Board 59: Investigation of Factors Promoting Competitive Candidates for Entry-level Bioengineering Positions

Marcia Pool; Madeline R. Darling; Gabriella Rose Dupont

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Publication Date: June 23, 2018
Start Date: June 23, 2018
End Date: July 27, 2018
Conference Session: College-Industry Partnerships Division Poster Session
Tagged Division: College Industry Partnerships
Page Count: 18
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--30065
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/30065
Download Count: 406

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Marcia Pool University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

visit author page

Dr. Marcia Pool is a Teaching Associate Professor and Director of Undergraduate Programs in Bioengineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In her career, Marcia has been active in improving undergraduate education through developing problem-based laboratories to enhance experimental design skills; developing a preliminary design course focused on problem identification and market space (based on an industry partner’s protocol); and mentoring and guiding student teams through the senior design capstone course and a translational course following senior design. To promote biomedical/bioengineering, Marcia works with Women in Engineering to offer outreach activities and served at the national level as Executive Director of the biomedical engineering honor society, Alpha Eta Mu Beta, from 2011-2017.

visit author page

biography

Madeline R. Darling University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

visit author page

Maddie is an Undergraduate Programs Coordinator for the Department of Bioengineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She holds a M.S. in College Student Affairs from Eastern Illinois University (2016). Her research interests include student academic success, retention, first-generation students, and student/advisor interactions within academic and career advising sessions.

visit author page

biography

Gabriella Rose Dupont University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

visit author page

I am a MEng student in Bioengineering, with a BS, Bioengineering, both from University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. I am interested in biomechanics and how curriculum structure affects education outcomes.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Well-established fields of engineering (e.g. electrical engineering) typically support curriculums that cover the same foundational topics, regardless of offering institution. Identifying these key foundational areas in a field and integrating them into multiple institutions’ curriculums ensures students have been exposed to consistent concepts and may be evaluated with standardized exams such as the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam (FE). Additionally, hiring managers can expect a student with a degree in the established fields can perform well in key foundational areas. However, biomedical (BME) or bioengineering (BIOE) programs span a wide array of material; some programs focus on biological aspects (e.g., tissue engineering) while other programs focus on applying traditional engineering to living systems (e.g. medical device development) [1]. Lack of standardization amongst biomedical and bioengineering curriculums creates a lack of transparency in the hiring process, as differing institutions’ biomedical or bioengineering degree programs may not teach the same competencies and skills to their graduates.

At our institution, the bioengineering curriculum offers five specialized track areas: biomechanics, cell and tissue engineering, therapeutics engineering, computational and systems biology, and imaging and sensing. Each track consists of fifteen engineering credit hours of track focused coursework. Post-graduation, students are divided amongst career pursuits; averaged self-reported student data from 2008-2015 indicates students’ career path as industry (48%), graduate school (23%), medical school (19%), and other (10%). While we know students’ first post-graduate destination, we now seek to identify (1) is there a correlation between students’ selected track and internship or co-op opportunities, (2) is there a correlation between track choice and students first destination post-graduation, (3) does undergraduate research experience influence competitiveness for entry-level BME/BIOE jobs, and (4) does possessing internship or co-op experience negate any difference (if it exists) in preparation due to specified track.

Alumni data will be analyzed to identify factors affecting career placement. Current students will be tracked through mandatory advising sessions each semester to identify interest in industry positions as well as co-curricular experiences contributing to increased competitiveness for industry. Results from this study will serve as an advising tool for students in our department, as well as inform the BME/BIOE field of key foundational skills expected of industry bound BME/BIOE students.

[1] D. W. Gatchell and R. A. Linsenmeier. “Similarities and Differences in Undergraduate Biomedical Engineering Curricula in the United States,” in American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN 2014.

Citation
Format

Pool, M., & Darling, M. R., & Dupont, G. R. (2018, June), Board 59: Investigation of Factors Promoting Competitive Candidates for Entry-level Bioengineering Positions Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. 10.18260/1-2--30065

TY - CPAPER
AB - Well-established fields of engineering (e.g. electrical engineering) typically support curriculums that cover the same foundational topics, regardless of offering institution. Identifying these key foundational areas in a field and integrating them into multiple institutions’ curriculums ensures students have been exposed to consistent concepts and may be evaluated with standardized exams such as the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam (FE). Additionally, hiring managers can expect a student with a degree in the established fields can perform well in key foundational areas. However, biomedical (BME) or bioengineering (BIOE) programs span a wide array of material; some programs focus on biological aspects (e.g., tissue engineering) while other programs focus on applying traditional engineering to living systems (e.g. medical device development) [1]. Lack of standardization amongst biomedical and bioengineering curriculums creates a lack of transparency in the hiring process, as differing institutions’ biomedical or bioengineering degree programs may not teach the same competencies and skills to their graduates.

At our institution, the bioengineering curriculum offers five specialized track areas: biomechanics, cell and tissue engineering, therapeutics engineering, computational and systems biology, and imaging and sensing. Each track consists of fifteen engineering credit hours of track focused coursework. Post-graduation, students are divided amongst career pursuits; averaged self-reported student data from 2008-2015 indicates students’ career path as industry (48%), graduate school (23%), medical school (19%), and other (10%). While we know students’ first post-graduate destination, we now seek to identify (1) is there a correlation between students’ selected track and internship or co-op opportunities, (2) is there a correlation between track choice and students first destination post-graduation, (3) does undergraduate research experience influence competitiveness for entry-level BME/BIOE jobs, and (4) does possessing internship or co-op experience negate any difference (if it exists) in preparation due to specified track.

Alumni data will be analyzed to identify factors affecting career placement. Current students will be tracked through mandatory advising sessions each semester to identify interest in industry positions as well as co-curricular experiences contributing to increased competitiveness for industry. Results from this study will serve as an advising tool for students in our department, as well as inform the BME/BIOE field of key foundational skills expected of industry bound BME/BIOE students.

[1] D. W. Gatchell and R. A. Linsenmeier. “Similarities and Differences in Undergraduate Biomedical Engineering Curricula in the United States,” in American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN 2014.

AU - Marcia Pool
AU - Madeline R. Darling
AU - Gabriella Rose Dupont
CY - Salt Lake City, Utah
DA - 2018/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Board 59: Investigation of Factors Promoting Competitive Candidates for Entry-level Bioengineering Positions
UR - https://peer.asee.org/30065
DO - 10.18260/1-2--30065
ER -