: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. National Science Foundation, 1996. [5] N. R. Council et al., “From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology,” 1996. [6] N. R. Council et al., Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. National Academies Press, 1999. [7] S. Hurtado, N. L. Cabrera, M. H. Lin, L. Arellano, and L. L. Espinosa, “Diversifying science: Underrepresented student experiences in structured research programs,” Research in Higher Education, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 189–214, 2009. [8] N. W. Moon, R. L. Todd, D. L. Morton, and E. Ivey, “Accommodating
feedback loop. Whenever there is a link,we identify if a change in the cause creates the same or opposite change in the result. The formeris indicated by an “S” next to the arrow, and the latter an “O.” It is common for there to bemultiple connected and interacting loops for any problem in a real organization. Indeed, one canoften come up with very complicated CLDs to adequately capture the fullness of an issue. Wujec’s exercise begins by asking participants in a group to each on their own sketch how tomake toast. It is a simple exercise that anyone can do. In the next step, they share their sketcheswith the group. The sharing stage results in laughter. Some people draw one or two steps, whileothers may draw an elaborate process that involves a
future. Washington DC: National Academies Press, 2007.[14] NSF’s 10 Big Ideas - NSF 2026. https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/big_ideas/nsf2026.jsp [Accessed Jan. 15, 2018].[15] American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vision2030: Creating the Future of Mechanical Engineering Education. 16 pp. 2012.[16] C. Atman, S. Sheppard, L. Fleming, R. Miller, K. Smith, R. Stevens, R. Streveler, “Findings from the Academic Pathways Study of Engineering Undergraduates 2003-2008,” slides presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Conference & Exposition, Austin TX, June 16, 2009.[17] C.B. Masters, S.T. Hunter, and G. Kremer, “Design Process Learning and Creative Processing Ability: Is there a Synergy?” in
project-based learning that we use is based on problem-based learning. Each project has oneor more problems that need to be solved and often these problems can be broken down to smallerproblems that each team can address. These problems are centered around the goal(s) of eachproject. For example, a competition project may need to build a rocket that exactly reaches 5,280feet. This problem can be broken down to smaller problems such as the size of the motor, weightof the rocket, and other problems that contribute to the goal of obtaining that altitude.The projects we have involve multiple disciplines and multiple problems to be solved. With theexample of the rocket project, we have aerospace, mechanical, chemical, electrical and
defense to the findings of this study, attention is drawn to thedefinition of shame here operated within. The term “perceived” is essential in depicting the truenature of shame. Expectations are interpreted by the individual. Nicole recognized multiple timesthat her perception of expectations may not be absolutely identical to reality. However, despitelogical recognition of reality, her emotional experiences still operate within forms ofexpectations that are interpretations determined by the self.AcknowledgementsThis work was supported through funding by the National Science Foundation (NSF EEC1752897). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do
), quantity (number of ideas generated), and quality (feasibility of anidea and the degree to which it meets the design specifications), noting that “an engineeringdesign must not only be novel (unusual, unexpected) but it must also satisfy some intendedfunction(s) to desired specifications (have desired utility)” (p. 111). Creativity in engineering isalso discussed as “functional creativity” by Cropley & Cropley (2005) who also highlight thatengineering products typically need to serve a useful function.Challenges to Teaching CreativityCreativity in engineering has been identified as an essential skill, yet there are few engineeringprograms that offer courses that teach creativity (Charyton & Merrill, 2009). While there may beseveral
2014 he was awarded by FAPESP with a post-doctoral research at the Centre for Ethics, Law and Public Affairs at the same university. His research focus relies on Engineering and Community Services; Socio-Legal Studies, Science and Technology Studies, Political philosophy, Sociology of Environment and Intellectual Property Rights.Dr. Cristiano Cordeiro Cruz, Aeronautics Technological Institute (Brazil) I currently develop a post-doctorate research at the Aeronautics Technological Institute (ITA) with a schol- arship from FAPESP (#2018/20563-3). I hold a PhD degree in Philosophy (University of S˜ao Paulo, 2017), a bachelor degree in Philosophy (Jesuit Faculty of Philosophy and Theology, 2008), a master degree in
faculty teach new concepts in programming,design, microelectronic control and graphical communication in relation to needing such skills inorder to solve a problem related to their Cornerstone theme. We see firsthand the positiveoutcomes of this approach in both student and faculty satisfaction and will continue to refine ourcourses based on feedback and research.References[1] First Year Engineering Learning & Innovation Center, Northeastern University, 2018.[2] National Academy of Engineering. Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2005.[3] S. Ambrose and C. Amon, "Systematic Design of a First-Year Mechanical Engineering Course at Carnegie
self-motivated andheld high self-efficacy in teaching. Having teachers with above average motivation may havecaused a deeper learning of engineering design, which resulted in high scores and holdinginformed NOE views.AcknowledgementsOpinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of theauthor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Thismaterial is based upon work that was partly funded by the National Science Foundation undergrant number IIA1301726.References[1] National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices,crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.[2] National Research Council. (2006). America's lab
establish a clear purpose for mixing,with Kajfez and Creamer calling upon the engineering education community to clearly explainhow mixing aligns with the research question(s) [18].Heeding these calls from literature, our mixed methods study uses a fully-integrated approach toexamine the complex experiences of students in a global engineering program. By using anunderexplored mixed methods approach to data analysis, we respond to Bryman’s request thatthe community more broadly incorporate mixing strategies in data analysis [19]. We also followKajfez and Creamer’s suggestions by making explicit our purpose for mixing, emphasizing thealignment between this mixed methods approach and our research questions [18].BackgroundThe Rising Sophomore Abroad
individuals in the future. Students embraced the potential of growthmindset to lead to more productive reactions and behaviors both in their academic and personallives. This indicates a need for additional work to understand concrete strategies for individualswho have learned about growth mindset to begin to implement such productive practices intotheir everyday habits. Future work should also capture the ways in which the culture(s) ofundergraduate engineering education can be shifted to develop and sustain growth mindset.Appendix: Focus Group Prompts Used to Solicit Student Reflections, Adopted from [19]Chapters 1 and 2 1.1. Think about someone you know who is steeped in the fixed mindset. Think about how they're always trying to prove
and potential collaborationbetween engineering librarians and mechanical engineering faculty. For the course in this study,the plan for next year will be to use these instructional activities again. It also has started thediscussion of where additional library collaboration earlier in the mechanical engineeringprogram would be appropriate and beneficial. This additional exposure and training will buildfamiliarity with information fluency skills, which may be perceived as difficult, but are essentialin the professional environment.Works Cited[1] G. Kerins, “Information seeking and students studying for professional careers: The cases of engineering and law students in Ireland,” Inf. Res. Int. Electron. J., vol. 10, no. 1, Oct. 2004.[2] S
BackgroundSome background on the educational system in the United Kingdom is needed to appreciate thecontext for the examination. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland following an Education Actof 1944 a tripartite selective system of secondary schooling was developed which began to bereplaced by a system of comprehensive schools in the 1980’s. Selection to these types of schoolswas by means of an aptitude test at age eleven (known as the 11+). The schools that made up thetripartite system were: secondary modern, most of which educated children to the then schoolleaving age of 15; secondary technical which in addition to the basic curriculum offeredtechnical subjects up to and beyond the school leaving age; and grammar schools that offered anacademic
. Pemberton, S. Mavin and B. Stalker, “Scratching beneath the surface of communities of (mal) practice,”The Learning Organization, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 62-73, 2007 [Online]. Available: ProQuest ABI/Inform Global, http://search.proquest.com. [Accessed Jan. 8, 2019].[4] National and State Libraries Australia, “Our work,” National and State Libraries Australia, 2018. [Online] Available: https://www.nsla.org.au/our-work. [Accessed Jan. 18, 2019].[5] E. Bilodeau and Carson, P. “The role of communities of practice in the professional education of academic librarians,” Education for Information, vol. 31, no. 1-2, pp. 25-51, 2015 [Online]. Available: Academic Search Premier, https://search.ebscohost.com
Paper ID #15380A Scavenger Hunt to Connect the As-Built World to Structural EngineeringTheoryDr. Matthew Swenty P.E., Virginia Military Institute Matthew (Matt) Swenty obtained his Bachelors and Masters degrees in Civil Engineering from Missouri S&T then worked as a bridge designer at the Missouri Department of Transportation before obtaining his Ph.D. in Civil Engineering from Virginia Tech. He worked at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center in McClean, Virginia focusing on concrete bridge research prior to joining the faculty at the Vir- ginia Military Institute (VMI). He teaches engineering mechanics and
(ENGR101), was specifically designed and offered during the fall quarter of the 2015-16 school year asa part of a NSF S-STEM grant, Program for Engineering Excellence for Partner Schools(PEEPS). PEEPS is a cohort scholarship program that provides engineering students withfinancial, academic, and social support3. ENGR 101 was developed by two engineering faculty, aVISTA member, and supported by a curriculum expert, to expand the benefits of PEEPS to alarger number of students and to establish interventions and practices in engineering classroomsthat better support diversity on our university’s campus. The specific course goals were todevelop and enhance students’ engineering identity and sense of belonging within the College ofEngineering in order
needs. Thesenames were given to the professor who then contacted them, described the pilot project, andchose a topic(s) for the capstone course.A company in the entertainment industry that agreed to participate had technical staff that werelocated at a distant location. Despite this distance, they were willing to work with students viavideo teleconference, multimedia and the internet. They also committed their time to supportingthe capstone and mini-capstone projects to 1 hour per week. The other participant in theeducation industry was in the local vicinity and therefore could make a presentation on site andcollaborate with the students in person.Busy industry technologists were offered the following incentives to make presentations tostudents
prospects with sponsor(s)Research Labs Manufacturing Research Recruitment of in-class, trained Research experience,Doubling as Lab Invites Class Students students who previously used jobsEducational to Participate in Lab equipment; feedback with freshSpaces Meetings perspective Environmental Studies of Publications, research data and Training on effective use Waste and Operation from access to “free” space and student and 3D printers,Extracurricular 3D Printers in MakerSpace researchers
noticedisciplinary aspects of their students’ engineering design.AcknowledgementsThis work was conducted at the Tufts University Center for Engineering Education andOutreach. This project is funded by the National Science Foundation DRK-12 program, grant#DRL-1020243. The authors would like to thank the Novel Engineering team for theirassistance, particularly Dr. Mary McCormick and Brian O’Connell for their help in conductingthe interviewers. The authors would also like to thank the six teachers who participated in theinterviews.References1) Hammer, D., Goldberg, F., & Fargason, S. (2012). Responsive teaching and the beginnings of energy in a third grade classroom. Review of Science, Mathematics, and ICT Education, 6(1), 51-72.2) Robertson, A. D
% Change Average Teacher Focused 2.75 2.75 0 Teacher Focused Average Student Focused 3.875 3.875 0 Student Focused Faculty 3 PRE POST % Change Average Teacher Focused 3.75 3.75 0 Teacher Focused Average Student Focused 2.875 3.5 21.7 Student FocusedTable 2. shows the results for the self-reported RTOP survey, and Table 3 presents the results forthe recently developed Faculty Teaching and Learning Awareness Survey.For all three surveys, it is clear that Faculty 1's self-reported results demonstrate a significantchange from the beginning to the
follow-up interview researchfor the next five years. The overarching goal of the study is to better understand what kinds ofvariables seem to motivate middle and high school boys and girls in the U. S. South to pursuecomputer science education as well as what kinds of variables seem to influence educationalpersistence and successful entry into the computing workforce. The purposes of our largerresearch project are multiple: (1) To assess the effectiveness of a project-based camp curriculum that integrates digital composing, rhetoric, and design with computer science and engineering education; (2) To better understand the dynamics of collaborative/team-based and competitive projects in groups of middle and high school boys and
things.Methodological overview The methodological approach for this project came about via both theoretical (literature)and practical considerations. While the cultural construction literature tends to emphasize theoryand analysis, we tried to assemble a robust and consistent methodological approach to investigatecultural construction in a particular setting. In McDermott’s early writing at the time of his datacollection (1970’s) he aligned himself methodologically with three primary traditions:ethnography, ethnomethodology, and discourse/interaction analysis17,18,19. As an investigation ofculture, the work relies on ethnographic methods and approaches, such as the incorporation ofmultiple qualitative data streams, ethnographic field noting20, and one