communication skills. Community members andleaders, parents, school administrators, local teachers and the press are invited to this event.Student Projects The research projects are a new and exciting experience that Go Green provides students.Even though certain general questions such as those mentioned above are used to begin theprojects, students are challenged to develop their own scientific hypothesis and describe anexperimental approach to justify their position. Students work on these group projects during the Project Work sessions of each day. AGo Green mentor (a faculty member, teacher, or graduate student) works with each group as aresource during this time. In addition, students conduct research each day after they leave
, India. She obtained her M.S. in Systems Engineering from Stevens Institute of Technology. She is a member of INCOSE. Page 12.468.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Designing a course on Business Process Reengineering (BPR): Bridging the Gap between Business Operations and Engineering of SystemsAbstract:Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is a systematic approach to helping an organizationanalyze and improve its processes. All systems are designed, developed and engineered tosupport business processes. Therefore, an understanding of the business
components commonly attract students from underrepresented groups [13-14]. 5. Our course is focused on the positive social impact of engineering, which makes engineering more accessible to underrepresented students, as the potential to make a positive societal impact is especially important to underrepresented students in career selection [15-16].HuskyADAPT: Accessible Design and Play TechnologyHuskyADAPT was co-founded in 2016 by University of Washington (UW) faculty and studentsfrom Bioengineering, Computer Science, Human Centered Design and Engineering, MechanicalEngineering, and Rehabilitation Medicine [1]. HuskyADAPT has grown to include a studentorganization with over 100 active members. Our initial work was focused
focusing on humanitarian engineer- ing. In addition, she teaches STEP 1 and STEP 2 education courses through CU Teach Engineering, a new General Engineering Plus program specifically designed to prepare students to earn a secondary math or science teacher licensure through engineering. She manages and mentors graduate and undergraduate engineering Fellows who teach in local K-12 classrooms through the Integrated Teaching and Learning Program’s TEAMS initiative, is on the development team for the TeachEngineering digital library, and is faculty advisor for CU-Boulder’s Society of Women Engineers (SWE).Jaclyn L. Cunitz, University of Colorado Boulder Jaclyn L. Cunitz is an undergraduate student in the department of
undergraduate students. During 2018- 2020, she collaborated with Dr. Kavitha Chandra to utilize participatory action research (PAR) as an evaluation approach for the Research, Academics, and Mentoring Pathways (RAMP) summer program for first-year women engineering students.Prof. Kavitha Chandra, University of Massachusetts Lowell Kavitha Chandra is the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs and Professor of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering in the Francis College of Engineering at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. She directs the Research, Academics and Mentoring Pathways (RAMP) to Success program that aims to estab- lish successful pathways to graduate school and interdisciplinary careers for new undergraduate
aerospace engineering from the University of Michigan - Ann Arbor and a B.S.E. in civil engineering from Case Western Reserve University, both in the areas of structural engineering and solid mechanics.Dr. Aaron W. Johnson, University of Michigan Aaron W. Johnson (he/him) is an Assistant Professor in the Aerospace Engineering Department and a Core Faculty member of the Engineering Education Research Program at the University of Michigan. His lab’s design-based research focuses on how to re-contextualize engineering science engineering courses to better reflect and prepare students for the reality of ill-defined, sociotechnical engineering practice. Their current projects include studying and designing classroom
scheduled final exam day.3. Two design projectsTwo design projects in the modified MECH625 were an individual minor project and a team-based major project. The minor project focused on developing several necessary skills foraccurate component simulation. The team based major project was developed for students toexplore the baseline of a flawed product and redesign it according to specified designspecifications / constraints.Minor project: the FEA analysis of the member stiffness of the bolted jointsThe skills considered for the essential FEA simulation of components using SolidWorksSimulation were modeling, pre-processing, meshing, application of boundary conditions,convergence verification, and post-processing. At the end of week# 5, exercises for
Management Systems Engineering (IDMS) faculty regularly teach the course, withthree assigned to teach sections each semester. Graduate students are assigned as instructors inthe course in the Summer and sometimes in Fall. Each faculty member has their own approach tothe course, based on years of teaching the material. Thus, the new material has had to fit intodifferent course structures and teaching approaches. Another complicating factor is studentnumbers: 400 take the course each Spring and Fall, and 150 students take the course in thesummer term. The large numbers of students present a significant challenge in providingmeaningful feedback.Where We StartedTo gain approval of the course as an information and data literacy offering in the
yearsaway from the present. Looking forward is always uncertain, and pragmatically, these studentsmay lean towards the side of what enables them to keep their options open. Coupled with theprevalent attitude that engineering is more rigorous and difficult than education, at least on theundergraduate level, it follows that students anticipate to start with what seems “harder” to getinto (an engineering career) before “coming back” to the “easier” or more accessible teachingpathway.Notably, two interviewees plan to teach immediately following graduation. Kat describes her“goal is to always teach and never do engineering,” with engineering as “a nice fallback,” due toa trajectory-changing experience working as a summer science camp counselor
development opportunities).Vignettes as Measures of Teachers’ Decision MakingThe vignettes were intended to reveal elements of teachers’ decision-making for advisingfictional students toward or away from engineering classes, and to elicit their expectations forstudent success in advanced engineering studies and careers. The vignettes were designed toallow us to make comparisons about factors that influence teachers’ recommendations. Whileeach vignette presented a moderately rich portrait and provided numerous attributes describingstudent personal characteristics, interests and academic abilities, we focus on two major factorsthat are likely to influence teachers’ perceptions of engineering preparation: student academicperformance and student social
. She teaches Properties of Reservoir Fluids, Mechanics of Petroleum Production, Petroleum Seminar, Field Session, Fossil Energy, Environmental Law and Sustainability, and Corporate Social Responsibility. In addition to teaching in the Petroleum Engineering program at Mines, Linda teaches courses in the Leadership in Social Respon- sibility, Humanitarian Engineering, Energy, and Midstream Minor programs and the Natural Resources and Energy Policy graduate program at Mines. Linda is an active member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Health, Safety, Security, Environment and Social Responsibility (HSSE-SR) Advisory Committee and is Chair of the Sustainable Development Technical Section. She is also a member
experience in exploring the effective intersection of ABEToutcomes and IL competencies, in the context of incorporation into an existing course. Wepresented this project on the 2013 Annual conference of Frontiers in Education in a paper titled“Best of Two Worlds in a Software Engineering Class, Student Outcomes of AccreditationBoard of Engineering and Technology (ABET) and Information Literacy Standards ofAssociation of College and Research Libraries (ACRL)”. As we contunue with our ABETacrreditation application process (during spring and summer of 2014), along with our capstonecourse, this software engineering class had become an important member in our curriculum toincorporate ABET’s professional skills and to attain the corresponding student
Science, New York University) Elizabeth Hervias (Chemical Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology) Maryom Rahman (Chemical Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology) Amina Anowara (Chemical and Biomedical Engineering, Princeton University)B. Mentor PoolThe research projects performed by the undergraduate students during the summer REU will be within theareas of diagnosis, therapy, and mechanistic modeling of cancer systems. To further this intellectualcuriosity and the innovation spirit, the chosen faculty members are renowned, including multiple NSFawardees (2 NSF Career Award winners). The faculty members have a diverse intellectual focus in cancer,from diagnostic devices, machine learning, and mechanism to therapeutic
opportunities, internships, and undergraduateresearch. The submission options also align with tenets of Universal Design for Learning [46],allowing students to demonstrate their knowledge in preferred ways. The three options were ashort self-recorded video, such as from a phone; meet in-person or over zoom to discuss withinstructor; or a standard write-up. Giving options to the traditional assignment that requiressubmitting a written response may be helpful for students who struggle with grammar, whichsometimes includes international students, for example.In this educational intervention, FWV was added as an option on two assignments. It was ofinterest if students would elect to explore FWV or select the other alternatives. The choices thatstudents
also changed annually. 7. A Conference Day with concurrent sessions by COE students, faculty, alumni and industry representatives. Club members, sponsors and parents are able to interact with student organizations, partner educational institutions and a variety of industry representatives from throughout North and South Carolina through informational tables and booths. As mentioned earlier, one of the conference sessions contains the Public Speaking Competition of the career exploration contest.Middle school clubs have been provided with balsa wood bridge and Legos MindStorm robot kits. Projectpersonnel and NCJETS mentors are currently involved in developing a club and competition structure thatwill best serve
questions, female undergraduates at the University of Georgia (UGA)in the southeastern United States were invited to complete a 20-question survey that asked themto identify their reasons for enrolling as an engineering major, as well as their personal andfamily educational backgrounds. A majority of survey participants chose engineering becausethey were interested in it or because they thought it would lead to a successful career. About halfof the students had at least one family member working as an engineer. In a study by Mativo andGeorge [47], it was found that engineering women have a great influence on the career choice oftheir daughters. In particular, among women engineering professionals who had daughters whowere attending college, 54
sabbatical or otherwise on leave should also belisted. The program will need to supply a curriculum vitae for each person listed in the tables.Thus, plan ahead and gather these documents during the semesters prior to the visit. Trackingdown an adjunct used once months later to obtain their CV can be very challenging.The accreditation team members are likely to visit classrooms to both observe teaching andspeak with students. Think about course scheduling in advance, ensuring that key subjects willbe available during the weekdays most likely utilized for a visit. If a group of students, sayseniors, will not have classes during the visit days, consider planning a pizza party or othergathering to offer evaluators the opportunity to meet with these
epistemological stances are enacted in engineering education research. He has been involved in faculty development activities since 1998, through the ExCEEd Teaching Workshops of the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Essential Teaching Seminars of the American Society of Mechanical Engi- neers, and the U.S. National Science Foundation-sponsored SUCCEED Coalition. He has also been active in promoting qualitative research methods in engineering education through workshops presented as part of an NSF project. He has received several awards for his work, including the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers, the Ralph Teetor Education Award from the Society of Automotive Engineers, being named a
, 2018), and during theimplementation of the curriculum in homeschool settings (e.g. Dandridge et al., 2019). In allthese studies, we have observed evidence of children engaging in both engineering and CTpractices. The project involved various researchers including faculty members, postdoctoralscholars, staff professionals, and graduate and undergraduate students. Throughout the four yearsof the project, more than 60 kindergarten, first, and second grade in-service teachers participatedin the study. The participating teachers were from 15 different public elementary schools and oneprivate elementary school within five different school districts. Four homeschool educators werealso included. More than 1,000 kindergarten to second grade
Paper ID #42146A Game-Based Learning Method to Promote Soft Skills in Construction EducationRaissa Seichi Marchiori, The University of Alabama Raissa Seichi Marchiori is currently a Graduate Research Assistant (GRA) and a Ph.D. student in the Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering at the University of Alabama. Raissa obtained her bachelor’s degree and an MBA in Civil Engineering in Brazil. Her research topic is in the construction engineering area. Her research interests include implementing Building Information Modeling on construction sites, safety training, workforce development, and
AC 2010-846: “THE IMAGE OF A WOMAN ENGINEER:” WOMEN’SIDENTITIES AS ENGINEERS AS PORTRAYED BY HISTORICAL NEWSPAPERSAND MAGAZINES, 1930-1970Alice Pawley, Purdue University Alice Pawley is an assistant professor in the School of Engineering Education and an affiliate faculty member in the Women’s Studies Program at Purdue University. Dr. Pawley has a B.Eng. in chemical engineering from McGill University, and an M.S. and Ph.D. in industrial engineering with a Ph.D. minor in women’s studies from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is co-PI on Purdue University’s ADVANCE initiative, through which she is incorporating her work on metaphors into better understanding current models of women’s
aninteresting area of study when it comes to engineering education, because professors arehistorically intuitors while most engineering students are sensors13. The third MBTI Page 15.366.6category describes the manner in which a person evaluates information. Those who tendto use a logical cause and effect strategy, Thinkers (T), differ from those who use ahierarchy based on values or the manner in which an idea is communicated, Feelers (F).The final category indicates how a person makes decisions or comes to conclusions.Perceivers (P) prefer to ensure all the data is thoroughly considered, and Judgers (J)summarize the situation as it presently stands and make
-academicactivities.The participants have a rigorous schedule of two three-hour classes each day, broken into smallermodules and divided among the team of instructors. Classes are completed by 4pm, followed bya two-hour relaxation or study period before dinner. After dinner there is often an eveningactivity such as a faculty lecture, admissions workshop, research laboratory tour, or an informalgathering with members of the Caltech community. Instructors also hold optional office hours inthe evening to assist with homework, go over material, or aid students in projects andpresentations.The 2008 YESS class was composed of 29 students (11 females and 18 male students). Themajority (26) of participants were rising high school seniors, and many were the top students
evaluation of learning outcomes / graduate attributes with reference to these objectives. • Statistical evidence had recently been presented to the Faculty that conclusively demonstrated that, when incoming Grade Point Equivalent scores were used as a measure of the relative strength of a degree cohort, engineering students were not achieving an appropriate proportion of A and B grades relative to those given to students from other degrees. Very capable incoming engineering students were not receiving the grades they might have achieved in another degree path. This was of particular disadvantage when engineering students applied for cross disciplinary scholarship and post graduate research awards
mentors among the students, as they feel they have several people to which they are reporting. They are unsure of the extent to which various assignments need to be completed, as this is often dictated by the coach or technical mentor and expectations inevitably differ or are at least described differently among faculty members. The faculty are uncertain whether this is an unavoidable outcome of a very different learning structure for the students, or whether some revision could simplify this for the students. We will continue to explore this to reduce the confusion.In summary, we believe we have developed an effective program for our entire department toteam teach or “team mentor” our capstone design
; and faculty members must bequalified and demonstrate abilities to instruct and assess curriculum [4]. Of these broadrecommendations, Criterion 3 (Figure 1) directly addresses student outcomes: what students areexpected to know and be able to do by graduation. Criterion 3c in particular addressesengineering design abilities.(a) an ability to apply knowledge of (b) an ability to design and conductmathematics, science, and engineering experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data(c) an ability to design a system, (d) an ability to function on multidisciplinarycomponent, or process to meet desired needs teams
Educational and Career Decision Making.” ACT Research Report Series, 2015 (3). ACT, Inc., 2014[3] A. Sithole, E. T. Chiyaka, P. McCarthy, D.M. Mupinga, B.K. . Bucklein, and J. Kibirige. “ Student Attraction, Persistence and Retention in STEM Programs: Successes and Continuing Challenges”. Higher Education Studies, 7(1), pp.46-59, 2017[4] E. R. Kurban, and A. F. Cabrera. “Building readiness and intention towards STEM fields of study: using HSLS: 09 and SEM to examine this complex process among high school students”. The Journal of Higher Education, 91(4), pp.620, 2020.[5] K.G. Ricks, J.A. Richardson, H.P. Stern, R. P. Taylor, and R. A. Taylor. “ An Engineering Learning Community to Promote Retention and
factor. This framework has been usedacross STEM education to describe what it means to take on the role of being a particular type ofperson and has been linked to several important outcomes including continuation in engineeringpathways [5], [41], [46], academic performance [47], [48], and choosing engineering careers [49],[50], [51]. Recognition is an important aspect of engineering role identity [42], [43]. Recognitionincludes both a self-recognition and other-recognition aspect of being the kind of person who cando engineering work. These beliefs shape the internal dialogue that students have about themselvesin the role of an engineer. Students’ recognition beliefs do not develop from interactions withinsignificant contacts but are
refine the content and delivery of the IC, it wasencouraging to the design instructors that the students seemed to easily make connections toother design course content even if the terms used on the IC were slightly different. Forexample, the biomedical engineering students used the terms “merit” and “feasibility” whiledeveloping their decision matrix for their projects. The students readily translated these terms to“key features/functions” and “critical to success” metrics. It is hypothesized that this task maybe more difficult for freshman or sophomore-level students, but it is an important skill to developin graduating seniors as they head into careers where the terminology may be different, but theconcepts are the same.It was also
finish ones association (e.g. to finish presenting aTV show), whereas an engineer accepts ultimate and on-going responsibility for a documentwhen “signing-off”.Typical engineering science curricula provide basic methods which engineers may use inpractice, but much of the content provides little that engineers can directly apply in practice.While engineers may learn the subtle mathematical foundations of finite element analysis, therelatively few graduates that will actually operate finite element software for analysis willnever need to perform the mathematical derivations they had to learn for examinations. Thelink between education and practice is, therefore, largely indirect. By inspiring students toembrace challenging mathematical and