Paper ID #9857A Philosophy of Learning Engineering and a Native American Philosophy ofLearning; An Analysis for CongruencyMs. Christina Hobson Foster, Arizona State UniversityDr. Shawn S Jordan, Arizona State University, Polytechnic campus Shawn Jordan, Ph.D.is an Assistant Professor in theDepartment of Engineering atArizona State Univer- sity. He is the PI on three NSF-funded projects: CAREER: Engineering Design Across Navajo Culture, Community, and Society (EEC 1351728), Might Young Makers be the Engineers of the Future?(EEC 1329321), and Broadening the Reach of Engineering through Community Engagement (BRECE)(DUE 1259356
” come first, and to the extent that the nearly 200 firms who recruit our students at the twiceyearly career fairs have expectations that NC State students will have a particular suite of civil engineering skills, and the department aims to provide those skills. It also does assert that ABET requirements are viewed as minimum requirements that must be met, not an optimal target. Expanding the scope of those expectations (read as being constraints), unnecessarily, as might easily occur with an explicit conformance to either BOK1 or BOK2, is not advantageous nor is it necessarily important in meeting the needs of our customers. This having been said, the department’s “customers” are true civil engineering firms, both local and
listening – but this was implicitly aimedat grooming us to stand out in interviews and boardrooms from the herd ofcolleagues who lacked communication skills. Listening was an asset that we weretaught to view as a “booster” to our career prospects.This career orientation model was built around the goal of creating engineers whofulfill what industry demands. Academia itself was seen as an engineer “churningfactory.” Don’t get me wrong. The curricula and our initiation into the industrialsector were top notch. The message we got about our role in society, however, wasa blur. Although we had courses with case studies depicting huge engineeringfailures and their catastrophic consequences (e.g., the Union Carbide Bhopaltragedy), the public side of these
learning; results of integrated curricula experiences; nationally-normed subject content examinations; recent graduate surveys that demonstrate graduate satisfaction with employment including career development activities, mobility opportunities, and appropriate job title; and employer surveys that demonstrate satisfaction with recent graduates. Programs also must demonstrate that their graduates are readily accepted into the workforce and are prepared for continuing education.ii Page 6.125.2 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
general engineering major. At HMC and MIT, the required general educationcurricula also stressed disciplinary connections and thus interdisciplinarity. Institutions –particularly ASU, Howard, and the University of Michigan (UM) – incorporatedinterdisciplinarity into courses and programs: ASU’s Innovation Space course brings togetherstudents from business and engineering; at Howard, senior design courses are interdisciplinary,involving students within engineering and from other fields as well; the focus at UM was on thedevelopment of three interdisciplinary minor programs that would allow students to combinestudies across engineering majors to meet their career goals. At Virginia Tech (VT) and UM,curricular efforts were greatly supplemented by co
engineering disciplines (biomedical/bioengineering, chemical, civil, electrical, industrial, and mechanical). All faculty members,program chairs, and sophomore, junior and senior students at participating institutions were Page 22.430.3invited to participate in web-based surveys. The student surveys solicited respondents‟background and demographic characteristics, self-assessments of selected learning outcomes,and future career plans. The survey also queried students‟ perceptions of classroom practices,out-of-class interactions with faculty, and extracurricular experiences. Chairs were askedquestions about their curriculum, educational support
, but the primary concern would be in setting up false expectations in newly hired faculty who do not understand the final objectives and outcomes of the P&T process. By providing new faculty members with OES-l opportunities that are "outside of the academic mainstream" compared to the traditional P&T process—without ALSO mentoring them so they know about and understand the need to address the core function of the P&T process (Teaching, Creative Activities, & Service) —then they may be moving along an inappropriate career trajectory, leading to disappointment, failure, and possible law suits as a result. ≠ Retention is much influenced by the OES-l as a part of P&T process
culturethat fosters interdependence, women should prefer classes that emphasize cooperative learning.In fact, both studies suggest that active participation in class, class discussion, small group work,and cooperation will improve the learning environment for women.Industry involvementVery few students choose a major with a thorough understanding of the implications for theimpact of their choice of major on what they will do after graduation. Student knowledge of thepractice of engineering and possible careers paths for engineering graduates early in theircollegiate careers is minimal at best. Without an accurate picture of the value of their major forlife after graduation, students may find it difficult to justify to themselves the hours of
was never, like, her asking if I could not do well. It was like you can do this, you can make your way through it. My little brothers, like, wanting to set an example for them and wanting to, you know, show them that, like, no matter our background we could do it. We can make it through college and graduate. And, you know, being in a position, like, with engineering, it puts you in a better financial position than a lot of other career paths, so being able to support, you know, my family and not letting, I guess past circumstances determine, like, the future. I think that, like, there's a lot of friends, being close with other people and The ACCESS Program like Obi and Greg. You know
Paper ID #9195Management and Assessment of a Successful Peer Mentor Program for In-creasing Freshmen RetentionMr. Jeff Johnson, LeTourneau University Jeff Johnson is an Instructor at LeTourneau University. He received his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering Technology from LeTourneau in 1994 then proceeded to spend 16 years in industry focusing on machine and civil design as well as project management. In 2010 he began his teaching career at his alma mater to share his experiences with engineering and technology students. He is currently a co-PI on the schools NSF-STEP retention grant.Prof. Alan D. Niemi, LeTourneau University
Support for Blind or Low-Vision (BLV) Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) LearnersAbstractThere is a growing, yet relatively limited body of research exploring the experiences of learnerswith disabilities in introductory electrical and computer engineering (ECE) education. With theproven importance of introductory ECE education in influencing students’ undergraduateinterests and future career prospects in technology, the inaccessibility of the field to learners withdisabilities poses an inequitable access barrier that further marginalizes these learners, oftenpreventing them from exploring the field in the first place. In particular, as ECE largely relies onvisual cues for designing, building, testing, and debugging
aprofessional engineer. It’s first fundamental canon to “Hold paramount the safety, health, andwelfare of the public” (NSPE, n. d.) informed their decision making when navigating anunethical directive or request. Rather than serving merely as a symbol of good engineering practice, the NSPE Code ofEthics and other written standards provide the raw material necessary for professional engineersto form an identity, often coming to life through application to case studies. Participants sharedmemories of case studies they had learned about early in their career that helped them determinehow they wanted to be perceived as a professional engineer. In reference to the ChallengerDisaster, which was among a few frequently-cited case studies, Zac shared
VicePresident of Product Management & Engineering for the wireless terminals division of SamsungTelecommunications America. He began his career as an associate professor of electricalengineering at Lakehead University, Canada. He has authored more than 30 technicalpublications and received five patents with several patents pending.Dr. Justin P. OpatkiewiczB.S. U.C. BerkeleyPh.D. Stanford UniversityDr. Opatkiewicz joined the NanoEngineering Department at UC San Diego in 2012 to lecture in avariety of core courses in the Chemical Engineering curriculum. He has won the Teacher of theYear Award for both the NanoEngineering department and the Jacobs School of Engineering in2014. While at Berkeley, Dr. Opatkiewicz created and taught the course
executive in the medical device industry and in academic instruction as a professor in biomedical engineering. His industry experience includes medical product development, marketing and sales, international business development, strategic and business planning, and senior man- agement with P&L responsibility. Currently, Bost is the Executive Associate Dean in the School of Engineering at Virginia Commonwealth University. He oversees development of innovation and outreach programs along with the School’s mar- keting and communications, human resources, information technology, and student career service activ- ities. Bost is also Director of the VCU Institute of Engineering and Medicine located in the Virginia
Teaching Fellow in the School of Engineering at Sheffield Hallam University. Afteruniversity and industrial experience as initially a computer systems design engineer at Plessey and latterly as anintegrated circuit applications engineer at Marconi he joined the university as a lecturer in electronics. Johncurrently is responsible for the coordination of learning, teaching and assessment strategy in the School ofEngineering.Tim Mulroy is a Lecturer in the School of Engineering at Sheffield Hallam University and provides academicoversight of the engineering industrial placement program for undergraduates. He is also academic coordinator forjoint programs between the university and its partner college in Malaysia. Tim started his career
12achieving the Letter A, and why only two students in the control group achieved Letter B, and howpeer to peer interaction can impact results. These conclusions drawn and strategies presented allowstudents to develop fundamental engineering skills early on in their education with the intent ofcarrying them throughout their studies. Furthermore, if students can experience a more rewarding andsuccessful time in Engineering Design I and II courses while gaining valuable experience, they willbe more confident in their abilities and choices not only in the classroom but in their careers as well. References1. Richards, S., Retzlaff, L., Donndelinger, J., 2022, “Developing and Manufacturing Process
implement it in their design process. Overall, ifstudents can better understand the cost and time trade-offs of manufacturing processes, they arebetter equipped for their engineering careers in an industry setting since this understanding is a keyfactor in ensuring efficient design development.7 AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank Mr. Thomas Gilman for his contributions in defining this work.References[1] Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., and Gonzalez, R., 2012, “Design Heuristics in Engineering Concept Generation,” J. Eng. Educ., 101(4), pp. 601–629.[2] Viswanathan, Vimal K. and Linsey, Julie S., ”Design Fixation and Its Mitiga- tion: A Study on the Role of Expertise,” ASME
that prepare early learners to become problem solvers in the computer science and engineering domains, skills that are necessary to meet future industry requirements. To address this gap, this paper proposes a framework and models to help educators identify available CT experiences to incorporate them into their lessons. The framework includes nine pedagogical experiences: (1) Unplugged, (2) Tinkering, (3) Making, (4) Remixing, (5) Robotics+, (6) Engineering, (7) Coding, (8) Dataying, and (9) Artificial Intelligence (AI).IntroductionThe growth of computational careers worldwide means that students of all ages, includingchildren in early childhood, must be consistently exposed to various problem
the Hokie Supervisor Spotlight Award in 2014, received the College of Engineering Graduate Student Mentor Award in 2018, and was inducted into the Virginia Tech Academy of Faculty Leadership in 2020. Dr. Matusovich has been a PI/Co-PI on 19 funded research projects including the NSF CAREER Award, with her share of funding being nearly $3 million. She has co-authored 2 book chapters, 34 journal publications, and more than 80 conference papers. She is recognized for her research and teaching, including Dean’s Awards for Outstanding New Faculty, Outstanding Teacher Award, and a Faculty Fellow. Dr. Matusovich has served the Educational Research and Methods (ERM) division of ASEE in many capacities over the past 10
use, e.g., using abusivelanguage to describe an instructor [17]. In addition to the personal harm done to instructors, biascan derail the careers of minority-group instructors as course evaluations often play an large rolein determining tenure and promotion [18, 19]. Our case study builds on the well-establishednotion of bias in student evaluations, and we investigate how much bias exists in writtenevaluations and whether that bias changed when courses switched to virtual format in 2020.3 Methods3.1 Data CollectionOur new data set, henceforth CCE for “COVID-19 Course Evaluations,” comes from a publicuniversity in the U.S. Midwest. The university’s registrar provided 23,882 course evaluationsfrom the College of Engineering collected over six
Sentiment Analysis to Evaluate First-year Engineering Students Teamwork Textual Feedback. 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Amelink, C. T., & Creamer, E. G. (2010). Gender Differences in Elements of the Undergraduate Experience that Influence Satisfaction with the Engineering Major and the Intent to Pursue Engineering as a Career. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01044.xArco-Tirado, J. L., Fernández-Martín, F. D., & Fernández-Balboa, J.-M. (2011). The impact of a peer-tutoring program on quality standards in higher education. Higher Education, 62, 773–788.Asghar, A. (2010). Reciprocal peer coaching and its use as a
Sloan Research Fellowship, an NSF CAREER award, and numerous teaching and research awards from the University of Illinois.Jason Xia, University of Illinois at Urbana - ChampaignEliot Wong RobsonTue DoAidan Tzur GlickmanZhuofan JiaEric JinJiwon LeePatrick LinSteven PanSamuel RuggerioTomoko Sakurayama, University of Illinois, Urbana-ChampaignAndrew YinYael Gertner, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dr Gertner joined the Computer Science Department at the University of Illinois in 2020 as a Teaching Assistant Professor. She received her B.S. and MEng in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from MIT, and Ph.D. in Computer and Information Science at the University of Pennsylvania. She was a Beckman Fellow at the
, Knowledge and Relationships. IBM Press. p 32.[5] Daloz, Laurent. (1986) Effective Teaching and Mentoring: Realizing the TransformationalPower of Adult Learning Experiences. Jossey Bass.[6] Ibid. p. 36.[7] Allen, T.D., Eby, L.T., Poteet, M.L. Lentz, E. and Lima, L. (2004). Career BenefitsAssociated With Mentoring for Protégés: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology. 89.[8] Hean, Lim Lee. (February 2009) Highlights of Educational Research on LeadershipMentoring: One and a half decades of Singapore experience. Nanyang TechnologicalUniversity, National Institute of Education in the International Journal of Evidence BasedCoaching and Mentoring, Vol. 7, No.1.[9] Hymowitz, Carol. (2007) Women Get Better at Forming Networks To Help Their Climb,WALL
semester.These statistics become concerning when examining the racial and gender factors related to STEMdegree attainment. Though progress has been made, a considerable gap remains betweenunderrepresented groups such as Black and Hispanic students and their white counterparts inattaining STEM degrees. According to data provided by National Science Board, from 2000 and2015, the number of science and engineering degrees awarded to Hispanic students has increasedfrom 7% to 13% compared to 61% awarded white students [29]. These minor trends significantlyimpact the professional and career trajectories of students, but limit the diversification of theSTEM workforce. For example, according to Pew Research Center Black and Hispanic groupscontinue to be
programs positioned the engineer’s role as a leader orcollaborator. Programs with an “engineering for” orientation framed leadership and collaborationskills in transactional or extractive terms - that the purpose of learning how to lead or collaboratewas to reap the greatest success for your career or your employer. This approach was commonlyfound in the international or global engineering minors, which emphasized “competency” and“effectiveness” as the goals, which would facilitate successful cross-cultural negotiation ormanagement. On the other hand, leadership or collaboration for “engineering with” relied moreon language that understood the goal to be co-development and mutuality. For example, whereother minors described the goal as solving
improved to support student mental health,reduce attrition rates, and bridge the gender and ethno-racial gaps in graduation rates, makingdoctoral education a more viable career path for engineers.Identity development in engineering doctoral students Research on identity development in engineering students has primarily focused onundergraduates, and only a handful have considered identity development in graduate students[1], [2], [3], [4]. Because engineering graduate students, and especially doctoral students, oftenmatriculate with professional experience, researchers have assumed that graduate students enterdoctoral programs with a ready-made professional identity as engineers. However, training indoctoral engineering programs requires
Architectureand Marine Engineering (NAME). Many first-year students express an interest in the NAMEmajor yet do not have a good understanding of the major or the larger discipline. This manifestsitself in disappointing retention numbers, with roughly half of the students leaving the majorafter the first year. This project aimed to not only provide an opportunity for experientiallearning on an actual boat, but also provided faculty mentoring on the profession, career paths,etc., with the goal of increasing retention within the major.Another project goal is to encourage community building within the NAME major. Engaging ina major-specific project such as this naturally encourages individual interactions. Additionally,lab instructors encourage teamwork
careers: Leaky pipeline or gender filter?” Gender and Education, 17(4), pp. 369–386, 2005.[2] R. Suresh, “The relationship between barrier courses and persistence in engineering.” Journal of College Student Retention, 8(2), pp. 215–39, 2006/2007.[3] T. Armstrong, Neurodiversity: A Concept Whose Time Has Come. Da Capo Press. 2010. p. 3.[4] T. Armstrong “The Myth of the Normal Brain: Embracing Neurodiversity.” AMA J Ethics.17(4): pp. 348-352, 2015. doi:10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.4.msoc1-1504.[5] C. L. Taylor, A. Esmaili Zaghi, J. C. Kaufman, S. M. Reis, and J. S. Renzulli, “Divergent thinking and academic performance of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder characteristics in engineering