teacher (7-12) and taught in public schools and museums from 2003-2013.Dr. Marci S. DeCaro, University of Louisville Marci DeCaro is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences at the University of Louisville. Her research focuses on the role of cognitive factors such as working memory in learning and performance situations. She studies these topics with adults and children in laboratory and educational contexts.Dr. Jeffrey Lloyd Hieb, University of Louisville Jeffrey L. Hieb is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Fundamentals at the Univer- sity of Louisville. He graduated from Furman University in 1992 with degrees in Computer Science and Philosophy
. degrees from Xi’an Jiaotong University, China and Ph.D. degree from University of Strathclyde, UK. Prior to joining UBC in 2008, she worked as a research scientist at Ryerson University on various projects in the area of CFD and heat and mass transfer. Dr. Yan has taught a variety of courses including fluid mechanics, fluid machines, mechanics of materials, calculus, and kinematics and dynamic. She has also developed undergraduate fluids laboratories and supervised many capstone projects. Her interest in SoTL is evidence-based teaching strategies, student engagement, faculty development, and teaching and learning communities. Dr. Yan is a registered P.Eng. with APEGBC and has served as reviewer for various
resonator arrays.Dr. Colleen Janeiro, East Carolina University Dr. Colleen Janeiro teaches engineering fundamentals such as Introduction to Engineering, Materials and Processes, and Statics. Her teaching interests include development of solid communication skills and enhancing laboratory skills.Dr. William E. Howard, East Carolina University William E (Ed) Howard is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering at East Carolina University. He was previously a faculty member at Milwaukee School of Engineering, following a 14- year career as a design and project engineer with Thiokol Corporation, Spaulding Composites Company, and Sta-Rite Industries. c American Society for Engineering
Paper ID #16813Student Proposals for Design Projects to Aid Children with Severe Disabili-tiesDr. Steve Warren, Kansas State University Steve Warren received a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from Kansas State University in 1989 and 1991, respectively, followed by a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from The University of Texas at Austin in 1994. Dr. Warren is an Associate Professor in the Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering at Kansas State University. He directs the KSU Medical Component Design Laboratory, a facility partially funded by the National Science Foundation that provides resources for the
-Mona, I. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Argumentative discourse in a high school chemistry classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 106(8), 349–361. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949- 8594.2006.tb17755.x18. Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). An anthropologist visits the laboratory. In Labor life: The construction of scientifc facts (pp. 43–103). Princeton University Press.19. Fink, F. K. (2001). Integration of work based learning in engineering education. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2001. 31st Annual. Reno, NV: IEEE. http://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2001.96374720. Jonassen, D. & Shen, D. (2009). Engaging and supporting problem solving in engineering ethics. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 235
Paper ID #15772Summer Bridge Program Structured to Cover Most Demanding STEM Top-icsMs. Megan McSpedon, Rice University Megan McSpedon is the Associate Director of the Rice Emerging Scholars Program. She has been with the program since it was founded in 2012. Megan received a B.A. in English from Rice University.Dr. Ann Saterbak, Rice University Ann Saterbak is Professor in the Practice in the Bioengineering Department and Associate Dean for Un- dergraduate Education in the School of Engineering at Rice University. Saterbak was responsible for developing the laboratory program in Bioengineering. Saterbak introduced problem
Paper ID #16713System Engineering Education for All Engineers - A Capstone Design Ap-proachDr. Armand Joseph Chaput, Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics University ofTexas at Austin Dr. Armand J. Chaput is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics at the University of Texas (UT) at Austin and Director of the Air System Laboratory. He teaches Aircraft Design with a focus on Systems Engineering and Unmanned Air Systems (UAS). Dr. Chaput is a retired Senior Technical Fellow - Air System Design and Integration from Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company where he
this course. With regard to this table, it is importantto note that the WPI academic schedule is based on students taking four terms in an academicyear, with a fifth (optional) summer term. Each term is seven weeks long and three full timecourses/term constitute a full (undergraduate) load. The SE ES capstone course is offered in thefirst term of the year and it is expected that students will take this course concurrent with startingtheir capstone project (MQP but could also be the IQP). A one-term course typically meets fourtimes/week and courses that have laboratory sessions (not this course) also layer in a weekly labsection. A simple calculation shows that as a result of this course/term structure, a typical classwill meet 28 times/term
, manufacturing, and assembly processes. Since 2010, Lo- gan has worked as a private tutor; most recently he has moved from small in-person tutoring into electronic classroom learning as a consultant for an online tutoring service. In previous semesters, he has aided the teaching of introductory design and modeling classes at Florida Polytechnic University. As the operator of the Florida Polytechnic University Robotics Laboratory, he trains students to use fabrication machin- ery, 2D and 3D design software, and analytic methods to aid in student and research projects. Logan also provides 3D modeling, prototyping, and 2D design services to various local companies, and hopes to earn certifications for 3D design in the coming
19 Laboratory Tours 3.47 19 Poster Session 3.47 19 Faculty Meetings 3.44 18Respondents were also asked to provide suggestions for improvement of the event activities.Feedback suggested categorized faculty presentations, more activities outside the building, andbetter attention to time constraints on visitors. Some representative comments include: “Although some students would like a breadth of background on research, most if not all have a major field (imaging, cellular engineering) that they would like to work in; so different, separate groups for each field would allow each presenter to
data. By engaging in these practices, the researchers were able to acknowledge – and to theextent that it was possible – separate their biases from the data they analyzed. Afterwards, theresearchers compiled their findings, and came to consensus with regards to this study’s findings.Findings Findings from this study illustrate that Black men in engineering graduate programsengage with their faculty advisors in various educational spaces, including communication inone-on-one meetings, interactions in the laboratory, and occasional casual conversations.Through these interactions with faculty advisors, students described encountering both positiveand negative experiences that shaped how they valued the advisor-advisee relationship
led energy conservation research projects for Argonne National Laboratory. He has a BS in civil engineering from Carnegie-Mellon University and an MS in civil engineering with an emphasis in regional planning from Northwestern University. Wayne is a frequent speaker and author on continuing education for engineers, and is a member of the College of Engineering’s Education Innovation Committee.Dr. Jeffrey S. Russell, University of Wisconsin, Madison Dr. Jeffrey S. Russell is the Vice Provost for Lifelong Learning and Dean of the Division of Continuing Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In his role as Vice Provost, he is striving to make UW- Madison a global leader in the service to lifelong learners. He
Importance Satisfaction 1 Industrial Engineering courses at SIUE 2.94 2.19 2 Industrial Engineering courses at ITU 2.81 1.69 2 Industrial Engineering facilities at SIUE 2.81 2.56 3 Industrial Engineering technical elective choices at ITU 2.75 1.56 4 Industrial Engineering technical elective choices at SIUE 2.69 1.50 5 Industrial Engineering laboratories at SIUE 2.56 1.93 6 General Engineering courses at SIUE 2.12 2.13 7 General Education courses at SIUE
twoareas namely (i) those that have “simulations” and (ii) those that have “authenticinvolvement.” Simulations consist of contrived situations that are carefully designedto meet selected learning objectives and are under close faculty control. The authenticinvolvement activities expose the student to real situations with totally open-endedprojects, although the faculty may influence the selection of the situations and setperformance criteria to assure that positive learning objectives are met. Authenticinvolvements use outside clients while simulations use experimental laboratories,guided design, or case studies. In an article in 2006, Davis et al. [6] defines “thepurpose of the capstone engineering design course is to provide students
, 2004), “distributed cognition” (Hutchins, 1995), or “situated cognition” (Lave,1988; Lave and Wenger, 1991), and the cognitive-ethnographic methods we apply follow fromthat approach. In real-world scenarios, such as engineering design, much of the work isperformed by groups of individuals interacting with each other, mediated by tools and artifacts;thus, an adequate account of the moral judgments in engineering requires that we examine thegroup as the appropriate unit of analysis, not individuals considering hypothetical or historicalcases by themselves in the classroom or laboratory. Furthermore, we move from analyzing theindividual, where we can really only see the input and output of the cognitive process and haveto infer the structure of
their teaching. The changes coveredfour aspects: course syllabus, classroom discussion, assignments, and exams, which arediscussed in detail below.Course syllabus.Compared to their pre-workshop syllabi, participants’ revised syllabi were more focused ondetails related to the importance of academic integrity and university rules. Doug explained howhe modified his syllabus to clarify expectations for specific aspects of his course: I went from one line to a whole page, very, very clearly spelling out for the different aspects of the courses. And these courses that I teach have laboratory work, they have lectures, they have homework, they have exams, they have everything. I carefully spelled out what the expectations were
day the students were given a brief lecture showing how engineers use thetechnologies they were working with and were introduced to the state of the art including videoclips from work being done by researchers at various universities and tours of laboratories atECU. They then had to put this knowledge together to build a robot that could navigate a linedcircular path while determining how far it had traveled along that line, avoid running into otherrobots on the line, and determine what the depth was of some artificial terrain designed tosimulate the ocean floor. The students worked in pairs and in some cases groups of three toaccomplish the daily tasks
Learning and Development, Prentice Hall.18. Abdulwahed, M. and Nagy, Z. K. (2009), Applying Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle for Laboratory Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98: 283-294. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01025.x19. Sharp, J. E., Harb, J. N. and Terry, R. E. (1997), Combining Kolb Learning Styles and Writing to Learn in Engineering Classes. Journal of Engineering Education, 86: 93-101. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00271.x20. Stice, J. E. (1987), Using Kolb’s Learning Cycle to Improve Student Learning. Engineering Education, 77.21. Brown, A. O. (2004), Undergraduate Finite Element Instruction using Commercial Finite Element Software Tutorials and the Kolb Learning Cycle. Proceedings of the
courses in thermodynamics, heat transfer, energy systems laboratory, cryogenics, and vacuum technology.Mr. David J Gagnon, University of Wisconsin - Madison David J. Gagnon (University of Wisconsin, Madison) is a Discovery Fellow and program director of the Mobile Learning Lab in the Wisconsin Institutes for Discovery at University of Wisconsin, Madison. He directs a team of educational researchers, software engineers, artists and storytellers that explore the inter- sections of learning science and media design, specializing in mobile media, video games and simulation. David is also the Director of the ARIS project, a free and open tool that allows anyone to produce mo- bile games, stories and tours. He is also active
qualitative examination of graduate advising relationships: The advisee perspective. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(2), 178.8. McCuen, R.H., Akar, G., Gifford, I.A., & Srikantaiah, D. (2009). Recommendations for improving graduate adviser-advisee communication. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 135(4), 153-160.9. Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.10. Raoul Tan, T. L. & Potocnik, D. (2006). Are you experienced? Junior scientists should make the most of opportunities to develop skills outside the laboratory.” EMBO Reports. 7, pp. 961–964.11. Tomazou, E. M
Institute of Technology in 2000. Currently, she serves on the Editorial Board of the Springer Wireless Networks Journal and formerly on the editorial boards of IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing and Elsevier Ad Hoc Networks Journal. Her engineering education research interests are the status of under- represented minority groups and women in engineering as well as the impact of online learning on student proficiency in engineering laboratory courses. Page 26.862.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 How the Pathway to Engineering Affects Diversity in the
. Marzano, R., & Heflebower, T. (2012). Teaching & Assessing 21st Century Skills. Bloomington, INI: Marzano Research Laboratory.2. Wulf, W. (2006). Diversity in Engineering. Women in Engineering ProActive Network.3. Kimrey, J. (2013, July 26). Engineering futures are always bright. (Chron) Retrieved January 03, 2013, from http://www.chron.com/jobs/article/Engineering-futures-are-always-bright-4688904.php4. M. Knight and C. Cunningham, "Draw an Engineer Test (DAET): Development of a Tool to Investigate Students Ideas about Engineers and Engineering," ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2004.5. Fussell Policastro, E. (2009, April). Engineers can change the world. (InTech) Retrieved January 03, 2014, from
and for onlineplatforms. A number of classrooms are available that are outfitted with full video capturecapabilities and staffed by student operators. A video studio with a green screen is alsoavailable for instructor use.The instructors were given great leeway in how they chose to structure and develop theonline versions of their courses, including traditional classroom teaching supplemented withonline material, flipped classrooms, tutored online education (of which more below), and aMOOC. In the latter case, the MOOC was to be offered in addition to the regular for-creditcourse. The University views its MOOCs both as a public service and as laboratories forexploring online teaching and learning—the School of Education at the University has
challenges identified in a recent report by theNational Research Council 8.According with the conclusions of the Frontiers in Chemical Engineering project a newcurriculum that is to incorporate Multi-scale aspects should 6: • Integrate all organizing principles and basic supportive sciences throughout the educational sequence and should move from simple to complex • Be consistently infused with relevant and demonstrative laboratory experiences • Provide opportunities for teaming experiences and use of communications skills (written, oral, graphic) • Address different learning styles • The curriculum should be consistently infused with relevant and demonstrative examples
engineers for 2020 and beyond. Available from http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/cms/7126/7639.aspx4 Merriam, S., & Bierema, L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.5 Arkes, J. (1999). What do educational credentials signal and why do employers value credentials? Economics of Education Review, 18, 133-1416 Morell, L. (2012). Engineering education in the 21st century: Roles, opportunities, and challenges. Hewlett Packard Laboratories. Available from http://luenymorell.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/morell- eng-edu-in-21st-cent-roles-opport-and-challenges.pdf7 Young, J. (2012). Badges earned online
Paper ID #12397A First-Year Project-Based Design Course with Management Simulation andGame-Based Learning ElementsMr. Daniel D. Anastasio, University of Connecticut Daniel Anastasio received his B.S. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Connecticut in 2009. He is pursuing a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering at the University of Connecticut while acting as a co- instructor for the chemical engineering capstone laboratory and the first-year foundations of engineering course. His research interests include osmotically driven membrane separations and engineering peda- gogy.Ms. Malgorzata Chwatko, University of
process and design educational and research programs that bring the concepts of innovation and entrepreneurship into the classroom and the research laboratory. Dr. Christodoulatos is leading the implementation of academic entrepreneurship through the creation of innovative curric- ula and overseeing the commercialization of the Institute’s intellectual property. He has been teaching and performing research since 1988 and has managed over a hundred and fifty major research projects exceeding $30M. Dr. Christodoulatos has developed and delivered entrepreneurship curricula and special- ized innovation and entrepreneurship workshops for faculty, administration and technical entrepreneurs in Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. He
undergraduate computer engineering students is not at all clear.This is in part due to the nature of the discipline, which has continually changing technology andorganization. In this paper, we describe a project-based computer engineering curriculum, whichcomplements more traditional lectures and laboratory courses. We compare this curriculum withcurricula from other small universities in the US. We show how our curriculum is in agreementwith a mixed-mode approach that combines projects with traditional techniques. An assessmentof student outcomes is presented and successes and limitations are discussed.Critical issues in engineering educationIn 2003, Mills and Treagust2 summarized the critical issues in engineering education asidentified by