Engineering, also from the University of Michigan. In addition to his pursuing his degree, Harsh is also a graduate student instructor (GSI) for Engineering 101, Introduction to Computers and Programming, a first-semester course mandatory for all engineering students. In addition to his teaching duties, Harsh has helped facilitate and develop course logistics, course development, and professional development for staff members through the Foundational Course Initiative at the University of Michigan. Outside of teaching, Harsh enjoys developing software for autonomous aircraft systems, cooking, and collecting Vinyl LPs.Ryien HosseiniMegan Beemer © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022
described in this paper. Acompetition was held and the lamps resulting from this laboratory were sold at a fund raisingauction event. The faculty members associated with this project indeed considered the lamps tobe a very creative product.IntroductionIn spring semester 2008, a laboratory to infuse creativity into the design process was explored inthe first required course for freshmen in Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE). Thecourse, ECE 125: Fundamentals of Electrical and Computer Engineering, is a two credit coursewith two lectures per week and a total of five laboratories held throughout the semester. Thelecture introduces students to basic circuit analysis, programming in MATLAB, and a survey ofthe ECE discipline. The laboratory
, inclusive, and supportive academy.The main features of this NRT – the main goal of which is to generate an innovative model forSTEM graduate student training by identifying and implementing the most effective tools for thetraining of STEM professionals – have been described in a previous publication [1]. A morerecent manuscript has described the first three interventions within this NRT, namely, anonboarding and orientation event, a career exploration symposium, and a multidisciplinaryintroductory course, along with the assessment and outcomes of each of these interventions [2].In this and future contributions, we intend to continue showcasing data from the NRT, focusingon the evaluation of its constituent parts. Against this backdrop, this
completed), 2 (Strong team member, got own work done and helped others when requested), 1(Completed own work only), 0 (Not a team player, seldom showed up to scheduled meetings, unprepared, or brought a negative attitude to team)Students are instructed that they will encounter this peer review process in their careers, so that itis important that they learn how to provide feedback professionally and diplomatically, and alsoto receive and learn from feedback. Each student receives copies of all evaluations about them,with the name of the evaluator kept private. These evaluations help strong team members feelappreciated for their efforts, and give weaker members an opportunity to improve theirperformance. Teaching staff review all peer
engage with specific tasks. This latter step was important in that it provided both amotivation to engage the work and a means to pilot the new instructional strategies.From the perspective of the authors and PLC members, the PLC provided a consistent space forits members to explore the concepts of social justice and inclusivity as they relate to curriculum,to our students, and to our own self-development. The environment was challenging but invitingand respectful, allowing for authentic discussion of ideas for teaming instruction activities andfor an opportunity to receive critical feedback. The variety of perspectives and experiences of thePLC members improved the quality of the teaming activities and modules that emerged, and alsopromoted the
made them think deeply about their goals and how to achieve them.Undergraduate research opportunities: Undergraduate research funded by the CREATE programhas been very well received by both scholars and their faculty research mentors. A total of sixteenscholars were placed in laboratories of engineering professors who indicated interest in givingthem a research experience. An evaluation was conducted on scholars’ performance and allresearch mentors deemed that their scholars had participated satisfactorily. Some scholars havedecided to pursue graduate school based on these experiences.Career and graduate school guidance: CREATE may have given information on careers andgraduate school a bit too early in the program to the second cohort and
lab studying solar energy.Learner-centered altruism sometimes means helping students with problems outside the course,such as finding an internship and preparing application materials. One faculty member took apoll of seniors and discovering their concern about the future (both entering graduate school andindustry) chose to implement a series of workshops in their course rather than overburdeningstudents with content. This faculty member implemented workshops designed to bring outsidespeakers with advice and knowledge the students felt as though they lacked (determined throughthe survey). Workshops allowed students to ask questions and gain advice from experts in areassuch as graduate admissions, industry hiring practices, and startup
sections (both in-person and online) of this course are taught per semester with an interdisciplinary instructional team comprised of CoE faculty including communication professor Dr. Burchfield and engineering professors from the Industrial and Management Systems Engineering Department. An adjunct instructor and graduate engineering students are hired as teaching assistants. In addition to flipped classroom and traditional lecture instructional methods, the course employs a project-based method where engineering students work in teams of up to six students. All students in all sections (both in-person and online) receive the same team assignments. For their projects, student teams are given the
included statements aboutteam work, critical thinking and problem solving, and personal skills. For example, one studentsaid, “The most important thing I learned was to stay focused and while doing research you haveto keep an open mind.”The strength of agreement items asked the participants to share some summary perceptionsregarding their experiences (Table 9). The students indicated that they had found value in the cross-disciplinary set of peers they had worked with. They liked the style of problem-based learning theyhad experienced in the REU. Although not necessarily in transportation, students were able to seethemselves in graduate study, academia, or research-based careers. That four of the fiverespondents “strongly agreed” that they were
sociotechnical integration,including service courses for the core curriculum, service courses serving other engineeringprograms, an interdepartmental graduate program, and departmental minors and anundergraduate major. In this paper, we focus attention on program development considerationssurrounding our undergraduate BS in Design Engineering program. This program is built upon a“general engineering” framework with two significant exceptions. First, the programsystematically situates “design” expertise at the program’s core, both in terms of students’ expertidentity and in terms of the curricular structure. Second, the program offers wide-ranging “focusareas” as an alternative to disciplinary depth. The curricular logic is that students developdomain
o To offer an experience that will actively engage the recruited students into cutting-edge Machine Learning research. The program aims to form, maintain and evolve a vibrant community of learners here in Central Florida, which will foster and provide a valuable summer research experience for undergraduate students through participation in research programs and high quality student/faculty interaction and mentorship. We plan to familiarize and excite the participant students about many, state-of-the-art aspects of ML, which, we hope, will facilitate their retention in STEM fields, either career-wise or by continuing into STEM graduate education.Our Program is supported by a network of affiliate universities and
-enrolling students into the course on their behalf, we were side-stepping their ownautonomy to select their courses, resulting in some students feeling that they were duped ordisrespected. This paper examines multiple ways in which the instructional team exerted powerover students, and presents data to illustrate the resulting consequences on student attitudes,motivations, and beliefs about the course.However, we also wonder how starting up any new course initiative within an established systemof curricular flowcharts and requirements can be done without leveraging some amount of powerto get students enrolled. Our analysis explores the implicit trust of students in an institution toknow what’s best for their educational preparation for engineering
experiences for veterans to motivate them tocontinue to graduate school or pursue a career in Naval STEM research. A mentor program wasimplemented to provide research faculty mentors, Navy engineering mentors and an expandedmentor network to support the student veterans. The program is well received at bothuniversities and has demonstrated a positive impact on the undergraduate student veterans.Several program challenges are presented along with methods used to overcome those challengesto provide a better experience for both the veteran students and faculty mentors.IntroductionThis paper discusses the development and execution of a multi-year veteran research exchangeprogram between the University of Tennessee and the University of North Carolina at
, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).Mrs. Selyna Beverly, University of Michigan Selyna Beverly is current doctoral student in the Higher Education program at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. She has worked as an administrator in a College of Engineering in California and through that experience grew interested in studying female faculty and students. Currently, her research centers on implicit bias within engineering and how it affects women who are pursuing engineering degrees. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2017 Can I really do this? Perceived benefits of a
questions about the student’s overall strengths and areas for improvement, seeAppendix C for the employer evaluation (our assessment tool). Supervisors receive the onlinesurvey tool via an email invitation during the last three weeks of the co-op experience, and if notcompleted receive reminders toward the final week of the co-op. Supervisors are encouraged tohave an individual meeting with the student before the end of the co-op period. The assessmenttool allows for a PDF printout to be discussed with and provided to the student. The programreceives the data from the online survey. At the end of the survey, supervisors are given anoption to request a meeting with a faculty member to discuss any issues that may have arisen,either with the student
timemanagement are also emphasized [3]. Further, these capstone projects are also expected to serveas a conduit that connects theoretical learning in classrooms with applied problem-solving in theindustry and prepare the graduating seniors to take on professional responsibilities immediatelyafter graduation [4] [5]. In line with other engineering disciplines in the country, capstone design in biological andagricultural engineering programs is also a two-semester course. The design projects aretypically conceived by the faculty sponsors and sometimes advised by the members of thedepartmental industrial advisory board. In the first semester, the students actively form groupsand select projects that are aligned with their interests (e.g
creating a working prototype. They have also already madea major career decision. They are committed to doing research – usually academicallyoriented research. The folks working in industry are more receptive to entrepreneurshipthan graduate students, but they are often limited by the demands and restrictions of theirjobs.Moving forward – bring entrepreneurship into senior designOur capstone design course has also continued to evolve. As seen in Table 3, our seniorswant to learn to be entrepreneurs, and they recognize the need for business and financialskills. They are aware that the career paths of previous generations of engineers are nolonger as available and that their futures will depend on their ability to be innovative andentrepreneurial.We
decisions about technology? The module includes an assignment that hasstudents reflect on a robotics film of their own choice and discuss it from the perspective of thequestions posed. This work is complemented by technical research assignments that result instudents identifying new opportunities for robotic applications in the context of these social andethical considerations.ENGR 494 - Engineering PeaceAn engineering faculty member and a faculty member from a school of Peace Studies havedeveloped this course that focuses both on the design and use of drones while cultivatingempathy across disciplinary boundaries. [1, 13, 14, 15]. The class is taken as an elective byengineers (usually seniors) and graduate students in Peace Studies. The first
2006-1932: YOU’VE BEEN SLIMED!: PROCESS AND PRODUCT DESIGNEXPERIENCES FOR RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF CHEMICAL ANDINDUSTRIAL ENGINEERSKaren High, Oklahoma State University KAREN HIGH earned her B.S. from the University of Michigan in 1985 and her M.S. in 1988 and Ph.D. in 1991 from the Pennsylvania State University. Dr. High is an Associate Professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University where she has been since 1991. Her main research interests are Sustainable Process Design, Industrial Catalysis, and Multicriteria Decision Making. Other scholarly activities include enhancing creativity in engineering practice and teaching science to education students and
results of this project arehelpful for understanding student learning and for program development, our experiences alsopoint to areas for further work. These include:• Further refinement of student reflection paper prompts that elicit the kinds of observations that are relevant for analyzing how and what engineers learn in this context.• Further exploration of the roles of social capital and cross-cultural communication in projects abroad.• Investigations of cooperating faculty members’ experiences in developing and mentoring students in this context.References 1Astin, A., Banta, T., Cross, P., El-Khawas, E., Ewell, P., Hutchings, Pl, Marchese, T., MeClenney, K.,Mentkowski, M., Moran
equitable outcomes. On the day of the workshop, students were placedin six teams, each with roughly 8-10 students, ensuring that at least two members of every teamwere “experts” on each segment of the module. The workshop provided a space for students tograpple with the major themes from the module and learn from others’ personal lived experiencesand perspectives. Table 1 provides the breakdown of the different segments within the BEDPmodule and examples of the discussion questions students were asked to consider in the workshop.The teams had approximately ten minutes to discuss the questions in their small groups after whichthe entire class discussed each team's responses and extracted recurring themes. During the workshop, an online polling
, especially, the experiences of under- represented undergraduate engineering students and engineering educators. She is a qualitative researcher who uses narrative research methods to understand undergraduate student and faculty member’s experi- ences in engineering education. Dr. Kellam is interested in curricular design and has developed design spines for environmental and mechanical engineering programs when she was a faculty member at UGA, and recently helped design the EESD PhD program at ASU. She teaches design courses, engineering sci- ence courses, and graduate courses focused on qualitative research methods. She also serves as a Senior Associate Editor of the Journal of Engineering Education.Dr. Anna Montana
Facilitation Each team must be facilitated by an experienced fac-ulty member.Although faculty should not do" the organizing of the reform e ort, it is absolutely essentialthat there be a faculty member a liated with each team, both to provide a source of guidanceand experience for the team and to build personal ties between students and faculty. Withthese principles in place, we have almost all the pieces of the puzzle, but it seems that perhapswe are relying on a student's sense of duty and mission a bit too much. Although students arebeing empowered by the reform process, what will ultimately power the individual student?2.4 Incentives, Friendly Competition, & Minimal CreditHuman beings being what they are, there is a wide range in what
with the local NAACPsuccessfully completed a two week in-house Residential Pre-Collegiate Summer Camp. Thecamp’s objectives were to increase the students’ awareness of STEM fields by exposing them toreal-world math and its application in related career fields. In order to meet these goals, acommittee consisting of individuals from various backgrounds including; academia, business,and community outreach was formed. In addition, a curriculum that incorporated math, a hands-on projects involving STEM, and an opportunity to develop relationships with STEMprofessionals was designed.The summer program was designed as a rigorous problem/project-based educational opportunitygeared toward motivated and academically able students who showed interest in
cross-curricular collaboration developed and refined by faculty and mentors. Thefocus of this paper is to delineate and illustrate the evolution of the class resulting in positiveimpacts upon student outcomes and expectations.INTRODUCTIONInstilling an understanding of design and the design process are key aspects of preparing civilengineering students for professional practice. This is the focus of the Capstone Design class atthe University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering(CEE). The evolution of this curriculum has resulted in positive impacts upon student outcomesand expectations as well as helping the department to comply with ABET accreditation criteria.The ABET Civil Engineering (CE) Program criteria
’ students and faculty; the challenges that students at HSIs faceand institutional responses to the challenges; and resources that could help to address unmetneeds. As people around the tables learned that their institutions shared similar challengesdespite their locations in disparate parts of the country and different-sized enrollments,participants shared more details about successes and impediments they had encountered inbuilding STEM technician programs on their campuses.The groups identified the following strategies for positive project outcomes: • Bring relevant business and industry people onto advisory teams while planning an initiative. • Involve advisory team members in internships, mentoring and other experiential
ofstudents to ME. As discussed earlier, we believe the overall impact on retention for bothprograms would be positive due to proper advising and mentoring during the first two years. Agood number of our ET students are transfers from E during their junior year! The intent here isto enable students to make an informed career decision much earlier and based on skills andinterest which will benefit not just the student but the entire engineering profession.Preliminary Assessment ResultsIn fall 2008, we administered a brief preliminary survey to industry professionals regarding thetopic of a 2 year common curriculum for E and ET programs. A total of 12 people completed thesurvey, ten of which had a degree in an engineering or engineering technology
students to iden7fy and pursue individualized design learning, structured via an itera7ve prototyping and tes7ng process; an IDS serving DE students only. 4. Design for a Globalized World: A systems thinking and design course exploring global interdependencies surrounding social and environmental systems as they intersect with engineered solu7ons; an IDS serving DE students only. 5. Design and Modeling of Integrated Systems: A systems modeling course that enables students to characterize and formalize component rela7onships to inform design in response to complex sociotechnical systems; an IDS serving DE students only. 6. Design Engineering Applica7ons: A career-focused dis7lla7on of DE-student
degree. An apparentbenefit of either option discussed above is that Colleges and Schools of Engineering would beable to devote more of their resources to graduate engineering programs leaving freshman andsophomore level engineering classes to ET programs.A 2-year Template for ECE and ECET ProgramsBased on our experience, on conversations with other faculty members, and on an examinationof a representative sample of online degree plans at various Institutions, we present in thissection a generic 2-year template for students declaring ECE and ECET majors. The samplegroup of online plans that was examined is:Purdue University BSCmpE Virginia Tech BSEEUT Austin Computer Engineering University of Florida
ofprofessionalism, experience and knowledge that would not be possible on an undergraduate-onlyproject, also giving context to the career aspects of Systems Engineering for all studentsinvolved.Project DescriptionThe first phase of the project was conducted over two semesters and involved 4 undergraduatesub-teams from Mechanical Engineering, Engineering Management, Electrical & ComputerEngineering and Civil Engineering – each team with 4-5 students, and 7 students from thegraduate Product Architecture program – a total of 24 students. For the second semester theProduct Architecture group dropped to 2 students due to programmatic constraints. Phase II hasthe same disciplines but with smaller sub teams and no graduate students.In the early stage of