scholarly journals A Learning Village: Utilizing A Holistic Approach To Create Connections Between Community College Pre Engineering Students And Iowa State's College Of Engineering

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqulyn Baughman ◽  
Steven Mickelson ◽  
Mary Darrow ◽  
Lora Leigh Chrystal ◽  
Mary Goodwin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community College ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
College Of Engineering

Feeding the Recruitment of Inner City Kids to MSE by Keeping 5TH Graders on Track for Engineering in College

2000 ◽  
Vol 632 ◽  
Author(s):  
William E. Brower
Keyword(s):  
Inner City ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Fifth Graders ◽  
Fifth Grade ◽  
College Of Engineering

ABSTRACTThe fifth grade inner city volunteer teaching project (5GVP) at Marquette University's College of Engineering has attempted to inform and inspire Milwaukee's inner city fifth graders about engineering for the last ten years. Each year I have recruited our engineering students to volunteer to take self contained science lessons into the Milwaukee Public Schools'fifth grade classrooms. Although the lessons are on science and the career touted is engineering in general, the lessons are flavored by my being in MSE. Being excited about a career is certainly a precursor to choosing that career. I have found the fifth graders very excited about seeing and experiencing science in action as the engineering students present it to them. Hopefully, the program at Marquette will result in more inner city students choosing to enter college as engineers, with MSE garnering its usual share.

scholarly journals Creativity in Design Engineers: Attitudes, Opinions and Potentially Influential Factors

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Neufeld ◽  
Omid Mirzaei ◽  
Mark Runco ◽  
Sean Maw
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Influential Factors ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Engineering Programs ◽  
Design Engineers ◽  
Creativity Research ◽  
College Of Engineering

Is creativity important in engineering design? If it is, then why do most undergraduate engineering programs spend so little time teaching creativity? And therefore, as a result of our programs, do our students emerge more creative, less creative or no different compared to when they arrived? If creativity is worth developing, can we accurately measure it in our students, and can we enhance it systematically?These were some of the questions that motivated the initiation of a creativity research program in the College of Engineering at the University of Saskatchewan. The assumption was that creativity is important in engineering, especially in design. The intent was to understand how we could assess creativity in our students and then enhance it.The focus of this initial study is a precursor to many of these more applied questions. We had students and faculty from a variety of Colleges, including Engineering, answer an online survey that probed attitudes towards creativity, respondent personality characteristics, opinions regarding conditional influences on creativity, and potential demographic factors influencing the creativity of individuals. As well, we employed a validated creativity attitudes and beliefs measurement tool (rCAB) as an accepted benchmark for assessment.The survey included both closed- and open-ended questions. The results from some of the open-ended questions have been analyzed to determine emerging groups of similar types of answers, and then efforts have been made to relate the groups in a meaningful framework.The results for the Engineering students are emphasized, but they are also compared with students and faculty from other Colleges. Closed questions were analyzed using inferential statistical tests (distributions, means, standard deviations, t-tests, ANOVA, Cronbach’s alpha), while the open-ended responses are compared more qualitatively when they cannot be quantified easily.The survey went through ethics approval and was distributed in the latter half of the Fall 2015 term.

Engineering Innovation in Biomedical Nanotechnology

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eniko T. Enikov ◽  
Zoltán Szabó ◽  
Rein Anton ◽  
Jesse Skoch ◽  
Whitney Sheen
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Students ◽  
Qualitative Assessment ◽  
First Year ◽  
Nanoscale Science And Engineering ◽  
Training Project ◽  
Undergraduate Engineering ◽  
Nanoscale Science ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
Student Projects ◽  
Institutional Challenges

The objective of this National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded undergraduate engineering training project is to introduce nanoscale science and engineering through an innovative use of a technical elective sophomore-level mechatronics course, followed by an Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET)-mandated senior-level engineering capstone design project. A unique partnership between University of Arizona’s department of surgery, its neurosurgical division, and the College of Engineering presents a creative environment, where medical residents serve as mentors for undergraduate engineering students in developing product ideas enabled by nanotechnology. Examples include: a smart ventricular peritoneal (VP) shunt with flow-sensing; a bio-resorbable inflatable stent for drug delivery, and a hand-held non-invasive eye tonometer. Results from the first year of the student projects, as well as qualitative assessment of their experience, is presented. Several institutional challenges were also identified.

scholarly journals Understanding Barriers to Student Success: What Students Have to Say

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Kuley ◽  
Sean Maw ◽  
Terry Fonstad
Keyword(s):  
Student Success ◽  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
First Year ◽  
Self Directed Learning ◽  
Directed Learning ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University

This paper focuses on feedback received from a set of qualitative questions that were administered to undergraduate students in the College of Engineering at the University of Saskatchewan, as part of a larger mixed methods study. The larger study aims to identify what characteristics, if any, can predict or are related to student success; The “start-stop-continue” method was utilized to assess student perceptions about  their success in the college as a whole. The students were asked: Are there any specific things that you can think of that act/acted as barriers to your success in engineering (stop)? What could the college do/change to make first year more successful for engineering students (start)? Is there anything in your engineering degree so far that you feel is done well and helps students succeed (continue)? Students identified the quality of instruction early in their program as well as adjustment to college workloads and self-directed learning as the most significant barriers tostudent success.

scholarly journals Sustaining The Progress To Improve Physics Education

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wathiq Abdul-Razzaq
Keyword(s):  
Physics Education ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Introductory Physics ◽  
College Level ◽  
West Virginia University ◽  
Physics Courses ◽  
Learn Physics ◽  
Physics Department ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
Introductory Physics Courses

One of the problems we face in teaching introductory physics courses at the college level is that about 2/3 of students never had physics prior coming to college.  Thus, many students find it very difficult to learn physics for the first time at the relatively fast-paced teaching of college physics courses.  Sometimes the drop/failure/withdrawal rate at West Virginia University is as high as 65% (~2/3) for the introductory physics courses taken mostly by pre-engineering students.  Obviously, there is a strong connection between the students’ physics backgrounds and the success rate of passing physics.  With the support of the National Science Foundation (NSF) funding, we created an intervention course for a small group of students who did poorly in the first test in one of the physics courses. This intervention course ran concurrently with the regular physics course, but started at the fourth week of class after the first test. Students who received our intervention showed significant improvement in the subsequent physics tests.1 The recruitment of the students and the supervision of the course were the result of a unique collaboration between the College of Engineering and the Physics Department.  After the expiration of the NSF grant, the intervention course was cancelled due to the lack of funds.  The labs associated with physics classes, however, give us the opportunity to continue the advancement of physics learning after the ending of the NSF grant.

scholarly journals Developing a Summer Research Internship Program for Underrepresented Community College Engineering Students

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelito Enriquez ◽  
Nicholas Langhoff ◽  
Wenshen Pong ◽  
Hamid Mahmoodi ◽  
Xiaorong Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Community College ◽  
Engineering Students

scholarly journals Creativity in Design Engineers: Attitudes, Opinions and Potentially Influential Factors – Part II

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omid Mirzaei ◽  
Paul Neufeld ◽  
Jade Knoblauch ◽  
Jessica Gerbrandt ◽  
Mark Runco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Influential Factors ◽  
The Other ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
Attitudes And Beliefs ◽  
Design Engineers ◽  
College Of Engineering ◽  
The University

.Abstract – In the latter half of 2015, a survey looking at attitudes and beliefs about creativity was distributed on the campus of the University of Saskatchewan. Over 2000 responses were gathered, including more than 200 in the College of Engineering. Initial quantitative results from this study were reported in 2016 in Neufeld et al [2].  In terms of the methods used in the study, as discussed in Neufeld et al [2], an online pilot survey was distributed to students and faculty from a variety of the Colleges at the University. Survey questions probed respondents’ affinity for creativity, their personality characteristics, their opinions on state, trait and skill-based viewpoints on creativity, and demographic details.  The first part of the survey was a validated Creative Attitudes and Values measurement tool (part of the Runco Creativity Assessment Battery (rCAB)© 2012), as discussed in Acar and Runco [1]. This tool consists of 25, 5-point Likert scale items. Of these 25 items, 15 and 10 were indicative and contraindicative items, respectively. Contraindicative items were reverse coded so that they could be used along with the indicative ones. Both past research and our results showed good inter-item reliability scores for this measurement tool.  In Neufeld et al [2] we presented results covering all of the closed-form, quantitative questions along with some correlational calculations with the rCAB scores. The focus of the current paper is on the qualitative results, as well as on a factor analysis of the rCAB questions.  The factor analysis was quite successful. We used SPSS and forced a correlation of items, reducing to three factors. We have just over 29% of variance accounted for, with 10% non-redundant residuals. We have strong anti-correlation between one factor and the other two, and no correlation between the other two. These results will be compared to those of the rCAB authors [3].  As for the qualitative data, we asked several open-ended questions to probe how respondents defined creativity, whether they regarded it as a positive behavior, as well as how they felt about creativity in terms of it being a skill, trait and/or state. For example, pairs of questions asked when creativity is difficult and easy, when it should and should not be used, and when it grows and diminishes. For each of the 9 questions that had open-ended answers, concepts were extracted from individual responses. Concepts were then grouped into themes. Themes and concepts were compared across questions and were aligned. Responses were then coded for concepts and themes. At this point, the text data could be quantitatively examined. This paper presents those results, and discusses the implications of the concepts, themes, and their statistics for how we talk about creativity, and how we can teach it. Comparisons will be made between the results from engineering students and staff versus non-engineers.  This paper completes the first level of evaluation of the results of this initial survey focused on attitudes and beliefs about creativity. Future work will focus on examining correlations between the results of different questions, including the rCAB scores.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document