science and Technology), an MBA from Boston University and a Ph.D. from the University of Texas-Austin. He is a registered professional engineer in Arkansas and Colorado.Dr. Decker B. Hains, Western Michigan University Dr. Decker B. Hains is a Master Faculty Specialist in the Department
’ perceptions of andapproaches to problem-solving over the course of their first engineering science course?Data Collection and AnalysisTo investigate this research question, we conducted a series of three cognitive interviews withfour students over the course of a one-semester statics and dynamics course. All students had thesame instructor for this course and were enrolled in their third semester at a highly selectiveuniversity in the eastern United States. They all earned high grades (mostly A’s with theoccasional B) on homeworks, quizzes, and exams. Each interview had two phases. First, studentswere asked open-ended questions about their methods of problem solving and conceptualquestions. Second, they were asked to think aloud as they solved
Paper ID #213792018 CoNECD - The Collaborative Network for Engineering and ComputingDiversity Conference: Crystal City, Virginia Apr 29Why inclusion programs are beneficial to students with disabilities and howuniversities can help: perspectives of students with disabilitiesMs. Meenakshi Manas Das, Mississippi State University Meenakshi Das is a junior computer science student at Mississippi State University and has an active interest in Accessibility in tech.Dr. Sarah B. Lee, Mississippi State University Sarah Lee joined the faculty at Mississippi State University after a 19 year information technology career at FedEx
Technology Sharon C. Bommer KBRwyle Adedeji B. Badiru Air Force Institute of TechnologyIntroductionThe Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) is located at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base nearDayton, Ohio. The Institute provides technical and professional continuing education for theUnited States Air Force and is also home to a fully accredited graduate program, the GraduateSchool of Engineering and Management. AFIT offers Master’s and Doctoral degrees in STEMareas in support of the mission of the US Air Force. AFIT is unique from most universities on anumber of aspects, including its two categories
technology teacher, as well as several years of electrical and mechanical engineering design experience as a practicing engineer. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering from Swarthmore College, his Master’s of Education degree from the University of Massachusetts, and a Master’s of Science in Mechanical Engineering and Doctorate in Engineering Education from Purdue University.Dr. Thad B. Welch, Boise State University Thad B. Welch, Ph.D., P.E. received the B.E.E., M.S.E.E., E.E., and Ph.D. degrees from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Naval Postgraduate School, Naval Postgraduate School, and the University of Colorado in 1979, 1989, 1989, and 1997, respectively. He was commissioned in the U.S. Navy in
Paper ID #22303Standardizing the Statics Curriculum Across Multiple InstructorsDr. Kimberly B. Demoret P.E., Florida Institute of Technology Kimberly B. Demoret, Ph.D., P.E., teaches Statics and Aerospace Engineering Capstone Design at the Florida Institute of Technology. Prior to joining Florida Tech in 2015, she worked for eight years at Kennedy Space Center on development of launch systems in support of NASA’s space exploration goals. Before that she was a US Air Force officer for 20 years, supporting several aerospace programs as a developmental engineer and manager.Dr. Jennifer Schlegel, Florida Institute of
Engineering Professor. With this opportunity, Hern´an is able to further his understanding of both engineering and education to aid the generations who aim to become future engineers.Dr. Kristen B. Wendell, Tufts University Kristen Wendell is Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Ed- ucation at Tufts University. Her research efforts at at the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach focus on supporting discourse and design practices during K-12, teacher education, and college-level en- gineering learning experiences, and increasing access to engineering in the elementary school experience, especially in under-resourced schools. In 2016 she was a recipient of the U.S. Presidential
Ellbogen Meritorious Classroom Teaching Award (2012), the Tau Beta Pi WY-A Undergraduate Teaching Award (2011), the IEEE UW Student Branch’s Outstanding Professor of the Year (2005 and 2008), the UW Mortar Board ”Top Prof” award (2005, 2007, and 2015), the Outstanding Teaching Award from the ASEE Rocky Mountain Section (2007), the John A. Curtis Lecture Award from the Computers in Education Division of ASEE (1998, 2005, and 2010), and the Brigadier General Roland E. Thomas Award for outstanding contribution to cadet education (both 1992 and 1993) at the U.S. Air Force Academy. He is an active ABET evaluator and an NCEES PE exam committee member.Dr. Thad B. Welch, Boise State University Thad B. Welch, Ph.D., P.E
since 2006 focusing on grant team management, program management, and project management as well as Broader Impacts for National Science Foundation proposals. She was the Executive Director of the Northern Indiana Regional Science and Engineering Fair from 2012 to 2016 and served on the Science Education Foundation of Indiana Board of Directors during that time. In addition, her committee work includes several initiatives to broaden participation of underrepresented groups in STEM. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice and a Master of Public Affairs degree with a concentration in Nonprofit Administration from Indiana University South Bend.Dr. Jay B. Brockman, University of Notre Dame Dr. Jay
Paper ID #22302Capstone Design and Psychology: Teams, Traits, and Competencies Mea-sured in Student SurveysDr. Kimberly B. Demoret P.E., Florida Institute of Technology Kimberly B. Demoret, Ph.D., P.E., teaches Statics and Aerospace Engineering Capstone Design at the Florida Institute of Technology. Prior to joining Florida Tech in 2015, she worked for eight years at Kennedy Space Center on development of launch systems in support of NASA’s space exploration goals. Before that she was a US Air Force officer for 20 years, supporting several aerospace programs as a developmental engineer and manager.Kyi Phyu Nyein, Florida
Paper ID #21337Student Career Decision Making Approaches and Development of Profes-sional Engineering TrajectoriesDr. Joyce B. Main, Purdue University, 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 Social Policy from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Nichole Ramirez, Purdue University, West Lafayette (College of Engineering) Nichole Ramirez is a postdoctoral researcher in the School of Engineering Education at Purdue